|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 16:36:05 GMT -8
In response to the confusion before, here is a new final structure for how to determine your 8 MLB keepers' annual salaries. This change will be made live in the constitution concurrent with this post. I have vetted this with a few members of the league and received positive feedback regarding clarity and intent. I hope this strikes the right balance of competitive fairness and the sense of each MLB franchise heading into the 2017 season. Part 1.2: Franchise Keepers Each GM will select up to 8 MLB Players of their choosing from the Original Team and assign those players salary values as detailed below. The salary cap for all JBL teams is $220,000,000. docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JkBVeRamuYg7GirinBZmDzSHDgM8OzuTK_cXd-rlWpc/edit#gid=598980712 The salaries given in the link above are the definitive list of Juiced Ball League starting salaries. They have been generated by using the Fangraphs Auction Calculator using the Depth Chart projection method for our league-specific setup. The link in the “Methodology” tab in the above spreadsheet shows the input. There is also a $3 bias added to all RP and SP in order to adjust the Depth chart projection salary output. The league budget was set at $200, but note that the JBL salary cap is $220. This is deliberate in order to give teams additional “breathing room” on salary and represent a sort of “home town discount” to the initial franchise players. No outputs from the Auction Calculator are official for JBL purposes other than the salary information given in the above sheet. Teams can select up to 8 MLB players (greater than or equal to 130 AB / 50 IP in the major leagues). Any player chosen with a salary below $8 million will be paid an $8 million salary. This is reflected in the blue highlighted “JBL Salary” in column E of the sheet “Salary Data” – this is the value that goes into your roster spreadsheet. The rationale behind this is to avoid any player from being close to no-cost due to projection system quirks or poor anticipated health. Owners will need to carefully determine if fringe-top-8 players are worth the $8 million investment. In the initial contract offerings, the GM will specify the number of years offered to each player per the above annual salary rules, subject to the age restrictions in Part 4.3. A 5 year contract beginning in 2017 is indicated by an input of 2021 in the contract column of the roster spreadsheet, as this is the final year of the contract (e.g. signed “through” 2021). No options may be attached to these contracts. These players are not arbitration eligible, regardless of real-life arbitration status. In addition to the major league keepers, each GM will select 10 minor league players (less than 130 AB/50 IP in the major leagues) from their franchise to form the initial minor league roster. A minor league eligible player is not subject to being placed on the major league keeper list if one of the top-8 drafted players in your franchise.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 16:53:55 GMT -8
So I don't see the detailed salary structure anywhere so is it just the salaries listed on the spread sheet?
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 16:56:01 GMT -8
Correct, for simplicity the salary structure has been done away with and only the salaries in the sheet will be used. The one exception is if the player's salary in the spreadsheet is less than 8 million - in which case he will be paid exactly 8 million
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 17:02:56 GMT -8
Got it. So we need to edit our stuff correct? And can we change our keepers until the draft starts?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 18:12:43 GMT -8
For Free Agency the minimum salary is 8 million starting? If so that makes more sense and I'll add 5 guys to get to 10 starting players.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 18:24:41 GMT -8
Yankees - correct David - the 8 million minimum only applies to this initial 8 MLB keepers. The minimum starting bid in free agency will be the minimum salary of $600,000
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 18:27:57 GMT -8
But every team has to have 8 players even if they don't keep them but in that case their salaries would count against the cap correct?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 18:28:47 GMT -8
Wow. Alright. Thanks. 5 keepers it is. Rough days in the ATL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 18:29:29 GMT -8
Also why were some players x10 and others x10 plus 3 mil?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 18:32:50 GMT -8
I believe its related to the SP/RP bias that is +3 listed at the top of the spreadsheet (salary data section).
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 19:32:24 GMT -8
But every team has to have 8 players even if they don't keep them but in that case their salaries would count against the cap correct? No - if you don't believe a player is worth the 8 million minimum salary (even for a 1 year contract) you have no obligation to keep them. You can have 5 keepers, paying only the salaries fot those 5. You are not deducted 8 million for each of the 3 unfilled keeper slots. Am I understanding your question correctly?
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 19:33:32 GMT -8
I believe its related to the SP/RP bias that is +3 listed at the top of the spreadsheet (salary data section). Correct. I have double and triple checked that each of the formulas are correct. This +3 over the depth charts value is done for all pitchers, with the rationale given above
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 19:35:09 GMT -8
Wow. Alright. Thanks. 5 keepers it is. Rough days in the ATL Just FYI, I'd stress that you can keep a player for a single season at 8 million, as opposed to keeping a player. I havent reviewed your case specifically but maybe that would make sense for you
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 19:44:29 GMT -8
So we don't have to keep 8? And we are only capped for what we keep?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 19:45:15 GMT -8
What happened to there being any $4M contracts? Even guys with negative values on whatever that formula is have ridiculous salaries attached.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 19:46:34 GMT -8
My case is a nightmare. I'll have 150 million in fa money to use on secondary players. But that's fine. My plan is going to be to use that money wisely not on bad contracts. I realized this would be a tough project which is precisely why I want it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 19:50:22 GMT -8
What happened to there being any $4M contracts? Even guys with negative values on whatever that formula is have ridiculous salaries attached. But you don't have to take them. And once they're fa those numbers don't matter
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 20:07:11 GMT -8
Remember projections are just that. If u have 8 guys that project better than their value you should hold them. As many as possible up to 8 cause you're gonna find out in fa that they will likely go for more. At least the ones with more long term value. A lot of us crap teams will be loaded in fa money. And some people will way overpay just because they have it. If you're like me and you can't get 8 with value it's best to use that in the open market.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 20:14:06 GMT -8
Unless you got a guy or two you think would get steamed past 8 mil in fa. Could lock in and save the misery of finding out. I definitely have none of those lol.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 20:17:02 GMT -8
My case is a nightmare. I'll have 150 million in fa money to use on secondary players. But that's fine. My plan is going to be to use that money wisely not on bad contracts. I realized this would be a tough project which is precisely why I want it. Remember that this league is 24 teams. You will have 6 teams worth of #1 and #2 players to choose from. I don't think it's as dire as you're making it out to be. And also remember that I have seen this concept play out over 3 years so far in a separate league. There is a good amount of turnover in the competitive franchises
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 20:20:53 GMT -8
I agree with the Braves to a point. I don't have an issue with the contract keeper set up, I think it's a fair way to enforce current value. Even if I disagree with certain players value (Schebler, Peraza, Hamilton) because it doesn't associate risk it still is a good system. Additionally 6 teams are available in free agency, so in theory there will be a lot of talent to go after.
The issue I have is the increase in cap. I still think that if the elite teams want the elite teams, then they shouldn't also be in the running for the elite talent in Free Agency.
Case in point, if the Angels aren't claimed, the elite teams could still make a run at Trout and still be able to fill out the remainder of their roster based off of current league values in the spreadsheet. Perhaps inflation will counteract this, but if Trout goes for much more then 40M then you're not getting good value out of his contract. Maybe I'm pedantic, I just think 200M is the better cap, the better teams can still acquire quality in FA to round out their teams, but are out of the running for the elite free agents and might keep inflation in check.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 20:22:12 GMT -8
@cubs. No I'm with you. I'm not concerned. It's gonna be fun and a great hobby. That's what I'm looking for. No worries here. I like what you did. Seems well thought and I can tell you are going to be a solid lm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2017 20:25:18 GMT -8
I agree with the Braves to a point. I don't have an issue with the contract keeper set up, I think it's a fair way to enforce current value. Even if I disagree with certain players value (Schebler, Peraza, Hamilton) because it doesn't associate risk it still is a good system. Additionally 6 teams are available in free agency, so in theory there will be a lot of talent to go after. The issue I have is the increase in cap. I still think that if the elite teams want the elite teams, then they shouldn't also be in the running for the elite talent in Free Agency. Case in point, if the Angels aren't claimed, the elite teams could still make a run at Trout and still be able to fill out the remainder of their roster based off of current league values in the spreadsheet. Perhaps inflation will counteract this, but if Trout goes for much more then 40M then you're not getting good value out of his contract. Maybe I'm pedantic, I just think 200M is the better cap, the better teams can still acquire quality in FA to round out their teams, but are out of the running for the elite free agents and might keep inflation in check. The best teams create more of a trade market threat than fa. They should be priced out of the most worthy derivatives in fa. If they aren't it's more on us. But you have good points.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 1, 2017 21:00:29 GMT -8
All points are appreciated, but I will not be changing the settings now. Believe me, I have debated these changes with the rest of you. This league is my investment, as I know I can't quit if it all goes to hell haha. I believe that I've set us up for some good seasons!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2017 6:15:45 GMT -8
Why is Josh Bell now 8M? He's a prospect, 128 AB.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 2, 2017 6:26:41 GMT -8
Why is Josh Bell now 8M? He's a prospect, 128 AB. Any player with less than 130 AB or 50 IP is eligible to start the season on your minor league roster, regardless of what the salary spreadsheet says.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2017 7:22:39 GMT -8
You have done a monumentally fantastic job here commish. You have offered up an entirely new contract structure, gotten feedback from owners, debated and answered concerns, integrated the valid concerns, modified the rule, and decided to implement it in less than 48 hours....kudos. I am excited to apparently have stumbled into an outstanding potential league
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Mar 2, 2017 7:26:07 GMT -8
You have done a monumentally fantastic job here commish. You have offered up an entirely new contract structure, gotten feedback from owners, debated and answered concerns, integrated the valid concerns, modified the rule, and decided to implement it in less than 48 hours....kudos. I am excited to apparently have stumbled into an outstanding potential league Thank you, that means a lot!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2017 7:52:35 GMT -8
You have done a monumentally fantastic job here commish. You have offered up an entirely new contract structure, gotten feedback from owners, debated and answered concerns, integrated the valid concerns, modified the rule, and decided to implement it in less than 48 hours....kudos. I am excited to apparently have stumbled into an outstanding potential league Could not agree more. Well Said chuck and thank you Curtis. I am actually leaving leagues I was in to invest time into this one bc of your work Curtis and your willingness to be open and transparent. What you have set up here is challenging and I am looking to be here long term regardless of how brutal my team turns out to be this season
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2017 6:11:42 GMT -8
How should we communicate changes to our initial keepers? Do we post the changes or just go into the spreadsheet and make the changes? I am wondering because some of my players contracts are too expensive so I am dumping them.
|
|