Sunspot wrote:I need to find a way to do this without the auction. That is why I suggested useing a yearly publications $ values.
I really don't see the point then. Maybe what you need instead of dollar values is a keeper scale based on where you finished the year before. Something like 1st and 2nd place can keep 8, 3rd and th can keep 9...etc.
Keeper league + salaries + NO auction doesn't really make any sense to me.
We converted from a non salary keeper league to using salaries about 5 yrs ago. We did the same thing Hbj79's league did and picked a publication to use for the values before it came out. We keep as many as we want but have to give a raise to every player every year (escalating salaries). The raise can be any figure of your choosing, but if you want to give the teams at the bottom a chance it should be about $5. This will make teams throw back more players. Having an auction and escalating $ values makes owners make tough keeper decisions each year. Also, it rewards owners that "buy" good value in the auction. Nothing better than getting a David Wright for $3 before he hits it big. In our league, the bottom feeders tend to pick up young players with lots of potential to try to move up in the standings in the next few years. I think this style of play makes you think about both the current year and the future. Makes it very interesting.
But the automatic raise doesn't make sense. If a guy tanks from one year to the next, why should he get a raise? Also, I really think it could be worked out so that the same publication is used from year to year as the $ value for players, they would obviously be adjusted to their performance from the year before, which makes more sense than an automatic raise. Does anyone else think it would or wouldn't work, and why? thanks guys for the input.
Normally, salary leagues use auctions to set the value for each player based on an open market--just like in real baseball.
Your league has a problem... you want to keep your rosters but have to assign salaries for the first time. You have to use something other than the market, in this case some publication's or web site's 2005 dollar values.
The first thing you have to realize, is that in using salaries, if no two teams in your league are allowed to own the same player, you probably have to use an auction. Otherwise, there isn't a fair way to decide which team gets Albert Pujols at $35. If one is willing to go all the way up to $42 on Pujols, and the other only $38, if the second team can't perfectly read the first team and drive him up to $42, the first team will get him for $39.
I guess you could draft players who have dollar values assigned to them already, or assign dollar values to draft rounds, but that is really complicated and fails to do what the auction does... simulate real free agency.
In the original Rotisserie rules, a player won at auction keeps his salary for three years. Inbetween the 2nd and 3rd year of a player's contract, teams can sign him to an extention for up to 3 years at a $5 increase for each additional year. So, if you grabbed Felix Hernandez at $20 this season, and wanted to keep him for as long as you could, you'd have to pay:
If Hernadez is the stud he is hyped to be, he could give you $35 value in 2010. If he settles into a #2 fantasy starter type, he'll be overpriced in 2009 and 2010. That makes for an interesting decision for the team that owns him between 2006 and 2007. They will need to forecast correctly and properly weigh the risks and rewards involved.
The structure does two things:
1. For the first three years it rewards teams that find players before they breakout. For the foils that got Albert Pujols for $5 in 2001, they were rewarded again in 2002 and 2003 for their phenominal find, and rightly so... knowing about a player before anyone else does should pay off big. And if a player is as underpriced as Pujols at $5, it rewards that team for six years. $20 for Pujols in 2006 is still a steal.
2. By setting a limit on how long a player has until they are a free agent and/or escalating a player's salary over time, the league ensures that the free agent pool will see a steady trickle of good players, just like in real baseball--players become free agents after 5-6 years in the majors. The free agent pool only includes a fraction of the total talent pool, but big names do pass through. If the team that got Pujols at $5 in 2001 could keep him at $5, he would never become a free agent. Pretty much every breakout player would remain with their original fantasy team forever. This doesn't mimic real baseball and it would negatively impact league parity, as well as making for boring drafts filled with only over-the-hill veterans and rookies. Carlos Beltran, Alex Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, and other elite players do hit the free agent market after they acumulate enough service time to pass through arbitration.
The automatic raise makes sense because for young players their salaries do increase via arbitration. And, it forces a team to decide if a player is worth returning to the free agent pool... they have to make a decision instead of just waiting for a contract to expire--just like non-tendering an arbitration eligble player.
Set contracts and set contract extentions make sense because in baseball, players and teams do not renegotiate contracts every season on a one year basis.
Rocco Baldelli just signed a 6-year, $33 million contract extention. If he does better than expected, Baldelli won't get paid more than $5.6 million in 2007. If he doesn't do as well as expected, to be fair, the Devil Rays can't lower his salary either. The Devil Rays and baldelli have agreed on a salary together for the next six years and both must honor their agreement.
The same holds true for auction leagues. You reward teams that hand out smart contracts, and punish teams that overpay.
The Mariners won't get a break in overpaying for Beltre just because he flopped last season. Neither should the owner in your league that paid $32 for him at auction. Don't let him off the hook and lower Beltre's salary down to $19. Other teams showed restraint in bidding on Beltre where that owner did not. They should be rewarded and the aforementioned owner punished.
if you want to draft and not aution, a keeper alternative we use at CBS is a round-based keeper. If you drafted David Wright in the 20th round, you can keep him and lose your 20th pick this year. If you drafted Arod #1 you can keep him for your #1 pick. In the wildcard setting you'd have to label each player with a value (round they were drafted) and set the default to the lowest round you go to.
We've started a 3-year contract limit on players this season, which you'd want if you ever wanted to see a young star on the open market ever again (I have Johan as a 12, someone else has Wright as a 29)
I understand that Auction is ideal, but that is not possible for our league. We are spread all over this country and usually we have to or three people on line, that is just too much typing for us. Not to mention the length of the draft would be more than some of the owners would be willing to put up with. So with that said, if we pre value each player with a publications $ amounts, the owner will be awarded somewhat for having dibbs to keep a player at that value or not. If he throws the guy back into the pool, that would be his decision. Say we have a $350 max and you can keep up to $150 worth of players (for example) from last years team. One guy decides to keep Pujols for 40, Bay for 30, Lidge for 30, Carpenter for 20, and Young for 30. That owner now has $200 left to spend in the draft or on free agents after the draft. The draft goes last place team through first place in snake style untill eveyone has their rosters filled. Where would the downfall be in this system and how could it be fixed? Again, I really appreciate you guys helping me out.
Because we kept 15 players last year, most of the top 20 players in baseball were on 3 of the 10 teams in our league. If there were some sort of $ amout, then those teams could not afford to keep all of the studs, therefore the competative ballance would get better. I am one of the 3 upper teams in my league, so this is not biased at all, I just would like to see some of the other teams have a chance. Is there a better way to spread the wealth?