A Very Darrelly Dynasty League

[NorthOf49]

I don't disagree, but what is the mechanic then? Do you really like the 'race' to be the first guy to pick CJ at an arbitrary time the day of / day after he plays his first AA game?

I don't have a problem with a first-come, first-serve policy regarding players that have been passed over multiple times by every team. There were decent prospects who reached even the Majors last year and were awarded to whichever owner was paying attention. That's cool, and those owners deserve credit.

 

But I agree that there does need to be some better system to determine who gets the player if many teams are involved.

 

I really disagree strongly that the potential availability of a guy or two like CJ Edwards would have made people value their draft picks more highly.

 

Actually, I'll go as far as saying that it had no effect at all.

It's more than just CJ Edwards. I'll bet that there will be seven or eight prospects who are good enough to get drafted in the 2014 MiLB draft who will have reached at least AA at the time of the draft.

[Laika]

I have a hard time seeing No49 stash multiple prospects on a roster built to win now. It would be pretty dumn.

 

Basically, he's just being a little dildo s***.

[Boxcar]

If we're voicing our thoughts, I think that, at the very least, a guy hitting AA should be put on waivers as soon as he's eligible to be added. This would be a pain for the commissioners to do for every guy who hits AA. I would be in favour of a system where a prospect's status is frozen at the start of the year. So Edwards was not available in the waiver draft and won't be eligible to start the year so he remains ineligible until the June draft. I think that is the most fair way to do it. I guess there's a freak chance that a guy would be elevated to the Majors in the time while not being on anyone's MiLB roster but I think such a case would be nearly impossible and could be dealt with on a case by case basis.

 

Just my two cents.

[Laika]

Last year this wasn't an issue because Yahoo didn't have a lot of prospects in the system, only had the top tier guys. When a guy got called up he got added to the system and automatically hit waivers. This took care of itself and their was no gap in our rules.

 

This year they have hundreds of prospects of all different significances though.

 

So anyone talking about deep seeded strategy being perturbed by a minor rule addition is full of it! Their strategy could only have even existed since Yahoo opened up a month ago.

 

I like z3r0s rule. Prospect status between season start and the June draft is determined by what level they finished at last year. If an unowned prospect gets added to a major league 25 man, then they are addable add-bait as soon as that officially happens.

 

z3r0s' rule is superior to the one I previously made up because it removes a kind of stupid process of tracking AA games and racing to add fringey prospects at 6 in the morning. It also makes the June draft a tiny, tiny bit more interesting which is good!

[NorthOf49]

It's not really a big deal, the proposed plan just seemed pretty clumsy, as someone noted.

Yeah the real problem seems to be that the issue was never addressed when the league was created. I've been keeping a list of A-ball guys who could reach AA by June since the start of the offseason, and may have acted differently in the past had I known none of them would be addable.

 

But I guess I'm flexible when it comes to rules that cover up loopholes/unforeseen circumstances, as opposed to rules changes that are purely cosmetic. So if it's agreed that this is the former, z3r0s' rule could work.

 

I have another idea though. Every team has 100 'AA prospect dollars' (AAPD) to spend throughout the season. Whenever a prospect is promoted to and first appears in a game at AA, every owner has two days to submit a silent bid of AAPD to a commissioner through Proboards. After the two-day deadline passes, whichever owner submitted the highest bid is awarded the player, and that owner has their bid deducted from their total AAPD pool. In the case of ties, the owner with the higher waiver priority (or maybe lower standings position) wins.

[NorthOf49]

This sounds like way too much work for something that like 3 people would participate in.

You'd keep everyone's AAPD total on Proboards. It's fair and IMO wouldn't be too much work.

[z3r0s]

Yeah the real problem seems to be that the issue was never addressed when the league was created. I've been keeping a list of A-ball guys who could reach AA by June since the start of the offseason, and may have acted differently in the past had I known none of them would be addable.

 

But I guess I'm flexible when it comes to rules that cover up loopholes/unforeseen circumstances, as opposed to rules changes that are purely cosmetic. So if it's agreed that this is the former, z3r0s' rule could work.

 

I have another idea though. Every team has 100 'AA prospect dollars' (AAPD) to spend throughout the season. Whenever a prospect is promoted to and first appears in a game at AA, every owner has two days to submit a silent bid AAPD to a commissioner through Proboards. After the two-day deadline passes, whichever owner submitted the highest bid is awarded the player, and that owner has their bid deducted from their total AAPD pool. In the case of ties, the owner with the higher waiver priority (or maybe lower standings position) wins.

 

Are AAPD tradeable?

 

JJ, I do feel that would be a lot of added accounting.

[NorthOf49]

Are AAPD tradeable?

 

JJ, I do feel that would be a lot of added accounting.

Of course they are! Everything is tradeable. That's the American way.

[Laika]

I typed up an official email but proboards won't let me send another league-wide one until tomorrow. Here is the text:

 

"There have been some questions about how we should handle unowned prospects that hit AA during the season.

 

Last year this wasn't an issue because Yahoo didn't have a lot of prospects in the system, they only had the top tier guys. When an out of system got called up he got added to the system and automatically hit waivers, usually after his first MLB game. This took care of the issue itself and their was no gap in our rules.

 

This year they have hundreds of prospects of all different significances though. One notable example is CJ Edwards, who is currently unowned and has not hit AA, but he might start the season in AA (or hit the level at some point soon).

 

Here is the official rule: The status of unowned prospects is determined by what minor league level they maxed out at last season. If an unowned prospect only hit A+ (or lower) last year, then they can't be added in Yahoo even if they hit AA during the year.

 

They can, however, be added if they get called up to the MLB. This can happen as soon as the MLB team officially calls them up, adding them to the 25 man roster.

 

If an unowned prospect hit AA last year then they can be added to your big league roster at any time.

 

So if a player did not hit AA last year then the only way to add him to your roster is through the rule 4 draft in June!

 

This line in the sand makes guys who have hit AA last year like Eddie Butler available in the rule 5 draft in the spring, and it keeps guys who haven't hit AA like CJ Edwards as June draft bait.

 

Due to Yahoo's new player database depth, we had to implement this rule. And since it is a necessary new rule and not a rule change, we've decided not to vote on it. I also think that it's fairly inconsequential but in a minor way, for the best interest of the league, which is why I'm just making it so.

 

If you have any questions please direct your emails to Northof49, owner of BALCO Pharm Team, blank@rogers.com"

[NorthOf49]

Ok, I guess I'm in. If you take my email off the board lol.

 

The part about how Yahoo started doing things different this year by adding all kinds of random prospects to the database is valid.

[TRM]

I typed up an official email but proboards won't let me send another league-wide one until tomorrow. Here is the text:

 

"There have been some questions about how we should handle unowned prospects that hit AA during the season.

 

Last year this wasn't an issue because Yahoo didn't have a lot of prospects in the system, they only had the top tier guys. When an out of system got called up he got added to the system and automatically hit waivers, usually after his first MLB game. This took care of the issue itself and their was no gap in our rules.

 

This year they have hundreds of prospects of all different significances though. One notable example is CJ Edwards, who is currently unowned and has not hit AA, but he might start the season in AA (or hit the level at some point soon).

 

Here is the official rule: The status of unowned prospects is determined by what minor league level they maxed out at last season. If an unowned prospect only hit A+ (or lower) last year, then they can't be added in Yahoo even if they hit AA during the year.

 

They can, however, be added if they get called up to the MLB. This can happen as soon as the MLB team officially calls them up, adding them to the 25 man roster.

 

If an unowned prospect hit AA last year then they can be added to your big league roster at any time.

 

So if a player did not hit AA last year then the only way to add him to your roster is through the rule 4 draft in June!

 

This line in the sand makes guys who have hit AA last year like Eddie Butler available in the rule 5 draft in the spring, and it keeps guys who haven't hit AA like CJ Edwards as June draft bait.

 

Due to Yahoo's new player database depth, we had to implement this rule. And since it is a necessary new rule and not a rule change, we've decided not to vote on it. I also think that it's fairly inconsequential but in a minor way, for the best interest of the league, which is why I'm just making it so.

 

If you have any questions please direct your emails to Northof49, owner of BALCO Pharm Team, blank@rogers.com"

 

Probably should't post No49 email address.

[Laika]

Sorry, actually meant to edit out your addy on here

[Dr. Dinger]

Just implement the rule now. We are Darrell overlords, we can do whatever we want.

[NorthOf49]

I like how CJ Edwards became everyone's go-to example purely because he had already been name-dropped. There's a hitting prospect in particular that everyone was probably thinking about when they typed Edwards.

[Abomination]

Probably should't post No49 email address.

 

Probably shouldn't quote the post containing it either lol

[Fearthedoc]

It seems like everyone outside of North loves the rule. I personally love it. I dont want to have to race to try and pick up the guy at 6 AM. It's only five to ten fringe top 150 prospects anyway. I also like that now we can draft them to out MiLB rosters rather than bringing them up to our MLB 25.

[Fearthedoc]

I like how CJ Edwards became everyone's go-to example purely because he had already been name-dropped. There's a hitting prospect in particular that everyone was probably thinking about when they typed Edwards.

 

I have a list of 5 similar to the Edwards situation. I'll target them in the draft.

[Laika]

It seems like everyone outside of North loves the rule. I personally love it. I dont want to have to race to try and pick up the guy at 6 AM. It's only five to ten fringe top 150 prospects anyway. I also like that now we can draft them to out MiLB rosters rather than bringing them up to our MLB 25.

 

And really, everyone would rather have these types of guys on their minor league team anyway, where you can stash them for a couple of years in case they turn into fantasy relevant players by some stroke of luck.

[TheHurl]

I'm so confused. can I get a drunken notes version of this rule

[Fearthedoc]

And really, everyone would rather have these types of guys on their minor league team anyway, where you can stash them for a couple of years in case they turn into fantasy relevant players by some stroke of luck.

 

Yeah some of these guys could be a couple years away. Unless you're in a complete rebuild, you cant afford to keep these guys in your 20 year to year. Especially since they're fringe prospects. We're not talking about studs here.

[NorthOf49]

Yeah some of these guys could be a couple years away. Unless you're in a complete rebuild, you cant afford to keep these guys in your 20 year to year. Especially since they're fringe prospects. We're not talking about studs here.

There's a guy out there who will start the year in AA and KLaw ranked ahead of Moran, Piscotty, Franco, Odor and others. He's pretty studly. Power, speed and average at a shallow position. I wouldn't say they're bad prospects, just that most of them aren't worth keeping for a full season if you're not rebuilding. But if you're contending you can always trade them to a rebuilding team.

[Laika]

There's a guy out there who will start the year in AA and KLaw ranked ahead of Moran, Piscotty, Franco, Odor and others. He's pretty studly. Power, speed and average at a shallow position. I wouldn't say they're bad prospects, just that most of them aren't worth keeping for a full season if you're not rebuilding. But if you're contending you can always trade them to a rebuilding team.

 

Rossell Herrerra is probably 2 full years away from the big leagues, and 3 or 4 years away from being fantasy relevant (if he ever is). The only guy with a timeline like that is Boxy. So you would have a very limited group of buyers! And Boxcar8 might have different ideas about what to do with his draft picks (essentially all he has to trade).

[TRM]

Called out.

[NorthOf49]

Rossell Herrerra is probably 2 full years away from the big leagues, and 3 or 4 years away from being fantasy relevant (if he ever is). The only guy with a timeline like that is Boxy. So you would have a very limited group of buyers! And Boxcar8 might have different ideas about what to do with his draft picks (essentially all he has to trade).

Yeah I would have traded Herrera to Boxy for a pick upgrade. Or I'd have used a loophole to get him on my MiLB roster.

[Laika]

Or I'd have used a loophole to get him on my MiLB roster.

 

You know damn right that we'd probably just close said loophole, thank you for exposing it, and then negate your move.

[Laika]

What loophole?

 

I'm guessing drafting his own MLB player and then arguing that it's within the rules?

[NorthOf49]

What loophole?

You get a last-round MiLB pick and drop the prospect from your MLB roster when it's your turn to pick. Then you draft him in the MiLB draft. Last-round picks are going to go for so cheap this year that it makes sense to sacrifice one in favour of Rosell Herrera.

[Laika]

The DDL is looking for a new owner. You'd be taking over a playoff team that currently owns Cutch, Mauer, Kipnis, Fielder, and Price, among others.

 

Shoot me a message with your credentials if interested. I'm serious.

[Abomination]

There should be a rule that players owned at the beginning of the MiLB draft, are unable to be drafted for it's entirety.

 

I believe this is in my proposed changes for the BBDL

[NorthOf49]

You're taking things to Grantian levels here. Please stop. It really isn't fun when someone is constantly looking for ways to exploit the rules of the league.

Okay. I'll get back to traditional asset acquisition methods. Sorry lol. I don't mind Grant as a poster but know it's not good to be compared to him fantasy-wise.

 

There should be a rule that players owned at the beginning of the MiLB draft, are unable to be drafted for it's entirety.

Yeah that makes sense. I think we have that for the waiver draft.

Edited March 7, 2014 by NorthOf49