Okay, I will keep this as brief as possible, but first let me state the purpose of this post: I want opinions from experienced owners in keeper leagues as to the reasonableness of our rules (that may be implemented after the draft). I don't post often, but I come to this site everyday because it tends to have the very best information on fantasy baseball.
This is the first year of a keeper league I am in with some friends from school. The only rules decided pre-draft were that you keep five players and the stats were 6x6. We had our draft on Monday of this week.
Now, the following system may be implemented retroactively:
*Each keeper player kept must be selected one round earlier than the round in which he was selected the year before (e.g. if x wants to keep Alex Gordon next year, he has to burn his 7th round pick instead of his 8th round pick)
*Because everyone wants to have the option of keeping their best players, those taken in Rounds 1-5 can still be kept, but are subject to a graduated "fee" (this would be set later, but an example is $5-4-3-2-1)
*Once a "prospect" player reaches "Round 1-5" status, he must be paid for -- however, current 6th round players will burn 5th round picks next year, so no fee is paid on them
*If the slot ahead of your "keeper" is available, the "penalty" is the one round increase rather than the fine. For example, say x wants to keep Utley next year but not Grady Sizemore (his second round pick). If he chooses to keep his third rounder, he doesn't pay a fee to do that because by releasing Sizemore his second round pick next year is "open," so he can fill that slot with a keeper
*There would be no limit on the number of years any player can be kept
This system is designed to prevent people from getting lucky with a longshot and getting to keep him his entire career without having to pay anything. Slowly, the 10th rounder would creep up to a top-5 rounder and would have to be paid for to keep.
My position is that this would have definitely affected the draft and its too complicated and unnecessary. For instance, Liriano was drafted in the 18th, now the owner will get him with his 17th round pick next year.
With it being a 5 person keeper, I just assumed that we would keep five and the draft would essentially begin next year at round 6. I did not think that I would have to redraft my player in a certain round the following year based upon which round he was drafted in this year.
The league is roughly split on how to vote. Could anyone give opinions on what the best (most reasonable) thing to do here is.
I am in a couple keeper leagues and one Dynasty league. Every keeper league I have played in we keep the guys we want and then draft the rest. I prefer this rather than have to try and figure out which player would be better to keep depending on what pick I used the year before. Even with the ablity of people getting to keep a certain player for life we really haven't had that problem. Pujols, Arod, Santana, Carpenter, Howard...etc have all been traded.
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."- Douglas Adams
the simple answer is that retroactive rules are a huge no-no. Especially significant ones like these that would certainly affect the draft. The arguement might be made to you that this will affect everyone equally so it doesn't matter, but that is crap b/c it does not address the principle of no retroactive changes.
the proposed rules seem ok, but they should not be implemented until next season.
rules seem fine. however, retroactive rules are a huge no-no imo. however, everyone knew the rules were not set when the draft occured. that is a bigger no-no imo. kinda like sitting down at a table to play poker: the first question you need to ask is "what are the rules" and the second question is "what are we playing for".
I agree that you simply can't change the rules after the draft. The problem in your case, however, is that there were no rules before or during the draft. Just because you assumed the league would work one way does not mean that was the proper assumption (please, if I'm wrong, correct me).
Basically, I think you're in a situation where a league vote is necessary, since nothing was spelled out during the draft.
Personally, I like the rules you describe. It creates more strategy than simply keeping your best 5. Anything that creates more strategy is a positive in my opinion. Not everone feels this way though, and I know a lot of people that prefer the straightforward.
Both of my leagues are keepers, and both use the "draft round" methodology for keepers. They differ slightly, but both incorporate the idea of inflation in one way or another.
Yeah, this is a crappy situation. It shows why you need some kind of league constitution ratified pre-draft, especially in keeper leagues.
Your league need to meet live/online/both and hash this out. That way you can all at least discuss the best solution to this moving forward. Have everyone think of different solutions and discuss them.
In the end the best solution may be to call 2007 an experimental failure, play for this year only and have a complete redraft in 2008, after a league constitution is written. Start keeping guys after that.
I'm actually leaning toward changing my vote after hearing your opinions. I really don't know that I would have drafted that differently. So you know, though, my reasoning was that in the absence of stated rules, you should probably default to the most common form of a keeper, which is probably to just keep the players you keep (rather than by round).
But, I definitely like more strategy and if you guys think these rules would work (again, this is our first keeper) I'm okay with it.
hot4tx wrote:In the end the best solution may be to call 2007 an experimental failure, play for this year only and have a complete redraft in 2008, after a league constitution is written. Start keeping guys after that.
This is a pretty solid idea I think.
The other thing to remember is that there are no "perfect" rules for a keeper league. Speaking as a league commish that set up a keeper 2 years ago, not matter how much thought goes into the rules, you're going to find problems with them. Best you can do is hash it out with the whole league ahead of time and try and think of as many possibilities as you can before finalizing the rules. It's MUCH harder to change them once you're into the league for a year or two.
It might be a wise concept to forgo the $$ system entirely. If someone unlocks a gem they should be rewarded, not considered lucky because they drafted them.
In my league the format is, that which ever round that player is drafted in, if you wish to keep that player for the next season you lose the equivalant draft pick.
So if you want to keep Pujols, you lose your first round pick, but, if you say drafted Cole Hammels in the 18th round last year and want to pick him, then that it only costs you yor 18th round pick.
For multi-year keepers, the rule is going to be that your keepers draft slot increases by 2 rounds, with the highest round being the 3rd. So using the Hammels example again, in the 2006 draft I took him in the 18th, I forfeit my 2007 18th rounder, 2008 16th rounder, 2009 14th rounder etc...
We are only in year one of the league, so I cannot tell how well its going to work, however, its a sound and simple to understand system.
The system you have proposed seems a little difficult to grasp, as well as complicated to keep track of. A "more fair" system might be that instead of using the cash system, each year base the pick you lose on the CBS Sportsline ADP (average draft position) for that player on the day of the draft, they are fairly accurate due to the volume of leagues on the site.
Best of luck
Down 3, 8 straight.....The 2004 World Series Champions. The "Idiots". some gone, none forgotten.