Repricing Players Cards v2

I will take a dangerous step here and address the original issue from another thread which appears to be crashing and burning. That issue was repricing the cards (players) at to be determined intervals.
I think this is a worthwhile idea for our consideration and one that would create ongoing challenges by introducing new values and therefore new players to our draft card.
Here are my thoughts:
1) Reprice players upward or downward based on their usage in 80, 100, and perhaps 140M leagues. No player can be adjusted more than, say, 6% at any repricing interval.
For example, Suzuki 2004 is a popular fellow and costs $7.44M, Let’s say his salary rises the maximum 6% to $7.88M. I think he would still be popular, just not as much as before.
Meanwhile, there sits Dwight Evans at $7.44M, seldom used and dejected watching from afar as Ichiro scampers around the bases. Dwight’s salary might fall the maximum to $6.99M as his agent (Boras? Tom Cruise?) caves to the pressure of limited popularity.
Now we could chose between Suzuki at $7.88 or Evans at $6.99. Who becomes the better value in a Forbes park?
Similarly the ever popular Kirby Higbe would no doubt warrant the maximum increase to $3.54M from $3.34M. He would remain one of the more popular starters and probably would see his salary rise the near maximum in the next repricing period. During that time we’ll see someone, say Bill Hands ‘70, decrease from $3.38M to perhaps $3.18. Hummm.

2) The repricing of cards/players would be zero sum. If some salaries increase a total of $2M then other salaries decrease the same amount.

3) I suggest an annual repricing to be effective at the beginning of Spring Training.

4) There would be an issue with the current minimum salary of $ .50M. My thought is, “Would it be a crime for Joe DeMaestri to be priced at $ .47M?

5) Perhaps we can create a future for Bill Antonello in this game.

Maxie

We can't even get new cards, let alone reprice the old ones...

We can't even get new cards, let alone reprice the old ones...

Thanks for not making a troll say it

Honestly, not judging the idea itself, but this would come behind a number of other priorities that haven't happened yet.

I can see merit in the idea of periodically repricing based on usage. A card used frequently could be an indication that the card is under priced and a card never used could be an indication it is over priced.

But would not be a fan of going below a minimum amount. Currently that is 0.5 and would not lower it. Any card no matter how bad lower than 0.5 would become immediately more "valuable" no matter how bad the card just by the fact it gives you someone else you can bury on your bench in a DH league and have a little more money to spend on starters.

My reasons for favoring repricing the card set are:

1. Correcting some of the terrible prices in the card set will keep new players from being turned off by having their first team get pounded. A new Royals fan, for example, would be extremely displeased to see how badly the good Saberhagen card does.

2. The game (IMO) should be more about lineup construction and choosing a proper balance of hitting, pitching, and defense. Right now it's about who can grab the most underpriced cards in AD. There will still be plenty of strategic decisions to be made even if the cards are all "fairly" priced.

3. A set of prices that applies equally well to all caps and DH / no DH is IMPOSSIBLE. This is obvious for good-hitting starting pitchers, but it also applies to David Ortiz and other stone gloves with great bats. The same goes for "value" players such as Kirby Higbe and Dave Henderson - they are killers at $60 MM and $80 MM, but a little out of their element at $100 MM, and useless at higher caps. A market-based pricing system would gradually phase them out, but they would be replaced with other guys who suddenly become "great values" and those guys would in turn generate new strategies.

4. Another mostly neglected element in the game that would be brought more into play is adjusting your team to cope with the opponents' teams and ballparks. One of my most satisfying rings was won with a team where I only kept a couple of players off my original draft card because of an unusual ballpark mix. Right now, if you get all the "right" players for the ballpark you chose, there's not much left to do.

5. Especially at the $200 MM cap, when you miss on a player in the AD you could easily get stuck with Paul Waner, Randy Jones, Jim Edmonds, Cesar Cedeno, Phil Rizzuto, Carlton Fisk, or any of a dozen other players who you're just kind of stuck with like a wart on your nose - hideous, but too painful to cut. Perhaps this issue, at least, will go away with the promised new live draft improvements, which sound like they could quickly become AD improvements as well.

Idisagree with you,not everyone goes for the best prices.I pick my teams on which player I want this time,pitching team hitting team or neutral.I pick each kind of team by the league value

heres my broken record---3 lee lacy cards vs 1 manny ramirez card

all time greats is a misnomer

improve some of the franchises- blue jays for example

eliminate cards that never get used

Maxie is right, the repricing should be based on the caps 140 and below - if the $200 MM leagues were included, the prices of those players would quickly spiral out of control since the same 300 or so players are pretty much always used and there are a lot of $200 MM leagues.

And Doug, the algorithm for generating a team is:

1. What cap do I want to play?

2. Who do I want as my core players?

3. What park is that player group going to be most effective in?

4. What should be the general balance of the team among hitting / pitching / defense?

5. Who are the best values for that environment among the complementary players?

6. Draft them.

The issue I have with the card set is some guys are priced so far out of whack that they are good values for pretty much ALL ballparks, or for multiple classes of ballparks.

Im not against repricing,

just curious why it would be a priority over other important stuff-

we haven't gotten new cards or better pitching control or game by game line-ups or better communication stuff.
Id take any of those first.