bigmck wrote:Any system that allows a team to keep a player for that long is doomed to failure. You need a player to be available about every three or four years in the spring auction to give everyone a chance at them. The age restriction really does not have anything to do with Keepers. A very common Keeper format is as follows == A player gets his auction salary for years one and two of him being in the league. If he has not been dropped year three is the "Option Year". You can extend his contract at five dollars a year. If Joe Blow's Auction Salary was 13, you could extend his contract at $5 a year. This would mean that if you chose to extend by two years, his third, fourth and fifth years salary would be $23. At the end of his contract you would be forced to drop him.
I appreciate the response, thanks bro. I was unhappy with most common formats when I created this league. I was aware of the system you mention. My system, however, mimics MLB's reserve clause. Back in the day you could perpetually keep a guy under contract. I prefer a system where you gamble on a guy and then can sit back and watch his career play out without having to pony the dude up in his prime. I don't want to bother my fellow owners with a stack of math each year. I think that a unique connection with a player/investment can develop in this setting where it could not elsewhere, and it is simpler and cleaner for the less than diehard participants.
I very much respect your opinion, and time may prove that you are right. But I do not think that allowing managers to keep a guy for this long dooms the league for failure. On average each owner has a single keeper (there are very few 22 yr. old players in the game, and they must be stashed on your limited MLB roster). Even the most successful owner, in his heyday, will have 10/23 of his roster filled for $120. I'd wager that the advantage will never be overwhelming. Even just going back to 2009's "top prospect" listings, guys like Cameron Maybin often appeared before Colby Rasmus. An owner probably would have paid $20 or so for Maybin, and perhaps realize that Maybin will never be worth the discounted $12 for a single year of his career. People will hit, but people will also miss -- we all do.
In my eyes it boils down to a departure in philosophy. You are saying that every owner should have a crack at a guy after a few years. I sympathize more with the owner that has to surrender a player he believed in more than any other owner. I would liken it to copyright law (gives the author rights to his creation for life plus 70 years). I think the prospect of lasting glory will perpetually spark creativity throughout the league. Finding a balance between allowing for long term investments and safeguarding against future dominance is tricky, and this was my best effort.