Time to unveil my new keeper rules ... please comment!

[ramble2]

Okay folks, here it is.

My friend and I have invented a new keeper league system. We came up with the idea last year, and have been tweaking and developing it ever since. My league just finished using it for the first year.

It's more complicated than the simple 'keep any 8 players'. We devised a system that gives each managers 'contract-years' (or C-Ys, for short) based on where they finished in the standings. You can then use your C-Ys to sign players to contracts. You may sign players to one year or multi-year contracts, so long as you have enough C-Ys.

So if you have 10 C-Ys, you can sign 10 players to one year contracts, two players to five-year contracts, or any other combination you want.

Once a player's contract is over, they become a restricted free agent. Other managers can then offer that player a contract. The manager whose team that player is on may match any bid that is made (hence the 'restricted' part).

This is a mere sketch. It's easiest to see by following a simulation, which I've posted along with the rules for my league. Please take a look and tell me what you think:

http://www.geocities.com/thehaber2000/rules/c-yrules.html

(warning: I'm no web-design guru; I know enough HTML to make a functional site, not much more. Also be forewarned that the overall league website is still heavily under construction, so most of the links to other pages are dead. But that shouldn't matter.)

I think this is a great keeper system - especially for those of you who like to stay active in the off-season. We've had an absolute blast with it in my league.

I'm really curious to see what people here think of this. I'm going to be writing both The Sporting News and Yahoo and try to encourage them to start a keeper league for us fantasy players (and to use my system - it'd be great if it were all automated). I'd love it if other leagues started to use it. It'd be helpful to collect data on how it is working so that I could continue to develop it.

One other note. The final section, "10. Multiple C-Y scenario", is brand new. We are not using this in my league (not yet, anyway), and there may be flaws here that I haven't considered.

I look forward to hearing what people think about this!

[shortsavage]

I didn't get a chance to read your all of rules, but it sounds like you have a pretty good system going. It is very creative!

Do you teach at Davis? I have a bunch of friends there and I am thinking of it as a transfer location. I am around the corner in Walnut Creek .

[blankman]

Very interesting and life-like system you have there Ramble

I read a fair amount of the stuff and I liked it, but I'd be too afraid of the huge time committment that it seems would be required. So yes, for those with the time and drive I think its a great idea. I find it interesting that C-Ys are also the equivalent of salary and the team's payroll. I can't say I could have ever thought of that.

I'll probably comment more later, when I have time to read more of the rules, but so far it sounds pretty cool, although I don't have the time or drive or even friends that would have the time and drive to make that kind of committment.

Looks good

[Shitney™]

i'm glad you revised that worst to first scenario..

also, as far as this

Here’s an example. Suppose that in the above scenario I (the Roar of ’84) declined to match Zito’s three year contract offer. Jason (Dixietopes) would be notified of this, and asked whether he wanted to go ahead and sign Zito for three years or not. Suppose also that Jason only offered such a long contract in an attempt to get me to tie up my contract years, and that he does not want to have Zito for three years and declines to sign Zito. I would then be allowed to sign Zito to any length contract I wanted, e.g., a one year contract.

it seems that the offering guy has the benfit of the bluff, you might consider making him take the contract if you decline..


i really like that you alllow for the trading of C-Ys


unfortunately the guys in my league would never understand how to make it work

[wrveres]

Ramble,
I was looking for something on the waiver wire but didn't see anything, maybe I missed it... And I understood and thought the contract years was a good Idea, until you started doubling and tripling them in the "Manny Example" then it got weird ... your orginal idea of say, 5 contract years for the 5th year, 4 contract years for the 4th year and so on seemed to work the best. Maybe I missed something on the doubling and tripling of contract years ...

anyways ... interesting idea .... To keep a little continuity to the teams, you might want to look at doubling the amount of Contract years ... last place gets 30. It would allow more flexability in the bidding process too. Maybe that could get you away from the doubling or tripling of contract years. ie Manny.

as far as long term contracts. why wouldn't I sign prior to say a 7 year deal. It may cost me 7 CY this year but 2 years from now and beyond he would be a steal... personally I would asign CY's that way. hmm interesting ...but I don't like the Manny scenario ...

good work

[ramble2]

i'm glad you revised that worst to first scenario..

also, as far as this

Here’s an example. Suppose that in the above scenario I (the Roar of ’84) declined to match Zito’s three year contract offer. Jason (Dixietopes) would be notified of this, and asked whether he wanted to go ahead and sign Zito for three years or not. Suppose also that Jason only offered such a long contract in an attempt to get me to tie up my contract years, and that he does not want to have Zito for three years and declines to sign Zito. I would then be allowed to sign Zito to any length contract I wanted, e.g., a one year contract.

it seems that the offering guy has the benfit of the bluff, you might consider making him take the contract if you decline..

Some of the folks in my league have noticed the same thing. We are going to try it out and see what happens. I've added another paragraph to the 'other options' section addressing this:

Leagues might also wish to discourage ‘bluff’ bidding on free agents. This could be deterred by penalizing managers 1 C-Y for every unmatched bid they make that they then retract.

[ramble2]

I've removed the section on the multiple C-Ys scenario (the Manny example). It was an optional variant anyway, and I think probably shouldn't be introduced until after people are comfortable with the original concept.

Waiver wire stuff works just like normal. In fact, you can drop guys that have long contracts, but it's just like MLB - contracts are guaranteed. So if you drop someone from your squad who has a long contract, you are still obligated to that contract unless someone else picks him up.

I think the major question for my system is whether you could convince people to use it. It comes across as a lot more complicated than it is, but it does require some thought and activity in the off-season. Not everyone is willing to do that.

[Madison]

Ok, here's one for you:

Let's say a team wants to win this year. They pull out all the stops. Burn up all contract years for this one and trade the next year or two's worth of CY's. Regardless of if they win the league or not, they quit after the season is over.

Obviously, a new owner must be found. Would he be saddled with 0 CY's for 3 seasons? It's great to think that everyone is an upstanding citizen, but once in awhile something like this could happen. It would be incredibly hard to find a new owner with that much of the deck stacked against them.

I'm just curious as to what you think in this situation.

[Shitney™]

Some of the folks in my league have noticed the same thing. We are going to try it out and see what happens. I've added another paragraph to the 'other options' section addressing this:

Leagues might also wish to discourage ‘bluff’ bidding on free agents. This could be deterred by penalizing managers 1 C-Y for every unmatched bid they make that they then retract.

i missed that section.. i do think that is a good idea.

......Obviously, a new owner must be found. Would he be saddled with 0 CY's for 3 seasons?.....

well if the rest of the league traded this owner for ALL of his future C-Y, they are half to blame...

[rotodog]

Ok, here's one for you:

Let's say a team wants to win this year. They pull out all the stops. Burn up all contract years for this one and trade the next year or two's worth of CY's. Regardless of if they win the league or not, they quit after the season is over.

Obviously, a new owner must be found. Would he be saddled with 0 CY's for 3 seasons? It's great to think that everyone is an upstanding citizen, but once in awhile something like this could happen. It would be incredibly hard to find a new owner with that much of the deck stacked against them.

I'm just curious as to what you think in this situation.

Super question!!!It happens in standard keeper leagues all the time.I wish someone smarter than me would find a fair way to discourage this practice.If some one finds one let us all know.