Post by Easy Freese on Feb 15, 2020 20:09:42 GMT -5
Below are the results from the 2020 Contract Baseball Survey along with my comments regarding each proposal.
2. Allow teams to designate one prospect each year that they can send back to their prospect pool after being called up. Once this prospect is sent back down, he cannot be called up for the remainder of the season. The player must still qualify as a prospect to be eligible to be sent down. - 12 Yes - 4 No
This proposal passes. Managers must have an open spot on their minors in order to send a prospect down. I am adding a few provisions to the rule. First, a manager cannot designate the same player to send down in two consecutive seasons. Second, this option to send down a prospect can only be used during the fantasy regular season. It cannot be used in the offseason or the playoffs. Third, a manager can only send down a prospect in the same year that prospect is called up. When a manager sends down a prospect, that contract will come off the books and revet to being a minors contract like standard draft picks are assigned.
3. After the Trading deadline, owners may not buyout the contract of any player with a salary of $25 or higher. (Vote Yes if you are in favour of the rule but would like to see a different $ threshold) - 14 Yes - 2 No
This proposal passes. After reviewing league contracts and receiving feedback bout lowering the contract amount, I have decided I am adjusting the threshold down from $25 to $20. Currently there are less than 10 players with contracts above $25. Having a rule that applies to so few players seems pointless. $20 captures more players while still ensuring too many guys are not prevented from being able to be bought out. Setting it at $20 also is consistent with the following proposal for FAs and helps set a clear threshold for future rules that regarding high priced players. The threshold may be reviewed in subsequent years depending on how the distribution of league contracts is affected by new rookie contract rules.
4. Any bid after 12 hours on an FA auction of $20 or more must be a minimum of 0.50. (Vote Yes if you are in favour of the rule but would like to see a different threshold than $20) - 12 Yes - 4 No
This proposal passes. No amendments to this rule. Rule is pretty clear. Rule will go into affect this FA period.
5. Players on a 1 year contract that are bought out after the trade deadline cost the whole contact of the player (If player X is on a 1 year contract of $3, his buyout would be $3 rather than $1.5 under the current rules) - 10 Yes - 6 No
This proposal fails. This will be included on next year's survey. Clearly there is support for this proposal however it does not meet 2/3 support typically used as the threshold for adopting rules and I do not feel it represents an immediate need or solves a glaring issue.
6. 2 year buyouts in the offseason, before the sheet is rolled over, would be subject to an additional 15% cap penalty (rounded to nearest 0.25). This additional cap penalty would be charged towards the upcoming season’s cap. Buyout for the current cap would remain the same. This rule is to place an additional cap hit for the following season. (Vote Yes if you would like a different % but are in favour of a cap penalty for buying out players on 2 year deals in the offseason) - 3 Yes - 13 No
This proposal fails. Not much needs to be said here. Clearly this is not something the league wants and therefore it will not be adopted.
7. Change the order of the prospect draft to align with regular season standings rather than final standings after the playoffs (i.e if a manager finishes in 5th in the regular season but wins the championship, that manager would draft 12th instead of 16th) - 7 Yes - 9 No
This proposal fails. Not a pressing issue. Received less support this year compared to last. Draft will remain unchanged.
8. Change the draft from automatic ordering based on standings to a lottery system. Only teams that do not make the playoffs would be placed in the lottery. Lottery would only be to determine the 1st pick in the draft. All non playoff teams would be weighted equally in the lottery. After the 1st pick is awarded, all subsequent picks would be awarded based on standings.(Select this option if you would like to see a lottery but would prefer different weighting) - 2 Yes - 14 No
This proposal fails. Clearly not something the league is interested and will not be considered ever again.
9. Eliminate all bonus draft picks - 6 Yes - 10 No
This proposal fails. Bonus draft picks will remain in place. Support isn't there for change and I feel this offers a tangible reward for managers who achieve success in this league and creates an incentive for managers to compete for playoff spots.
10. Eliminate divisions. All 16 teams would be in one division with the top 8 teams making the playoffs. No more division winner draft picks would be awarded. - 11 Yes - 5 No
**This proposal will not pass** Despite getting enough support, I have chosen to not implement this rule and keep divisions in tact. The primary reason for doing so is to ensure league balance through equal scheduling. with 22 weeks and 8 teams per division, managers play each team in their division twice and each team in the opposing division once. removing divisions would mean this scheduling parity is removed and would lead to some managers having a tougher schedule than others in the league which would directly impact their shot at the playoffs. I do however understand some managers frustrations with divisions winners getting higher seeds, therefore I have decided to keep the intent behind this proposal in place and change the playoff seeding so that division winners are guaranteed playoffs but seeding is done according to overall standings. I feel this is a reasonable compromise and keeps regular season scheduling balanced while also seeding the playoffs based on true talent level.
11. Change the IL rules to so that players must miss a minimum amount of consecutive games to be placed on our IL. Players who are on the 60 day DL can still be placed immediately on our IL but all other injured players must have missed a minimum amount of consecutive games before being eligible to be placed on IL. - 7 Keep rule as is, 4 (16 games), 2 (20 games), 2 (25 games), 1 (30 games)
This proposal fails. This will continue to be looked at moving forward but for now the rule will stand. I will however make to small adjustments. Firstly, the current rule requires a minimum of 10 weeks for a proposed injury timeline. I will now allow players to be placed on DL with a minimum proposed injury timeline of 8 weeks. 8 weeks must be the minimum. If a player is projected to be out 6-8 weeks, he will not be eligible. Secondly, I will now accept news sources from basically anywhere. Last year I was strict in only accepting MLB affiliated sources. You can post sources from anywhere although I reserve the right to request alternative sources if I feel the ones posted are questionable. Please make sure to post a link to the article or tweet with the projected injury timeline when placing someone on IL who is not on the 60 day MLB IL. A link must be present. It is up to you to post a link. This was not followed several times last year. It is up to the managers to show evidence of injury timelines, not myself to go searching for this. Repeated violations of this will be subject to penalties at my discretion.
12. Remove OPS as a category and replace with separate categories for OBP and SLG - 5 Yes - 11 No
This proposal fails. Despite personally being very much in support of this rule, clearly the league does not want to make this stat category change and therefore the current categories will remain.
Thank you all for filling out the survey. Feel free to continue the discussion about rules either on the forum or on Discord or you can reach out to me privately.
Easy Freese