Fantasy Baseball Cafe Forums

Once we have 8 votes in one of the options, we can then iron out the specifics.

Looks like we have a consensus!

Since the issue hasn't come up before, let em say that again, the issue hasn't come up before, it's apparent that the only concern seems to be the late round keepers that you get to keep forever at the late round (nice drafting by the way for those of you that have 'em), not the early/mid round keepers that will fall out of keeper status by virtue of degrading skills/value. I'd say keep it simple:

eg:
A/
year 1 drafted in the 16th thru 26th
year 2 he stays in the 16th thru 26th
year 3 he moves to the 15th, the same as a free agent pickup being kept, and stays there forever

B/
the rest of the players 1st thru the 15th stay where they are.

ensanimal wrote:Looks like we have a consensus!

Ens, we had the consensus before you and I voted.

ayebatter wrote:Since the issue hasn't come up before, let em say that again, the issue hasn't come up before, it's apparent that the only concern seems to be the late round keepers that you get to keep forever at the late round (nice drafting by the way for those of you that have 'em), not the early/mid round keepers that will fall out of keeper status by virtue of degrading skills/value. I'd say keep it simple:

eg:
A/
year 1 drafted in the 16th thru 26th
year 2 he stays in the 16th thru 26th
year 3 he moves to the 15th, the same as a free agent pickup being kept, and stays there forever

B/
the rest of the players 1st thru the 15th stay where they are.

I much prefer Fade's proposal. There are some big bargains in the mid rounds right now, and I think that, slowly, over time they should "normalise" with their re-draft position. Likewise, those late round bargains, essentially remain, huge bargains in the 15th round.

As I said in the other thread, I think it would also help put some of the top players back into the draft pool over time too.

I've been thinking a bit more about the two or three first round player issue. How about if you have two 1st round players, you are penalised an extra round on your third keeper?

For example, say you have two players (who after escalation) should be first round picks, your third keeper is from Rd 5, fourth from Rd 12, fifth from rd 23. Under my proposal you would lose picks in Rds 1 & 2 (for your first two keepers), and then Rd 4 (instead of 5), and 12 and 23.

One problem with this is if your third keeper was from Rd 2 or 3, then it would need to be /remain a Rd 3 pick in the above scenario, so in that instance you'd have to be penalised for your fourth keeper.

Of course, if you accumulate five keepers that would cost a Rd 1 pick, this wouldn't work at all!

May be too complicated?!!

ayebatter wrote:

ensanimal wrote:Looks like we have a consensus!

Ens, we had the consensus before you and I voted.

I like to think I'm important.

1st - 5th - Pick escalates 1 round per year.
6th - 11th - Pick escalates 2 rounds per year.
12th - 20th - Pick escalates 3 rounds per year.
21st - 26th - Pick escalates 4 rounds per year.

In this scenario, Eric Hosme (someone kept in Round 26 but supposed to be an early 1st or 2nd round pick by next year, supposedly) still takes 9 years to achieve 1st round status. No matter what system we devise, it seems like the really bargain players in the late rounds will be bargains for a long time. But we really need to increase the escalation and create more tiers. Maybe even 5, with late picks escalating by 5 rounds?

I also think once a pick escalates to Round 1, you can't simply "slide" them back and make them a Round 2 or Round 3 pick in order to own multiple Round 1 picks. Only one Round 1 pick should be kept, and then only for 3 years. All other Round 1 picks would be returned to the draft pool, and the Round 1 pick kept for more than three years would be returned to the draft pool too.

Well since we have an obvious consensus to change the system so that there is some sort of escalation, we just have to iron out the details.

So these are concerns:
1. Rate at which players escalate. Should all players, regardless of round, escalate at the same rate? Should escalation be on a sliding scale? Should late round keepers simply jump to certain round, like round 15, as ayebatter suggested?
2. Escalation maximum. What should happen when a player escalates to Round 1 (can be kept there forever? must be thrown back?)? What about people keeping multiple Round 1 players?


Although I'm not sure if I really like ayebatter's proposal exactly as written, I completely agree with his rationale. The main issue here is being able to keep players for a penalty that is far FAR away from their value. Early and mid-round keepers should be much less of a concern as they are already much closer to their market value. That's also why I am not a fan of jusman's. I am in favor of a sliding scale, but I dislike your idea regarding Round 1 players. Is me owning Miguel Cabrera and Evan Longoria at Round 1 and what is essentially Round 2 (which is exactly what their values are) as egregious as me keeping Carlos Santana at Round 24 (a 20 round difference)? I don't personally think so. Plus, Round 1 players get thrown back into the pool all of the time, as Ender showed in his last post.

I think at the very least you should be able to keep 1 guy for his entire career so I don't like having every guy who reached 1st round status falling off of your roster the next season.

I'd be ok with a system where if you have 2 guys saved at a 1st round value you have to let 1 of them fall off the next season though. The caveat being that people with more than 1 current 1st rounder right now shouldn't have that harsh of a penalty thrown at them instantly so they could redistribute their 1st rounders. So if someone had say 5 1st rounders right now then next year they could keep them at 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th with them deciding which one is which round. Then in the future one of them would fall off each season.

I also don't have a huge problem with people keeping more than one 1st rounder, I just offered the above as a suggestion for those who don't like it.