bid cash allocation

this would be like giving taxes for the rich, and food stamps to the poor

1. the 6 playoff teams are taxed ___ amount bidding cash the following season. and more-so to the top 2 or 3 teams. call it a luxury tax
2. the last 6 teams will receive ___ amount bidding cash the following season
3. teams 7-14 receive a very small amount. not as much as bottom 6
4. if you use less then $25 bid cash, you get ____ % of whatever is left, the following season
5. if you use more then $25 bid cash (including $ acquired from trades) , you will be taxed ___ % of the total you spent, to be taken off the following season. using up all your bid cash is indeed a luxury. also, if you finish bottom 6 in the standings, you become exempt from this tax!

obviously, Bryan and some of the big teams won't like this... it gives things a decent shot in the arm, depending on the amounts we would use

Lol. How about bidding on players instead of dumping 50% of your cash for WW "Hot Players"? That should be an ammendment.

Quote :

Murphy gets Darwin Barney and $15 bidding cash

STG gets Aubrey Huff and Brad Hand

accept

spundin wrote:

Lol. How about bidding on players instead of dumping 50% of your cash for WW "Hot Players"? That should be an ammendment.

Quote :

Murphy gets Darwin Barney and $15 bidding cash

STG gets Aubrey Huff and Brad Hand

accept

yea, that trade is one of the reasons i THOUGHT of this! thats actually been the best offer i got with an LF in it to this day.. Huff can still bounce back next year, in which case it would be worth it for me, but i regret giving him $$ . i would much rather have given $15 to a lower team... so my idea is for the only teams that can take on that kinda $ without getting taxed would be the bottom 6 .. let the bottom teams rebuild, because right now the top teams are rebuilding better then them, and i didnt realize it at the time of that trade

i'm not the only one who donated to the Murphy fund .. he spent $90 this year! Team Bud spent $49 ... so if we taxed those amounts, they could be in the negative for $$ next year .. nobody else was even close to those numbers



oh, while we're kicking dirt around..

spundin wrote:

Rios, Bedard and 3rd round pick for 2012 to Bryan

Eovaldi, Familia and Lannon to me.

I think this is quite the concept here, very creative and in theory.. It'd work to an extent. I don't like it though, and it's not because it directly affects me or any of the other top teams. I think it takes away from what a fantasy league should be to us top teams. We've made the right decisions and trades to allow us to be successful. We should not be punished or "taxed" for being good. MLB employs a luxury tax because the Yankees and Red Sox can spend insanely more amounts of money on free agents than the Rays or A's can. In this league, i can not spend more money than anyone else unless I acquire it. Why should I be penalized for acquiring it? It's a method of what people value in this league... I feel like I value bidding cash more than some others. You can look back at the last few years and some teams barely use the MiLB Bidding Process, this I believe is a severe oversight by them because as you can see by the bids Sean and I have won in the last few years... It's helped build our teams. I feel that teams like Sean, Stephen, and I just have an eye for MiLB talent and have drafted, bid, and traded for young talent better than anyone else. Bud Selig does not punish the Rays for developing players better than all the other teams.. I feel that by the tax, and some of our bidding histories that you are trying to punish some of us for excelling more than others. Everyone in th league has $30 to start, can use it any way they so choose, and have the right to trade for more if they so choose and can find a trading partner. If they do not choose to value this avenue for making their team better then the teams that do choose that avenue and excel at it, should not be punished.

jake wrote:

spundin wrote:

Lol. How about bidding on players instead of dumping 50% of your cash for WW "Hot Players"? That should be an ammendment.

Quote :

Murphy gets Darwin Barney and $15 bidding cash

STG gets Aubrey Huff and Brad Hand

accept

yea, that trade is one of the reasons i THOUGHT of this! thats actually been the best offer i got with an LF in it to this day.. Huff can still bounce back next year, in which case it would be worth it for me, but i regret giving him $$ . i would much rather have given $15 to a lower team... so my idea is for the only teams that can take on that kinda $ without getting taxed would be the bottom 6 .. let the bottom teams rebuild, because right now the top teams are rebuilding better then them, and i didnt realize it at the time of that trade

i'm not the only one who donated to the Murphy fund .. he spent $90 this year! Team Bud spent $49 ... so if we taxed those amounts, they could be in the negative for $$ next year .. nobody else was even close to those numbers



oh, while we're kicking dirt around..

spundin wrote:

Rios, Bedard and 3rd round pick for 2012 to Bryan

Eovaldi, Familia and Lannon to me.

I must not know what I am doing since I've made the playoffs 4 straight seasons.

LOL I'v been trying to unload Rios all season and I got younger and more flexible in the process. In case you forgot, Rios has been hitting as low as your chances of being competitive in this league all season. Bedard was almost cut by me also. Keep enjoying mediocrity.

ok. great. well apart from 2 of the top teams shockingly blowing this over, anyone else wanna chime in?

and this isn't designed to "punish" anybody.. the purpose is to re-do a system resulting in too much disparity.. it happens every year.. one team spends $90, while others spend less then $5... one team making 500 trades, while others make less then 10 (different topic, but still part of my argument).... how is that different then the Yankees spending big money, while teams like the A's suffer

jake wrote:

and this isn't designed to "punish" anybody.. the purpose is to re-do a system resulting in too much disparity.. it happens every year.. one team spends $90, while others spend less then $5... one team making 500 trades, while others make less then 10 (different topic, but still part of my argument).... how is that different then the Yankees spending big money, while teams like the A's suffer

The difference is that everyone has the same $30 dollars to start out and if managers chose not to spend it or trade it away foolishly that is their own fault. Your comparison scenario would only hold true if Bryan started the year with 90 and someone else with 5 and the team with 5 wanted to spend more but did not have access to it. Now if you want to complain about teams being inactive and not spending what they have to effectively combat the best teams from stocking their coffers, that is a completely different story and valid point...this tax system is not.

Remember, the goal of the league is to have an equal playing field for all managers...not equal managers because the field has been tilted. NO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Knuckleball wrote:

The difference is that everyone has the same $30 dollars to start out

THE END RESULT IS THE SAME, is my point .. look at the rosters/records. playing field is completely stretched. like a raped hole

Knuckleball wrote:

Now if you want to complain about teams being inactive and not spending what they have to effectively combat the best teams from stocking their coffers, that is a completely different story and valid point...

YES! THIS IS PARTLY MY POINT.. all these teams spending small amounts of money, you can look at it almost as if theyre "punishing" themselves... so what do you do then? kick everyone out that spent less then $15 and replace them? i bet the new ones wont be too different, and i doubt you'll find 10 managers as active as Bryan .... my idea is meant to give some balance. you cant force people to bid, but you can reduce how far the scales are being tipped... if you have a better idea, i'd love to hear it (seriously)

4 teams have over $22 left to spend. You'd be 5 if you hadn't done that stupid trade. Didn't realize until I looked it up you traded $23 away to the person you seem to be pissed off the most at for this ammendment. I guess storing stud MLB middle relievers on your MILB roster who are putting up #s that would make you more compeitive and trading away the cash that could be used to take their spots makes sense.

I know two of the four aren't active. The other two I am not sure their reasoning for not using the bidding dollars more actively, but they are active.

My suggestion would be in the offseason in some sort of format is to make it mandatory to promote MLB talent that is being left in the minors? Maybe after they reach 1000 at bats or 500 innings? I forget the rule we have on that now for demotions since I never have ran into it really.

I think if you are trying to hoard MLB washed up prospects on your milb roster, A) you are an idiot and thanks for the donation and B) thanks for taking one less team that has a spot open I have to worry about bidding against.

Maybe some people need to reevaluate their strategies since it isn't working and it works for others.

spundin wrote:

I think if you are trying to hoard MLB washed up prospects on your milb roster, A) you are an idiot and thanks for the donation and B) thanks for taking one less team that has a spot open I have to worry about bidding against.

now your being an asshole.. its not hoarding, its me being unable to make trades . all 5 of my MLB rp's have been on the block so i can call up my milb Rp's.. how is it my fault that Bryan can trade Jeremy Jeffres for $10 milb cash, and i cant trade Rafael Betancourt for $3 ??? ... also, its me waiting to call them up next year (someone like Ben Revere), or waiting for them to become full-time players.. whats the point this year if im out of it anyway.

your like the school yard bully throwing rocks at kids

Quote :

how is it my fault that Bryan can trade Jeremy Jeffres for $10 milb cash, and i cant trade Rafael Betancourt for $3 ???

Because Jeffress is a 23 yr old prospect that actually has upside for a rebuilding team, while Betancourt is good... He's what 36 years old? And Holds can be found year in and year out on the waiver wire. Now would you give up even $3 for that when you can find similar for free?!


I don't mind your suggestions Jeff, it sparks good debate... What I mind is your "poor me", "poor little guy" type of attitude that you and others don't have the time or ability to have a top team like others. Like anything in life, you get out what you put into something. That's my two cents.

bryanmurphy9 wrote:

Quote :

how is it my fault that Bryan can trade Jeremy Jeffres for $10 milb cash, and i cant trade Rafael Betancourt for $3 ???

Because Jeffress is a 23 yr old prospect that actually has upside for a rebuilding team, while Betancourt is good... He's what 36 years old? And Holds can be found year in and year out on the waiver wire. Now would you give up even $3 for that when you can find similar for free?!


I don't mind your suggestions Jeff, it sparks good debate... What I mind is your "poor me", "poor little guy" type of attitude that you and others don't have the time or ability to have a top team like others. Like anything in life, you get out what you put into something. That's my two cents.

im not crying about my team Murph, just trying to help competitive balance.. you guys are construing it as crying.. anything i screwed up on i'll take credit for... but im actually not worried about my team AT ALL.. i had a tough schedule, which is reflected in the standings, but after some research my stats this year was almost as good, or as good as Serenity's .. so i had a year as good as him, and get a top 7 pick.. i also have alot of young MLB ready players waiting to be used, its just a matter of me calling them up next year, making room for them, and hopefully the rest of them earn full time gigs like i think they deserve... i think my team is looking up, so for my own team, im not crying - no

as for Betancourt, im just surprised i couldnt trade him for small bid cash, especially to a contender.. that was before he became a closer, now it looks like i may have another closer on my team .. he has an awesome track record, and theres plenty of good closers 36 and up that last a few years. especially with his solid #'s ... i was just making an observation, i have no qualms about keeping Betancourt.. do you guys like to stick words in my mouth to support your arguements? maybe thats true

and Bryan, thanks for appreciating the suggestions at least.. i dont expect everyone to go for it at first, but posted it anyway because at the very least, maybe it'll encourage some teams to use their bid cash... maybe its a mistake i gave $15 for Huff (lets see if he bounces back next year before totally writing him off), and i defenitely regret that i gave it to you, but at least i spent it somehow and made an effort... if teams are gonna continue not spending, we should balance the scales somehow

jake wrote:

spundin wrote:

I think if you are trying to hoard MLB washed up prospects on your milb roster, A) you are an idiot and thanks for the donation and B) thanks for taking one less team that has a spot open I have to worry about bidding against.

now your being an asshole.. its not hoarding, its me being unable to make trades . all 5 of my MLB rp's have been on the block so i can call up my milb Rp's.. how is it my fault that Bryan can trade Jeremy Jeffres for $10 milb cash, and i cant trade Rafael Betancourt for $3 ??? ... also, its me waiting to call them up next year (someone like Ben Revere), or waiting for them to become full-time players.. whats the point this year if im out of it anyway.

your like the school yard bully throwing rocks at kids

LOL good luck next year dude.

spundin wrote:

LOL good luck next year dude.

ok Biff Tannen.. anything else constructive to say?

I don't like this. The analogy to MLB doesn't work, and I don't like it there, either.

Stop devaluing bidding dollars and overvaluing middle of the road middle relievers and LF, and you'll be ok.

I personally would spend my $'s but don't have the time to put into the league like others. I'm still competitive. But, I don't want to punish others because they don't have a life.