Our rule is *any* player kept has a $5 salary increase next season. Thus FAABs at 1 become 6 next year. Sure some bargains are found, but it is more likely that FAABs are "price enforced" by teams still in the running.I've never played with this rule so I can't comment based on experience. I do have a couple of quick observations.
1) I'd rather just use a flat $10 salary than permit someone to wind up with a cheap $6 keep next year just because they got lucky with a $1 FAAB flier. I've said this many times, but at $10 an owner is going to think twice before committing to that player.
2) At some point, it becomes impossible to price enforce owners via FAAB. In a league with $100 cap, it would be easy for a dead duck owner to wait until late August or early September and start putting cheap bids in on players who came up from the minors for a September cup of coffee. I acknowledge that few of these players are going to work out the following year, but giving an owner license to keep these players at $6 means that some of them will.
If you're going to use this $1/$6 rule why not simply switch to a flat $10 salary for all players purchased at $6 or less? You're reducing the keeper pool even further, and making it even harder for owners to build a dynasty by trolling the FAAB wires in September.
6 comments:
August notwithstanding, my league has rule that September FAAB players are $25 regardless of whether they are roster expansion or not. This prevents the keeping of the best prospects who weren't already taken in the minor league draft.
We have also only have 5 keepers and everyone starts as S1, so they have to be extended or optioned in year two, so dumping, while regular and annual, isn't wholesale and at least for the past 5 years hasn't started league fights or quits. Also, minor leaguers can't be dealt, which helps a lot.
My league has an even smaller salary boost, but we don't allow retention of September callups. People occasionally get very lucky during the season, but more often with middle relievers that become closers than with rookie players.
My AL league has a "normal" FAAB setup ($100, min bids of $1), and you CAN keep players at their prices. I'm still trying to figure out how inflation is consistently low (~20%) there.
It could be because after a player's 2nd year, he must be given a salary increase to keep him. For example:
Normal (I think) progression:
year 1 (bought at auction): $8
year 2: $8
year 3: $8
or years 3&4: $13
or years 3,4,5: $18
This league:
year 1: $8
year 2: $8
year 3: $13
or years 3&4: $18
or years 3,4,5: $23
and so on (no limit to the # of years, actually)
Also there are fewer keepers. However, I've seen that reducing the number of keepers actually increases the imbalance in dump deals (what if there was only 1 keeper? You'd give up everything single thing on your team for the one best keeper you can get).'
Like you mentioned in a previous post, players acquired by FAAB are rarely big dump targets.
If you want to curtail dumping, you have to think carefully about what your rules will actually do. If you don't allow minor leaguers to be traded and artificially increase the salaries of free agents, that will just make the keepers drafted at auction more valuable, and teams will overpay for them. It might be that the way to reduce imbalanced dump trades is actually to produce MORE keepers/inflation.
Or moderate it directly - no dumping allowed before a certain (I think that went fairly well for us this year), or even more strictly, no players who are dealt can be kept.
From the "Anonymous" of the subject comment: we also do not allow September FAABs to be kept the following year.
I am surprised at what I am reading. You are basically saying that your league is better off spending as much FAAB early and now making it even more apparent by penalizing the bottom dwellers who didnt spend and are looking for deals at the bottom? Everyone has the chance to bid so why cry because someone was able to get a player at the end. Be more frugal and you won't have to worry.
As far as picking up major players and dumping them, that's what salary caps are for. The baseball trade deadline is before our real deadline anyway so any high priced player could be traded but you can only fit so many on your roster.
While "Anonymous'" tone is confrontational, he does make an interesting point. Even as early as the "waiver" days, weight was given to your position in the standings. Why? Because if you were at the bottom of the standings, you needed help.
If the contenders are capped out or FAAB'd out, so be it. There is, however, a need for some salary inflation - otherwise, inflation goes out of control.
Post a Comment