Question regarding FA Compensation. Please R+R.. your opinions are needed!

[nick]

(This wouldn't take place until next season's offseason since we're currently in the middle of the offseason and I don't like switching in the middle of something, but if you guys like this idea more than the current format, we could change as soon as next offseason)

We'd still be keeping the compensation part, so when Type-A and Type-B (determined by the same format we use now) leave for FA, it would still net you compensation.

However.... instead of taking away from the signing team's draft picks, what if we did this...

Team Page>Transaction>Create Fictional Player>CHOOSE POS or RAN

(example

http://tripleplaysim.com/CAP.JPG
http://tripleplaysim.com/CAPPOS.JPG
http://tripleplaysim.com/benedictwagner.JPG
http://tripleplaysim.com/benedictwagner.JPG

It would then generate a prospect. Depending on the type of prospect that leaves, I would set different creation modifiers. It would create a completely random propect for each player.... or you could choose the type of prospect you'd like perhaps. I noticed that you could generate prospects on the team page last night, and the idea came to me... and I kinda thought it might be easier on you guys if we did it this way, plus the players you'd be receiving this way might have more upside than a 2nd or 3rd round draft pick. Well, just let me know in here what you guys would like... just want to make the league enjoyable any way possible....

[CrazyEights]

That sounds like it may be better for the team recieving the "reward" for losing thier player. Although, I like the current system better. I like the idea of losing something if you go after that "better" player. It changes the way you look at free agency. Teams won't just throw big money at the top players because the cost is also a draft pick. So the team may decide to offer less or not offer that player at all. I do like aspects of this idea, but not if it takes that element away from free agency.

[nick]

Thanks Crazy! This is good to hear

Really, I'm just trying to get a general consensus. I generally feel the same way as you. I really do want to know everyone's opinions. Sometimes I do not know how people feel about these things..... I really want to hear how you guys feel. I'm just trying to improve the league in anyway possible, hence exporting once I can finally work it out.


Also... another idea I thought of but never mentioned... how would you guys feel about an open-board trade council with a few core and a few rotating members every, i dunno, 2-3 sims? I thought this might eliminate some of the feeling that there are biased feelings amongst the league when it comes to the trade & voting process... if everyone has a chance to be on council, or those who would like to, atleast.

Really stupid or decent? Just throwing it out there. Dunno.

[CrazyEights]

I'm just trying to improve the league in anyway possible, hence exporting once I can finally work it out.

Have you run across any problems with the exporting. If you need any help getting it going, I might be able to help.

[CrazyEights]

I really do want to know everyone's opinions.

Well in that case. One thing I might suggest for free agent compensation though is an age limit for class A free agents. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to give up my 1st round pick for a 38 or 44 year old player no matter what his ratings or stats were last year.

[nick]

Hmmmmm, very good thought Crazy. I think this is a valid idea, and I am very open to adding this into the rulebook.

Honestly, that sounds legit, and it would take away from a lot of the FAs who fall under compensation.... and it seems like with the inclusion of ratings into determining compensation there's too many compensatable FAs, but without ratings and only stats, there's too little. This may even it out a little.

Thanks for the feedback Crazy. From one owner to another, I really appreciate it.

Everyone else feel free to chime in too. I really love Crazy's suggestion here, and think I might use it starting next year. Any other suggestions will most definitely be considered as well!

[browntown653]

I don't think you need a rotating TC...I'm biased because I'm in it, but, I think the people we have there are good.

[Porter]

Hmmmmm, very good thought Crazy. I think this is a valid idea, and I am very open to adding this into the rulebook.

Honestly, that sounds legit, and it would take away from a lot of the FAs who fall under compensation.... and it seems like with the inclusion of ratings into determining compensation there's too many compensatable FAs, but without ratings and only stats, there's too little. This may even it out a little.

Thanks for the feedback Crazy. From one owner to another, I really appreciate it.

Everyone else feel free to chime in too. I really love Crazy's suggestion here, and think I might use it starting next year. Any other suggestions will most definitely be considered as well!

Maybe if you have the idea for the "sandwich" pick, it would work out. Its time to take out the ratings because some highly rated guys, at least for pitching, are pitching below their ratings are. This may be due to the insane amount of talent as well. Maybe if you have it to the last two years instead of one. You will get that list down some.

Edit on the TC: If you ever rotated the TC, have it to like one or two per sim season. Not every two/three sims.

[Halladay_is_God]

I like FA comp as it but crazy's idea about an age limit is good but only to a certain extent because small handful of players are still good at 37+

[CrazyEights]

I like FA comp as it but crazy's idea about an age limit is good but only to a certain extent because small handful of players are still good at 37+

I agree HIG, Class A just seems like a high rating for players 37+. Perhaps bumping them down to Class B would be enough of a change. It would still give them value, but not the same value of a 30 year old with the same ratings or stats.

[Halladay_is_God]

that could work

[Kingdom]

I don't think you need a rotating TC...I'm biased because I'm in it, but, I think the people we have there are good.

I "unbiasedly" agree.

[Kingdom]

I like compensation and frankly, I wouldn't care if you went with your new player generating idea for it or just stuck with what's used now. I think it might be working too good, there were a lot of good players that went unsigned last year, I don't know if that'll happen this year too. As a bad team, I'm just not willing to risk a high 2nd rounder or whatever unless it was for a player I thought was unquestionably worth it (Danks, for example).

If you're a team like the yankees or red sox, it really doesn't matter in that scenario.

[cjkalt]

What if we did both? I feel like FA compensation as it is right now isn't worth losing a top player, but it would be more realistic and better if the team lost the pick, and you got a randomly generated spec

[Saber]

The point of compensation is to make signing FAs a bit a more risky.

How about removing protected picks?