|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 9, 2024 8:30:05 GMT -8
RulesEach team may nominate (i.e. create the opening bid) up to 2 players per round of Offseason Free Agency. Nominations cannot be made following Wednesday at 00:01 PST of a particular round - e.g. they must be placed in the first 2 days of the round. Free agency is determined through a bidding system using the Free Agent Bid Calculator ( link). This is also linked in the top navigation bar on all Proboards pages. Bid points are simply a number that is intended to compare the "value" of a contract offer as a function of the annual salary value and the total number of years offered. I STRONGLY recommend each user create a copy of this file on their personal Google Drive or desktop to avoid fighting other users during simultaneous use. Returning members should still download new copies as changes have been made over the offseason (see rules discussion here) The FA process is as follows: - Enter all required input cells highlighted in green: Player age (as of opening day March 28th 2024), current bid points (bid points of the previous offer), annual salary, number of years on contract, and desired option (if at all).
- Copy and paste all red-highlighted output cells. If "Is contract and bid valid" reads no then one of the internal verification checks has identified an issue with the bid structure. If posted in this state the bid is not valid and will be ignored (does not affect standing bid clock) until corrected.
- If a bid is unbeaten for 24 hours the player is awarded per the standing bid's contract details.
- For examples of what the bidding threads look like, see the previous season's free agency folder linked here.
- You may have any number of bids out at any period (not to be confused with the 2 nomination per round limit) provided that if you won all of them you would still be in salary cap compliance.
Ineligible PlayersPlayers not on their MLB team's 40 man rosters may not be nominated for free agency. There is overlap between the MiLFA draft and offseason free agency player pools - players may be drafted in the MiLFA draft that are on the 40 man roster but are still rookie eligible by MLB standards (having less than 130 AB or 50 IP in the MLB). If a player is nominated for free agency, he may not be subsequently drafted and vice versa - as the draft and free agency may be occurring simultaneously.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 23, 2024 13:32:59 GMT -8
New for round 2 and beyond - we will require that teams post their 2 nominations each round before bidding on other players in order to keep the player pool full.
|
|
|
|
Post by San Diego Padres (Sean) on Feb 23, 2024 17:26:37 GMT -8
I'm against this. I plan to be near my salary cap by the end round 3 and would like to be able to bid on a shortstop, for example, if I only have salary room for one new player and can't afford to spend anything on another player. I say this as someone who used both bids in round 1 and fully plan to do so in round 2 as well.
I think a better solution is allowing more than a max of 2 nominations per team. The problem, as I understand it, is not enough bids are happening. If gm's want to nominate more, and can afford it, I think they should be able to. And again, I fully intend on using my max number of nominations whatever it is, as long as I have the cap space for those nominations
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 23, 2024 17:35:15 GMT -8
Surely you have salary space to put out two initial $800,000 bids?
|
|
|
|
Post by San Diego Padres (Sean) on Feb 23, 2024 18:21:39 GMT -8
My concern isn't for round 2, to clarify
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 23, 2024 19:40:54 GMT -8
Ok, let's revisit prior to round 3 in case any teams have run extremely short on cap space but for round 2 we'll keep this new requirement in place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Mark) on Feb 23, 2024 23:08:06 GMT -8
Thanks Curtis. I appreciate the move as something has to be done about not enough nominations being made.
The other option is GMs get 24 hours to make their nominations in each round and then after that it’s a free for all, so GMs get to nominate as many players as they like, up to a max of 48 player nominations per round so it’s equal to x2 player nominations per franchise
|
|
|
|
Post by San Diego Padres (Sean) on Feb 23, 2024 23:26:56 GMT -8
For the future, I would be in favor of potentially increasing the maximum number of bids each GM can make per round. Teams with a huge amount of cap space in a given free agency period should be able to be more aggressive in making sure we're getting nominations on the board, IMO
|
|
|
|
Post by Houston Astros (Wade) on Feb 24, 2024 7:19:19 GMT -8
When does round 2 start
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Mark) on Feb 24, 2024 7:20:51 GMT -8
I still think the onus is on the GMs not the front office though, there's no reason we shouldn't have max nominations in round 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 24, 2024 14:19:23 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 24, 2024 14:51:20 GMT -8
New for round 2 and beyond - we will require that teams post their 2 nominations each round before bidding on other players in order to keep the player pool full. sorry Curtis but this is a absolutely ridiculous rule! |
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 24, 2024 14:53:27 GMT -8
Ok, let's revisit prior to round 3 in case any teams have run extremely short on cap space but for round 2 we'll keep this new requirement in place. this is a trash rule! Needs to be brought up in the off-season. I don't mind the nominations part as far as everyone having to nominate but even then you are forcing roster construction based on feelings and not baseball rules. Sorry I'm extremely against this new ruling. |
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 24, 2024 14:54:20 GMT -8
For the future, I would be in favor of potentially increasing the maximum number of bids each GM can make per round. Teams with a huge amount of cap space in a given free agency period should be able to be more aggressive in making sure we're getting nominations on the board, IMO agree whole heartedly with Sean here. |
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 24, 2024 14:54:53 GMT -8
We can't just make up rules as we go. That doesn't define what JBL is about.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 24, 2024 15:03:10 GMT -8
We can't just make up rules as we go. That doesn't define what JBL is about. You do realize that the requirement is a nomination correct, not a winning bid? The new requirement is to simply put two $800,000 2024 bids on players so that they are open for bidding for the rest of the league. The player pool is plenty deep enough for this not to be an issue. |
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 24, 2024 15:04:05 GMT -8
I've never read anywhere that it says we are required to nominate a player. If that's the case tons of GM's haven't followed rules for years. The simple solution is to up the nominations to the original rule of 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by Milwaukee Brewers (Mike) on Feb 24, 2024 18:16:04 GMT -8
I'm echoing some things mentioned by others, but thought I should throw my thoughts out there.
There may be reasons to implement a rule change, but mid-draft seems like the wrong time to do so. Maybe you consider a minor rule or logistics change mid-steam, but not to something as important as a draft or free agency. There have been other concerns in the past that led to discussion among all teams, which is how it should happen. Some of those thoughts ended up as changes, some died on the floor so to speak, but all teams had a chance to give their input. In this case, I received no notification (as I would expect for a change that would impact my decisions within 48 hours of initial posting) and barely noticed the update to the rules thread. (I wasn't paying attention to the rules because I didn't have a rules question.) You can't completely change the process on the fly with almost no notification.
In my opinion, it seems like a less than ideal way to force nominations...disregarding my belief that forcing nominations is a bad idea. So now its a race to get nominations out there that you know others will bid on? If your team has salary or roster constraints, you have to get your nominations in early or risk losing that limited cap or roster space. And you have to do that only so you can bid on the one guy you would have posted yourself, but someone else beat you to it. If there is a change to nomination process, I believe it should fall on the side of the number any owner is allowed to nominate as opposed to forcing teams to nominate before bidding. It seems ridiculous to have to nominate players you have no interest in so you can bid on those that you are.
As Sean said above, I nominated 2 in the 1st round and plan to nominate more in the 2nd...unless my targets have already been posted. And I guess that emphasizes what I've already said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Tigers (Matt) on Feb 24, 2024 18:39:53 GMT -8
I don't have much to contribute here. But as one of the GM's who DID NOT make any nominations in round one let me state..... It was simply because I worked back-to-back 16hrs days on Monday and Tuesday and fantasy baseball (no offence) was the last thing on my mind for those 48 hours, which happened to be the window for nominations. I had every intention of making nominations Wednesday morning when I logged in, only to realize I missed the window. That's why I would suggest extending the window for nominations to include Wednesdays. Because as we can see from this round, there is ample time for all bidding to finish before the next round starts.
I agree, having a lot of GMs not making nominations but bidding could be a bit of an issue, but we do all live busy lives. In years past I believe if needed we have increased the number of nominations in the later rounds. And if in the later rounds, there are still a lot of really good free agents available....we could always add a round.
I see where Mike is coming from though, in early rounds you are probably not having to "risk" a minimum contract on a guy that you don't want and no one else does either.... so it's not like you would be forced into keeping a guy you didn't really want simply to be able to bid. However, there is a chance that might happen in the late to last rounds. So it might be fair to definitely not have that rule for the later rounds.
I will say, not that I won.... But it would have absolutely sucked to not be able to even have a shot at bidding on Othani simply because my real life got in the way on Monday and Tuesday. And by potentially thinning out the number of potential bidders, such a rule would probably cause players to be sold under market value potentially making the league unfair/unbalanced.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 24, 2024 19:15:36 GMT -8
I don't have much to contribute here. But as one of the GM's who DID NOT make any nominations in round one let me state..... It was simply because I worked back-to-back 16hrs days on Monday and Tuesday and fantasy baseball (no offence) was the last thing on my mind for those 48 hours, which happened to be the window for nominations. I had every intention of making nominations Wednesday morning when I logged in, only to realize I missed the window. That's why I would suggest extending the window for nominations to include Wednesdays. [/u][/quote] Ok,this is the first point I've heard that raises a real issue with the rule change as written. I absolutely do not want a GM locked out of bidding in a round because they were not able to log in and participate in the first 2 days. |
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 24, 2024 19:36:48 GMT -8
After reading the two previous points I think they were both very well written and addressed some serious negligencies in our league. I will say I don't feel like this is the time to change anything. If there are active owners that don't bid on players well maybe we should address those owners. I will say I absolutely love this league but they're having a few times in the last two seasons I have seen some things that I feel could really jeopardize its integrity. The real simple solution here is to just up the nominations for every team there is no sense to force any team to have to make a bid on any player that they don't want. That would never happen in the major leagues and this is been very close to being a real GM of a real franchise and it should stay that way.
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 24, 2024 19:41:40 GMT -8
We can't just make up rules as we go. That doesn't define what JBL is about. You do realize that the requirement is a nomination correct, not a winning bid? The new requirement is to simply put two $800,000 2024 bids on players so that they are open for bidding for the rest of the league. The player pool is plenty deep enough for this not to be an issue. yes as owners if you want to bid on a free agent you are required to nominate but there is nowhere in the rules it says you have to nominate. This is a very plain and simple rule and trust me it makes me mad when people aren't active and don't nominate players and I could definitely nominate two or three more. But it is what it is those are the rules of the league and if we are to change those we need to have a discussion off season. |
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Dodgers (Jon) on Feb 24, 2024 20:58:32 GMT -8
I nominated only 1 player in round 1 and don’t plan to nominate any in future rounds. Why? I only needed and could afford 1 player.
Why would I nominate more players to help opposing teams? I would rather those 5 more guys I could nominate stay free agents rather than join another team. This is strategy, not negligence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 24, 2024 22:18:57 GMT -8
Thanks all for the feedback. I'll keep the new rule off the table this season, but will be implementing something to address what I see as a problem for next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Mark) on Feb 25, 2024 0:19:31 GMT -8
Just thinking about the additional round idea, can we have a final round which is a free for all? As many nominations as you like?
If you dont have time due to work or life then I get that but at the same time, GMs should have the opportunity to bid on players they want. Then this way there's no downside to the teams that dont want to bid / nominate and the teams that do want to bid / nominate can.
Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by San Diego Padres (Sean) on Feb 25, 2024 15:00:52 GMT -8
Just thinking about the additional round idea, can we have a final round which is a free for all? As many nominations as you like? If you dont have time due to work or life then I get that but at the same time, GMs should have the opportunity to bid on players they want. Then this way there's no downside to the teams that dont want to bid / nominate and the teams that do want to bid / nominate can. Thanks! If the problem we're trying to solve is simply making sure we get through enough auctions so that everyone can build their teams via off season free agency, rather than via in season free agency, I like the idea of adding a free for all round after our standard 3 rounds as a "failsafe" option
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees (Josh) on Feb 25, 2024 15:09:13 GMT -8
I really think we just need to up the amount of nominations allowed. I really like what Jon said though. There is strategy involved here and I as well will purposely not bid on a guy hoping and waiting to see what he does say after spring training or early initial call ups. We all do our own research and just like a real GM we all have guys we value completely different. I do think we could up the nominations and solve this whole deal real easy. I don't agree with a free for all at the end. That's basically what in season FA already is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Feb 25, 2024 16:52:55 GMT -8
Definitely won't be implementing an unlimited round at the end, as the limit to offseason FA functions to keep the in-season player pool from being a complete wasteland
|
|
|
|
Post by San Diego Padres (Sean) on Feb 26, 2024 0:26:46 GMT -8
There's gotta be a happy middle ground
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago White Sox (Mark) on Feb 27, 2024 0:10:17 GMT -8
Well nothing seems to be changing. So how about this, GMs have 24 hours to use their two nominations in a round. After that other GMs can make as many nominations as they like on a first come first served basis up until the total of 48 players (equal to x2 nominations per team).
That way we don't decimate the FA pool as you say Curtis but we're not restricting GMs from acquiring players. Please can we implement it for round 2 and beyond?
We're only at 25 nominations of a possible 48 for round 2 and just 28 for round one. This has to change
|
|
