Moneyball Baseball League Chat

I've had 4 beers at 10.5 ABV so I'm probably off base here, but after looking this over, it seems to me that you can only renew if the guy makes more than the section 9.5 salary scale. If the guy makes less than the scale, then you have to go to arbitration, extend, or cut, renewal is not an option. Which for some reason kind of makes sense?

The examples that got me thinking(?) are my E. Rosario and Davies. Rosario is at $2.81, and Davies $2.42, both are 5 years service time. So I can't renew them at those salaries because minimally a 5 year guy gets $3 M. These guys make less than the minimum; therefore for 2020, I've got to arb them, extend them for at least 5 years, or FA them. If one or both made more than the minimum, then the renew option comes into play.

I effed up the arbitration rule. The problem is that the owner can't really win arbitration as Rosario and Davies are going to cost a lot more, at least $4 mil, even if the owner wins. Let's say you take Davies to arbitration and his 2020 card is worth $1.25. You still end up paying $4 mil for him because of the minimum salary rules.

The only players you would ever take to arbitration are players with salaries well above the minimum salary, however that situation cannot occur after the draft. Once we move on from the draft, the salary structure will be determined entirely by the player development and free agency processes. Essentially the arbitration choice will apply to the draft class of players only. This is why I think we need to revise the arbitration rule going forward (i.e. before next season).

For now, I think the only thing that makes sense is to allow owners to re-sign this current class of arb eligible draftees at their current salary or the league minimum, or take them to arbitration, and then fix the arbitration rule. There are 59 drafted arbitration eligible players with salaries below the league minimum salary, many of whom will be dropped because they are likely deemed not worth the league minimum.

Phil

I've had 4 beers at 10.5 ABV so I'm probably off base here, but after looking this over, it seems to me that you can only renew if the guy makes more than the section 9.5 salary scale. If the guy makes less than the scale, then you have to go to arbitration, extend, or cut, renewal is not an option. Which for some reason kind of makes sense?

The examples that got me thinking(?) are my E. Rosario and Davies. Rosario is at $2.81, and Davies $2.42, both are 5 years service time. So I can't renew them at those salaries because minimally a 5 year guy gets $3 M. These guys make less than the minimum; therefore for 2020, I've got to arb them, extend them for at least 5 years, or FA them. If one or both made more than the minimum, then the renew option comes into play.

I effed up the arbitration rule. The problem is that the owner can't really win arbitration as Rosario and Davies are going to cost a lot more, at least $4 mil, even if the owner wins. Let's say you take Davies to arbitration and his 2020 card is worth $1.25. You still end up paying $4 mil for him because of the minimum salary rules.

The only players you would ever take to arbitration are players with salaries well above the minimum salary, however that situation cannot occur after the draft. Once we move on from the draft, the salary structure will be determined entirely by the player development and free agency processes. Essentially the arbitration choice will apply to the draft class of players only. This is why I think we need to revise the arbitration rule going forward (i.e. before next season).

For now, I think the only thing that makes sense is to allow owners to re-sign this current class of arb eligible draftees at their current salary or the league minimum, or take them to arbitration, and then fix the arbitration rule. There are 59 drafted arbitration eligible players with salaries below the league minimum salary, many of whom will be dropped because they are likely deemed not worth the league minimum.

Phil

Any player with an expiring contract that has less than 6 years of service time, but makes more than the salary scale above can be renewed for another year at the same salary. Players with more than 6 years of service time and an expiring contract are eligible for free agency.

Is this rule saying that players in this category that have salaries under the league minimum are not allowed to be renewed? So if I have a 5yr player at $.01 above minimum he can be renewed at that price but that if I have a 5yr player at $.0 I below he wouldn't be allowed to renew at the minimum?

You earlier said you'd create the league as a 200M, so I can't join.

Will have to recreate the team in a 999M league yes?

Never mind its 200 Mil, I had to switch from unleashed to regular. I'm in.

Is there any way to pick up unleashed players in between the first two 2019 seasons? If so, we need to recreate the league as an unleashed league

Never mind. We can do that before season 2.

You earlier said you'd create the league as a 200M, so I can't join.

Will have to recreate the team in a 999M league yes?

Exit the league, then you should be able to change the payroll on your draft page.

Not sure it this matters, but both Paul's, srh1200 and myself are supposed to be in the East division

Not sure it this matters, but both Paul's, srh1200 and myself are supposed to be in the East division

I swapped divisions because I created the league. Let's just swap the east and central for the first season.

Is there any way to pick up unleashed players in between the first two 2019 seasons? If so, we need to recreate the league as an unleashed league

Never mind. We can do that before season 2.

Section 11.04 Any player with a SOMO card that is not currently owned by another team for the current SOM 365 season is eligible for free agency. Uncarded and unleashed players are not eligible for the supplemental free agent signing period. Those players will become available at the end of the MLB season currently being played.

as per phil's post. I'd like to know how the arbitration rule is going to be "fixed". Want to make sure that I don't make a decision this year that ends up hurting me due to next year's "fixed" rule.

some rules keep getting changed (for the betterment of the league) while others don't... due to the idea that the rules were already stated and shouldn't be changed after the fact.

I assume we will be voting on whatever the new arbitration rule is, but I'd still like an idea of what is being proposed to vote on in case it makes a contract decision change.