12-10-2017, 02:35 PM
(12-10-2017, 01:44 AM)cadmus2166 Wrote: Just to be clear, the only part that's been discussed that I don't really like is the limit on times a player can be comped. I just don't see it as a big problem. Players who are comped get a minimum 2 year deal, and often more, so it's not like players are getting comped every year. I figure that if you gave up a draft pick to acquire a player at some point and then a few years later that player is still good enough for you to get a pick back, once they aren't needed anymore or if a team has needed to undergo a rebuild then you should be able to. Sometimes being able to comp a player helps a team entering rebuild mode, so you can't just make an argument that the rich are always just getting richer from the comp system as was suggested earlier.
A team entering rebuild mode is irrelevant in this discussion. They shouldn't get a comp pick that they didn't deserve either.
Why should a team in FA that threw out the most money for a player, that ends up helping the team have access of getting a free pick just because they threw out the most money in FA? Reward enough was that player helping them. The team also would still have another reward, that reward is being able to extend a player without having to fight with 29 other potential gm's in FA. So the team is still coming out smelling like roses. Right now teams not only benefit from the player helping them during the contract that you signed them to, but they have 2 options of extending the player OR getting a pick back in comp. That's just too much.
Herrod pitching well for detroit, helping them win a WS, and them having access to extend him and not fighting for him in FA is sufficient enough. That's enough reward in and of itself. But now, they comp'd him and got a bid and now will get a nice pick for him. I want to make it very clear, GB did nothing wrong. I would have done the exact same thing as he did, it's very smart strategy. But, I don't feel like it's good for the league.
As far as people saying this could hurt the league where more players just extend with the team, GM's have been saying that since i've been here anytime suggestions come up. There were people on the suggestions threads and in chat in the past saying how making 2 year 16 mil for Type A was gonna hurt the league, nope it hasn't. And so what if GB would have extended Herrod, so ok you have maybe 1 or 2 less FA's a year. Big deal, I'd take that than letting teams get good picks just because they spent the most in FA.
Compensation is meant as a reward for teams. Not sure how rewarding a team like Detroit a good pick just because they spent the most on Herrod in FA 2 years ago makes any sense whatsoever. And he's not the only one that's been done like that, he's just the most recent.