Let's draft 'em all -- all 940 played!

Think the difference in our salaries is my varsity team with a 4* rotation and spot starter, and my JV team with a straight 5 man rotation. That's basically how I drafted my SPers, cause of my back to back picks, I was able to draft 1 *ed SPer, and one non-*ed Sper everytime I picked.

In order to encourage managers to emulate the MLB style of player assignment, I wonder if we should have some kind of championship point system? How about something like...

Instructional:
1 point for each regular season win
5 points for getting to the playoffs
5 points for winning league title

Minors:
2 points for each regular season win
10 points for getting to the playoffs
10 points for winning league title

Majors:
4 points for each regular season win
20 points for getting to the playoffs
20 points for winning league title

That way, if managers choose to send some of their better players to the lower leagues, they will only be hurting their championship chances (just like in MLB).

sounds good but we should raise the minor salary cap to allow for movement to and from majors due to injury.
If folks have a team at 45mil and have to move a dude up and down a few times the cap could prevent it.

I'm going wait to load until the cap issue is set.

The upto 6 stadiums that could be picked twice, were already.

From here on out, there should be stadiums chosen, that were not selected yet.

The upto 6 stadiums that could be picked twice, were already.

From here on out, there should be stadiums chosen, that were not selected yet.

List updated, to show only the remaining available choices (as in the other drafts)

I'm willing to ear offers on Medlen.

Looking for a 2 SP for 2 SP deal in which I could add at least one SP* to my team.

If interested : jflatour99@gmail.com

The higher the caps are for the minors and instructional leagues, the more opportunities for stacking the minors and instructionals- if for example, a manager's major league team is out of it after 40-50 games, what would prevent dumping good players from a higher league to a lower one to win that league, especially if you have a high enough cap. This could cause bad feelings.

I know Terry has suggested a point system. That may partly solve the problem.



Suggestions as mentioned in an earlier post:

Beginning of season: Limit the number of high-salaried players in the minors and instructional league. This would prevent stacking the minors or instructional teams., i.e. Minors: no more than three players over 3.5 mil, with a cap of 4.5 for any individual player. Instructional: no more than three over 2 mil with an individual cap of 3.0 mil


During season: Not allowing players to move downward (majors to minors and minors to instructional). So,:
Majors: can accept players from minors or instructional with injuries or if it fits in with the rules
Minors: can move up to majors; can not move down to instructional
Instructional: can move up to minors or majors; can not accept minors or majors players- injuries should be covered by another eligible player on the team, but if not a player could play out of position. Since it is an instructional league- good learning experience for the player.

Or some rule like not using injury replacements with a higher salary than the injured player. This would eliminate teams gaining advantages from an injury.

It just doesn't seem right to bring a 3 mil 2B for example, from major league team to replace a .5 2B on the instructional league just because the .5 got injured for 10 games and you have the cap. Injuries shouldn't gain an advantage

Just a few suggestions to avoid possible controversy later. It would be nice to have a rule about the team caps, injuries, movements and player caps. Could be simple. Thanks

I like the points system as an overall measure of success.

Here's how my teams may play out (may have some movement before loading):

Majors - $115.28 (14 hitters, 11 pitchers)
Minors - 45.18 (14 hitters, 12 pitchers)
Instructional - 22.63 (16 hitters, 12 pitchers)

I like the idea of limiting salaries to 50.000 and 25.000 for ACTIVE players (even though the game engine will not control this). With this max in place, I wouldn't have a concern about the number of players over a certain salary limit (minors or instructional). None of mine are even close to this part of the proposal.

Only a few managers have commented on the league cap questions -- so let me post them again...

All leagues:
Unleashed set
DH: Yes

When I setup the top league, I checked out the footnote for the "other" setting for league salary caps. We may pick any number we like, between $60 and 200 mil, as far as the game engine is concerned.

Even though the system will not monitor lower salary levels for us, I still believe we need to have reduced levels in the other two leagues, in order for each of the leagues to have any hope of having 12 competitive teams.

Since we will be forced to have caps of $60 mil in each of the other two leagues, that will allow for a lot of injury replacement money to be available. As far as the total salaries of the active players on each squad are concerned, how about:

Minors: Up to 26 players, at $50 mil cap for ACTIVE players on roster
Instructional: Up to 28 players, at $25 mil cap for ACTIVE players on roster

What do you think?

And then, along with that...

In order to encourage managers to emulate the MLB style of player assignment, I wonder if we should have some kind of championship point system? How about something like...

Instructional:
1 point for each regular season win
5 points for getting to the playoffs
5 points for winning league title

Minors:
2 points for each regular season win
10 points for getting to the playoffs
10 points for winning league title

Majors:
4 points for each regular season win
20 points for getting to the playoffs
20 points for winning league title

That way, if managers choose to send some of their better players to the lower leagues, they will only be hurting their championship chances (just like in MLB).

These choices will encourage competition and be relatively easy to monitor during the season.

A few managers have supported these ideas, others have remained silent. Let me ask, are there any strong objections to them?

If not, we will proceed on this basis.

I'm okay with these rules and settings.