• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
What If FCM Had A Rule 5 Draft?
#11
(12-10-2015, 07:05 PM)mike Wrote: So you cant expose anyone you want with service time? Is their a salary limit? You have me confused when you mentioned in past leagues you could expose whoever you want but it wouldn't be that way with yours. Anyway the point being even if you don't like the comparison to other leagues, even going by your predicted draft you're literally talking about a little bit more shinier shit than the shit that's been seen in other leagues. Still doesn't solve having a time where everyone could do it even if they wanted to invest the time in doing it at all. As I had mentioned if this even were to happen it needs to be something a strong majority can participate in (the proper way not just sending in some list) otherwise what's the point.

My example of a past league was showing a bad example of how they did Rule 5 Drafts. For my Indians, let's say Charlie Carmody had another year on his contract. With their rules, I could expose him in order to protect a young player. If I had Carmody for another year, I would certainly use him, but I also wouldn't mind if someone took him since it would save my quite a bit of money. That was the problem with it.

So, under my rules you cannot expose players with Service Time. They must be protected before players without Service Time. Salary is irrelevant since salaried players usually have Service Time.

The players aren't guaranteed to be shiny shit. That's just not right. The majority of the time, sure they're going to be a dime a dozen bench guy. But you should have a look at what Adam Borthwick, R.J. O'Reilly, and Brian King look like now. That's what you're trying for in Rule 5 Drafts. A player that looks alright and then blossoms into something pretty nice. That's why you pay a million or two, to have that chance.

I highly doubt scouting will take much time. The majority of eligible players are crap and don't need to be scouted. You can hone in on players that actually have a fighting chance. Like I did with the experiment, most people are going to gravitate towards a certain peak cutoff.

This isn't like the amateur draft, where the flow can really help you understand where players are going. You have a limited number of picks, so if, for example, you want to take a chance on a LRP, your targets will either be there or they won't. People can send me a list of, "Hey, I want these 5 guys. If they aren't there, I pass on my picks." They don't miss out on anything.
Cle

Cleveland Record5631-4946 (.532) [2054-2071, 2083-2104, 2110-2135]
AL Post: 16 (ALC), 11 (WC) - ALDS Win: 12 - ALCS Champ: 7 - WS Champ: 4

ALW: Mariners + Angels Record: 1072-864 (.554) [2042-2048, 2105-2110]
AL Post: 3 (ALW), 4 (WC) - ALDS Win: 3 - ALCS Champ: 1 - WS Champ: 1

NLW: Rockies + Padres Record: 3230-2753 (.540) [2017-2042, 2072-2082]
NL Post: 18 (NLW), 4 (WC) - NLDS Win: 7 - NLCS Champ: 4 - WS Champ: 0
#12
I'm always up for anything that ups the ante on strategy, like this does. If there's strong support and there are no real kinks, I'd be on board.
Los Angeles Dodgers GM
#13
I will set this up for a full test run this off-season. Those that want to participate and see how things run can. If not, no harm since the results won't matter. Here's the timeline for how it'll run:

1. Rule 5 file released shortly after the FA file is posted (within 24 hours)
2. Additional protects need to be in by FA Update 2 (9 PM ET that night)
3. Draft will be on the WB night at 9 PM (send me pick lists if you can't make it)
Cle

Cleveland Record5631-4946 (.532) [2054-2071, 2083-2104, 2110-2135]
AL Post: 16 (ALC), 11 (WC) - ALDS Win: 12 - ALCS Champ: 7 - WS Champ: 4

ALW: Mariners + Angels Record: 1072-864 (.554) [2042-2048, 2105-2110]
AL Post: 3 (ALW), 4 (WC) - ALDS Win: 3 - ALCS Champ: 1 - WS Champ: 1

NLW: Rockies + Padres Record: 3230-2753 (.540) [2017-2042, 2072-2082]
NL Post: 18 (NLW), 4 (WC) - NLDS Win: 7 - NLCS Champ: 4 - WS Champ: 0
#14
I like this. Trial basis sounds good. Nice work Matty as always.
#15
(12-12-2015, 02:29 PM)jhc54 Wrote: I like this. Trial basis sounds good. Nice work Matty as always.

Right. And I do want to make it clear, the results of the 2060 Rule 5 Draft will NOT count.
Cle

Cleveland Record5631-4946 (.532) [2054-2071, 2083-2104, 2110-2135]
AL Post: 16 (ALC), 11 (WC) - ALDS Win: 12 - ALCS Champ: 7 - WS Champ: 4

ALW: Mariners + Angels Record: 1072-864 (.554) [2042-2048, 2105-2110]
AL Post: 3 (ALW), 4 (WC) - ALDS Win: 3 - ALCS Champ: 1 - WS Champ: 1

NLW: Rockies + Padres Record: 3230-2753 (.540) [2017-2042, 2072-2082]
NL Post: 18 (NLW), 4 (WC) - NLDS Win: 7 - NLCS Champ: 4 - WS Champ: 0
#16
YOU DON'T COUNT
Los Angeles Dodgers GM
#17
(12-13-2015, 03:23 AM)hickoxb2 Wrote: YOU DON'T COUNT

^
Pit
2104-2106

237-249 record






Det
2047-2103

5,268-3,807 record

43 Playoff Appearances
27 Division Titles
19 Pennants
6 World Championships  

Houston Astros
2035-2046

1133-811 record

9 Playoff Appearances
5 Division Titles
1 Pennant


« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)



Forum Jump: