USKL 3 Chat & Trades:

All pass except for #3.

All pass except for #3.

Interesting, I thought #4 (switching to unleashed) would be the one least likely to pass. Not sure what the big deal is having to cut 5 more players than we already do, but the votes are in. I will add the rule changes over the weekend. thanks to everyone for voting, though I still don't know what Timk wanted to do.

All pass except for #3.

Interesting, I thought #4 (switching to unleashed) would be the one least likely to pass. Not sure what the big deal is having to cut 5 more players than we already do, but the votes are in. I will add the rule changes over the weekend. thanks to everyone for voting, though I still don't know what Timk wanted to do.

On #4, my first instinct was to vote no just cuz extending the main draft would add to the pain of executing it ( the first rounds are pretty fun but later rounds can be a bit tedious ). But I realized that cutting an extra 5 may make things more interesting, esp w/regards to prospects.

Since prospects often aren't ready within 2 yrs, esp the ones that come in young-- they wind up taking a spot on the main roster as dead weight. If you had to cut 5 more guys, you may have to make some harder choices and cut some cards that have more value. So, I wound up giving a yes vote.

All pass except for #3.

Interesting, I thought #4 (switching to unleashed) would be the one least likely to pass. Not sure what the big deal is having to cut 5 more players than we already do, but the votes are in. I will add the rule changes over the weekend. thanks to everyone for voting, though I still don't know what Timk wanted to do.

On #4, my first instinct was to vote no just cuz extending the main draft would add to the pain of executing it ( the first rounds are pretty fun but later rounds can be a bit tedious ). But I realized that cutting an extra 5 may make things more interesting, esp w/regards to prospects.

Since prospects often aren't ready within 2 yrs, esp the ones that come in young-- they wind up taking a spot on the main roster as dead weight. If you had to cut 5 more guys, you may have to make some harder choices and cut some cards that have more value. So, I wound up giving a yes vote.

Which was exactly why I wanted to change it. Alas, it didn’t pass. This how is the Unleashed Keeoer league is set up. I think it works well. It makes the managers have to make tougher decisions.

Since prospects often aren't ready within 2 yrs, esp the ones that come in young-- they wind up taking a spot on the main roster as dead weight. If you had to cut 5 more guys, you may have to make some harder choices and cut some cards that have more value. So, I wound up giving a yes vote.

that's exactly why I voted no Since I joined this league I have won 56, 74, 46, 70 and 50 games. It has taken me 2.5 years to acquire those "harder choices" and "cards that have more value" that you mention - so for me, I don't want to have to give a bunch of them that I've worked to collect through trades and solid drafting.

I've got names like Salas, Langford, Cowser, Holliday, De La Cruz, Abrams, Marte, Encarnacion-Strand and Painter that I've been holding onto have got to pay off - I just didn't want to lose them, so I was a "no".

I really like the summer prospect draft - clearly I stand alone in that regard. I was really surprised. Why doesn't anyone like it?

I will say, Bill - your attention to this and offering up these solutions will begin to make an impact very quickly to improve the depth of the proverbial draft pool! Thanks for being on it.

Dislike for summer draft stems from three things,

1 there are simply too many prospects being drafted with 48 taken every year between the two prospect drafts

2 due to the timing, it’s more like a rookie supplemental draft than a true prospect draft. It robs players that should be in the Spring Free Agent draft.

3 Due to the time of year it happens, you run into issues with the MLB draft and I really don’t like having players that are not on an MLB roster officially eligible to be drafted.


And your logic makes no sense to me Sean regarding the cutting 15. The whole point is that you keep the young guys an add more MLB fringe players back into the draft pool. It just makes the decisions more difficult. Having played in keepers for 12-15 years now, it is way to easy to cut 10 from a 40 man roster. Almost everyone has 10 no brainer cuts every year just due to the volatility of pitching, especially relief. The idea behind cutting 15 is to actually have managers make hard decisions. You know actually MANAGE. But it’s for naught sadly,

YMMV of course.


And thanks Sean, I appreciate the compliment. I do try to keep the leagues I run fun, fair and balanced if I can. I’ve implemented these changes in other leagues I’ve run so I know they work. I may be a better commissioner than player given the dearth of titles I’ve won. There do seem to be many players that do like the way I run a league though.

I voted for all changes on page 250.

Tim K

I voted for all changes on page 250.

Tim K

Thanks Tim. We thought that was the case but didn’t know for sure because you didn’t add you votes to the running total. That does mean if only one more had voted for rule 3 it would have passed. Oh well.

Well nuts!!!!!! I apologize for misreading the counting of the votes. When were the votes due? Did everyone vote?

Tim K

Well nuts!!!!!! I apologize for misreading the counting of the votes. When were the votes due? Did everyone vote?

Tim K

All votes are in.