Keeper disaster

[Matt_Domsic]

In all fairness, that last quote incriminates me.

But there's no need to get nasty here. You'd think this was a money league or something.

Whoops my bad

[ayebatter]

Look I can quote things too - and they all point to you being a passive aggressive dick

hahahahahaha

[Fade2White12]

My personal opinion for each of the things you brought up, Matt.

1. I don't think that it should just be 3 years for each player. The difference between a player jumping from round 26 to 23 vs. from 6 to 3 are not remotely equal. That's why I proposed some sort of sliding scale. I think players should move quickly when they are extremely far from their value, but slow down as their round penalties become more in line with their actual value.

2. I'm not objective when it comes to this as I made a conscious decision a few seasons back when I attempted to acquire multiple first rounders. Last season, three of my keepers were first rounders (luckily I got rid of Utley). So although I would not want to 1st round players to then expire for my own selfish reasons, I like Ender feel that we should be able to keep any player for as long as we so choose.

3. Same as above. I'd like to be able to keep players indefinitely - which is what this league was originally marketed as, and what was publicized when we needed to fill any open spots.

[RedBullVodka]

I like Fade's proposals.

Sliding scale for escalation of keepers.
Option to keep players for as long as you like.
Good for you if you manage to accumulate lots of top round picks - can't see any way of preventing this if you keep players for as long as you like.

[Third Day]

I like Fade's proposals.

Sliding scale for escalation of keepers.
Option to keep players for as long as you like.
Good for you if you manage to accumulate lots of top round picks - can't see any way of preventing this if you keep players for as long as you like.

I agree with RBV, although I would be open to some sort of penalty if you keep multiple first round picks. Or that you can only keep one player per round, no round sliding.

[thejusman1]

I like Fade's proposals.

Sliding scale for escalation of keepers.
Option to keep players for as long as you like.
Good for you if you manage to accumulate lots of top round picks - can't see any way of preventing this if you keep players for as long as you like.

I agree with RBV, although I would be open to some sort of penalty if you keep multiple first round picks. Or that you can only keep one player per round, no round sliding.

Sliding scale for escalation of players - yes.

1st round players - Either they can only keep 1, no sliding scale, or after 3 years of "1st round status" even with the sliding scale, they must return to the draft pool. It is pretty uphill climb for a team like mine who entered the league taking over a bad team to rise out of the mediocrity... although that could be my drafting skills

[Ender]

On average only 6 of the top 15 players return top 15 value each season. 1st round picks are still pretty fungible in value. I don't have any kind of problem with someone keeping 5 1st round guys because in reality 3 of them aren't going to return top 15 value anyway.

Looking back at 2008 here are the top 3 players per position as rated by the cafe.

VMart, Martin, McCann - Only 1 would have been kept and is a 4th round value
Pujols, Howard, Fielder - 2 would have been kept at good value
Utley, Phillips, Upton - Only 2 would be kept none 1st rounders
ARod, Wright, Cabrera - Only 1 first rounder
Hanley, Tulo, Rollins - only 1 first rounder
Holliday, Soriano, Guerrero - Only 1 worth keeping
Santana, Peavy, Webb - none worth keeping
Papelbon, KRod, Putz - Only 1 worth keeping

In just a 4 year span 10 of the top 24 players by position would have fallen off of keeper lists completely and only 4 would still be 1st round values. The turnover in baseball is a lot faster than people think it is.

[Fade2White12]

On average only 6 of the top 15 players return top 15 value each season. 1st round picks are still pretty fungible in value. I don't have any kind of problem with someone keeping 5 1st round guys because in reality 3 of them aren't going to return top 15 value anyway.

Looking back at 2008 here are the top 3 players per position as rated by the cafe.

VMart, Martin, McCann - Only 1 would have been kept and is a 4th round value
Pujols, Howard, Fielder - 2 would have been kept at good value
Utley, Phillips, Upton - Only 2 would be kept none 1st rounders
ARod, Wright, Cabrera - Only 1 first rounder
Hanley, Tulo, Rollins - only 1 first rounder
Holliday, Soriano, Guerrero - Only 1 worth keeping
Santana, Peavy, Webb - none worth keeping
Papelbon, KRod, Putz - Only 1 worth keeping

In just a 4 year span 10 of the top 24 players by position would have fallen off of keeper lists completely and only 4 would still be 1st round values. The turnover in baseball is a lot faster than people think it is.

Exactly. The other thing is that 1st round players aren't really all that valuable. Many people believe that Lawrie or Hosmer may be 1st or 2nd round players within a year or two. If that happens, even with a sliding scale they'll still be considerably more valuable than a player like Pujols, and will continue to be for many years down the road.

Look at my team the last two years. When I had 3 first rounders, I finished what, 10th? Last year, 9th? Look at Dave Knight, who went last, to first, back to last. I think this is also a reason why I think that the rules shouldn't change too drastically. I thought I've had pretty nice keepers the last few years and haven't been in the least bit competitive. Like jusman, maybe I just suck at everything else.

[RedBullVodka]

I guess what we're trying to prevent here is a team having five first/second round talents that they've picked up in lower rounds (particularly very late rounds), and those players remaining in those rounds for ever more. Those players, at the moment, are huge bargains, and are the reason why some, if not all of us, are reaching for rookies in the hope of striking gold.

At least with escalation, those players (eventually) reach the rounds they should be drafted in, and then you have to decide whether the value is there in keeping them. For some players that will still take a heck of a long time. For example, for Andrew McCutchen in round 23, it will still take six years of being kept before he reaches even Round 10, and then a further 9 years before he reaches round 1 value! Almost certainly there will be a point in which his career starts to decline, where his value doesn't warrant being kept, but at least with escalation, that might happen before it would if remains a Rd 23 player for ever.

It really effects the early / mid-round players more perhaps. For example, I have Hunter Pence in round 5 - if we had implemented this rule from the start, I would perhaps have not kept him this year, as he would have been a Rd 2 keeper. I think by implementing the rule we would get a greater turn over of these type players, although there would still be an emphasis on trying to strike gold in the later rounds perhaps.

I think it would also help to create more value in those early rounds. At the moment, most players available in the early rounds are being picked way before their true value. I don't think any of the players picked in Rd 1 this year, would be picked in Rd 1 of a re-draft league (perhaps Reyes in a 14 teamer?), and only Reyes and Bruce are even close to having the possibility of returning that value this season. I think escalation should help to put more higher value players back into the draft pot over time (if not completely change this quirk of our system).

Fade's point at how important the keeper's are to dominance in this league is interesting. He has a great set of keepers, yet hasn't so far, been competitive. Perhaps it is because, most of those keepers are from early rounds, and as such, don't represent outstanding value compared with a McCutchen in Round 23 (both that he has helped me much!)?

Or perhaps, it is because having only 5 keepers, means that they are only a small proportion of the 12 hitters / 1400 IP limit team required to win this league, and the rest of the drafted team is equally, if not more important to constructing a winning team?