Page 2 of 95 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 1894

Thread: DM Classic IV Keeper League - General Discussion

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Western Massachusetts
    Posts
    11,560
    Mac mentioned Yaz, Bob Gibson is another one who really started in 1961 and will have almost all of his value after. He was a very solid pitcher in '61, and is great the next year. I'd say Gibson is a certain first rounder for me.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Balmer, Merlin
    Posts
    7,574
    Looks like only Tiger and Yankee Stadiums are gone, right?

    I don't care, I'll go homer once more. Give me:


  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Balmer, Merlin
    Posts
    7,574
    --These are my initial proposal for getting this league underway. Suggestions for improvements on the format are welcome.

    1. There will be 12 teams, in a 3 division league.
    2. 9 of the teams (3 per division) will be run by active owners and 3 (1 per division) will be a computer run team designed to keep active owners out of the cellar and normalize the stats (it was very hard to excell in our early leagues due to the heavy concentration of talent). The 3 100 game losers from 1961, the Phillies, A's and Senators, would fill this role for the fitst few seasons .
    3. The 9 owned teams would be stocked from a draft of the remaining 15 teams.
    Sounds great, a copy from DMIII. There were 18 teams in 1961 so cutting down to 12 gives us more powerful teams without going overboard. I would however like to leave the option open for expansion, if more owners become interested.

    4. There would be a 100 million dollar salary cap for the duration of the project. For 1961 salaries would be assigned by draft position, as follows;
    Rounds 1-10: 12, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3 and 2 miillion
    Rounds 11-15: 1 million
    Rounds 16-20: 750K
    Rounds 21-25: 500K
    Rounds 26-40: 250K
    Total: 81 million
    I like it. Gives us wiggle room to start with... much like any team just starting out. Meanwhile certain players are making the bulk of the $$$. Teams will invariably get in cap trouble later (provided we dont collude ).

    5. Free Agency would commence with the 1962 season when each team would have one player file, based a the standings (team with best record would lose their #1 SP, next their C and so on). Any player not offered a 250K raise would also be eligible for free agency. This system would be in place for the first 6 years. After that, players would be eligible for free agency after their 6th season (i.e. the rookie class of 62 would be the FA class of 68).
    Don't really agree with the first part (until actual FA begins), mainly because of the draft (see #6). What makes more sense to me, and simulates real life a bit more, is that the top teams would have to raise their salaries more. Or perhaps just the top players would demand huge deals. The second part I agree with for the most part--more later.

    If there was a way we could simulate the increase in pay these players would want based on stats and wins (win shares?), we could work with this. I'll post thoughts later on the subject.

    This will likely be the toughest part of all this but I think it'll be ironed out.

    6. Players debuting in 1962 (and each subsequent year) would be drafted in inverse order of the standings. The first 3 players drafted would be 1 million dollars, the next 3 750K, the next 3 500K and anyone drafted after the first round would be signed at the 250K minimum wage.
    We're doing this off of their first major league season, right? OK--I agree completely except I'd rather do 3-year contracts and start our first true FA period in 65... even though it goes against history a bit.

    7. Once the draft is complete, each owner would pick their 25 man active roster and submit lineups, depth chart, ration, bullpen roles and managerial profile. Most days during the season a full series will be played. Game results and injuries are reported after each series. Normally those results are accompanied by either team pitching reports, team batting reports, league batting leaders or league pitching leaders.
    ...keeping up the quality reports. That's why you rule at this Mark.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by J W
    Don't really agree with the first part (until actual FA begins), mainly because of the draft (see #6). What makes more sense to me, and simulates real life a bit more, is that the top teams would have to raise their salaries more. Or perhaps just the top players would demand huge deals. The second part I agree with for the most part--more later.
    What about factoring awards into the salaries? An extra $100k for each All-Star selection and GG and an extra $250k for each MVP and CY in addition to the initial $250k raise?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    north jersey
    Posts
    935
    hey guys, i hate to have to do this. i am very excited about the potential of this league, but my work schedule is getting to be too much of a grind. we're just getting into the guts of the hockey season, and i still have over five months to go. i'm afraid that i am not going to have enough time to be able to contribute to this league in the same way that i did in DMIII. i'm afraid i'll turn into another chancellor, dudecar, or wasp. that's not fair to you guys, and more importantly, i wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning this thing. so with regret, i'm pulling myself out of the league. good luck to everyone. thanks again mark for organizing all of this. it was a lot of fun. PM me if you have any openings in future seasons. if work has settled down, i'll definitely be interested in rejoining.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    --Sorry to lose you Mike. If there is an opening in future seasons or we expand down the road you'd be welcome back.
    --That does eliminate a tough decision for me though. We have 3 interested parties and did have only 2 spots. Now all three can have a team. Dudecar assures me he has resolved the issues which caused him to drop out of DMIII. Since he was a good owner in DMII I'm prepared to give him another shot. Dodger and Honus Wagner Rules, you also have teams if you are still interested after seeing some of the details of the league. Please confirm your participation ASAP (or let me know if you've decided against).
    --JW, I'd be agreeable to some alteration of the scheduled raises and free agent eligibility. Perhaps something along the lines of Nails idea for a premium for award winners or league leaders. If the best players are going to jump in price I'd like some salary control at the bottom of the roster though. I was thinking maybe we could retain anybody who didn't appear on the major league roster during the season without having to bump their salary. The 100 million has to cover 40 players in this scenario, rather than 30 in DMIII. It will get eaten up by inflation quicker than you might think.
    --I wouldn't want to shorten the FA window to 3 years, because alot of players might only have a cup of coffee their first season or two. The six years to free agency wouldn't be quailfying years like MLB, but 6 seasons from their draft year (starting with 1962), even if they don't play a game for your team that season. Maybe we could have "arbitration" after the third year where we jump salaries up to retain them though.
    Last edited by leecemark; 11-15-2005 at 06:44 AM.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Western Massachusetts
    Posts
    11,560
    Quote Originally Posted by J W
    Looks like only Tiger and Yankee Stadiums are gone, right?
    I took Crosley Field. It is also gone.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    Leecemark Knights - Tiger Stadium
    538280 Reds - Crosley Field
    JW Skipjacks - Memorial Stadium
    Mac195 ??? - Yankee Stadium
    Dudecar00 Gamblers - Wrigley Field (LA)
    Last edited by leecemark; 11-15-2005 at 09:24 PM.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    --A little follow up to the issue of escalating raises. Simple inflation will raise the cost of your team 10 million dollars a year if you just kept the same 40 guys. That would put all of us over the cap by 1963. Of course, it won't be that simple since we will all be losing a free agent and we will be non-tendering other guys to make room for the next seasons new player draft and free agent bidding (not to mention guys will just retire or cease to have any value). Still your first round pick in this year's draft will cost you 13 million a year in 1965 by the original plan. Adding in bonuses could make that 15-16 million for some players.
    --I like the idea of performance escalators for the less expensive guys entering the league starting in 1962, but am less than enthusiastic about doing it for 1961 draftees (or maybe it could only apply to players drafted after the 5th or 10th round). Either way, I'd like to control our minor league costs by freezing the salaries of anyone who spends the entire season in the minors. To accompany that, we might not allow a player with 3 years service time (in our league) to be sent down without going through waivers.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Balmer, Merlin
    Posts
    7,574
    We'll figure something out in regards to that. I think that parity will eventually catch up with people simply through the subsequent draft classes (which we can do normal-style, not ladder style). In fact, I may decide to develop my squad for the first couple years rather than get the Mantles of the world and eat a losing season or two. In short I would call it unfair to strip the best pitcher off our inaugural champion after 1961. For those of us willing to stick through this, we have to think of things over a 5-10 year stretch rather than year 1.
    -------
    Since we're counting from year drafted, there's absolutely no problem with the 6-year contract for me. I think arbitration after 3 years would be a good idea.
    -------
    I also approve the raise scale you submitted after your math on the subject... fact is, a lot of the players you'd raise $250 k on would cost even more $$$ if they hit the FA market a particular year. This is going to be real fun with the cap. Nails' suggestion for awards bonuses is excellent and should provide enough roadblock for us without making things crazy--and think about this--most awards go to players on winning teams right? So, there's the penalty for fielding a winning team in year 1961, a slight one and not the loss of their best player.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Balmer, Merlin
    Posts
    7,574
    One other thing: are we allowed to pick fictional team names this time around?

    If so, I'd like to be the JW Skipjacks, after a defunct Baltimore hockey team.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    --You can pick any name you'd like for your team. I have been the Tigers in the first three leagues, but didn't want to use them with a start from scratch team this time. Didn't want even a subconsious pull toward picking Tigers ahead of their true value.
    --JW, are you suggesting we don't have any free agency out of the 1961 guys, except those who are no longer worth their cost to their teams? I think circulating some of that talent will make for a more interesting game in the next few seasons. One alterative idea to the positional assignment of FA is to assign multi-year contracts to some of our players with those players being FAs when the deal is up. I think having some quality free agents on the market beginning with year 2 needs to happen somehow.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    In case anyone was wondering.
    Posts
    2,938
    Well, it should be a competitive league. I shudder to think how good Chris' teams are going to be, considering that he is only 13 (14 now??) and already seems to understand the stats as well as anyone here.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Western Massachusetts
    Posts
    11,560
    Quote Originally Posted by mac195
    Well, it should be a competitive league. I shudder to think how good Chris' teams are going to be, considering that he is only 13 (14 now??) and already seems to understand the stats as well as anyone here.
    Thanks for the compliments. I just hope I can do well.

    I don't turn 14 for three months, by the way.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Section 232, Row 1, Seat 24, Miller Park, Miller Park Way
    Posts
    3,589
    I'll name my team the Gamblers, and we'll play in Wrigley Field (LA).
    AL East Champions: 1981 1982
    AL Pennant: 1982
    NL Central Champions: 2011
    NL Wild Card: 2008

    "It was like coming this close to your dreams and then watching them brush past you like a stranger in a crowd. At the time you don't think much of it; you know, we just don't recognize the significant moments of our lives while they're happening. Back then I thought, 'Well, there'll be other days.' I didn't realize that that was the only day." - Moonlight Graham

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    --Here is a proposed raise escalator schedule based on performance;
    --For position players leading the league in BA, HR. RBI or RC would trigger a 500K (each) performance boost. That would give a maximum raise, for a Triple Crown winner, of 2.25 million in any one year (with the standard 250K included). The 2nd and 3rd place finishers in these categories would get 250K performance boosts.
    --For pitchers the categories would be Wins, IP, ERA, K's and saves. That gives 4 categories for SP, same as position players, with one (normally) for relief pitchers. The dollar figures would be the same.
    --I think basing this on league leadership will be better than awards, because there is no room for manipulating the raises. Frankly, if winning the MVP was going to drive up one of my players salary I'd be inclined not to vote for him. That star player on a division rival would be much more deserving .
    --To balance the salary pressure caused by this, any player who does not see action on the big league roster in a season would not be due a raise. We might also want to allow owners to extend multi-year contracts to some players. My initial idea would be to allow each owner to give a 2, 3,4 and 5 year deal to one player each from their initial draftees. That would lock them in at their draft price for those years. The trade off would be that they would be eligible for free agency when that deal was up.
    --We might also want to consider allowing each of us to lock up a player after his fifth year. Maybe one per team in a given year gets a 3-5 year deal at 1 million over their scheduled pay. That would limit the risk of huge raises for your biggest stars. For players acquired beginning in 1962 it would also delay your risk of losing them to free agency.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Balmer, Merlin
    Posts
    7,574
    I think I have a plan for free agency at least for the first few years:

    Draft Salary Breakdown
    Rounds 1-10: 12, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3 and 2 miillion
    Rounds 11-15: 1 million
    Rounds 16-20: 750K
    Rounds 21-25: 500K
    Rounds 26-40: 250K
    ---------------
    Total: $81 mil
    With the raise and escalator scales set, we can play with (guaranteed) contracts just by giving those contracts:
    - a length
    - a salary for year 1

    Any raises or performance escalators would be guaranteed along with the base salary for as long as the contract is good. Any increase in pay would be cumulative. Let's do an example:

    Mickey Bitzko is drafted in Round 4 and is signed to a 4 yr deal.

    YR 1 - 8.0 mil

    He does very well in year 1, leading the league in HR and 3rd in RBI. Adding his pay increases up (base $250 k + $500 k + $250 k) we get

    YR 2 - 9.0 mil

    He doesn't have a good 1962, but his old escalators are cumulative, so

    YR 3 - 9.25 mil

    In 1963 he finishes second in HR. Therefore we tack on $250 k + $250 k...

    YR 4 - 9.75 mil

    By the end of the deal, Bitzko will make:

    YR 1 - 8.0 mil
    YR 2 - 9.0 mil
    YR 3 - 9.25 mil
    YR 4 - 9.75 mil
    ----------------
    TOT - 4 yr, $36 mil

    Now, as for the contracts, here is my proposal (I know this is getting complicated, but it is a keeper league we're trying with a salary cap... and I think it's fun anyways)

    Rounds 16-20: 750K
    Rounds 21-25: 500K
    Rounds 26-40: 250K
    None of these guys will be making over $1 mil in 1962. These can turn into 6-yr deals. I've changed my mind on arbitration... the system's complicated as is and we don't need it. Most of these guys won't be superstars, or would become one late in the contract.

    Rounds 1-10: 12, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3 and 2 miillion
    Rounds 11-15: 1 million

    My initial idea would be to allow each owner to give a 2, 3, 4 and 5 year deal to one player each from their initial draftees.

    We might also want to consider allowing each of us to lock up a player after his fifth year. Maybe one per team in a given year gets a 3-5 year deal at 1 million over their scheduled pay.
    Since we're maxing out at 6 yr deals (which is fine), I would give the teams two contracts each at 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 yrs. I would also reduce the keeper rule to during/after the 4th year of a contract. Any contracts 3 years or less would not get this benefit and the player would hit the FA market.

    By this rule, five players per team (60 total) would hit the FA market at the end of each year, for the first 3 years (1961-63), minus retirements. This plus the draft, and any cuts made at the bottom of the roster. For 1964-66, up to five players per team would hit the market, but probably less.

    Same as Mark, feel free to pick apart or add to this idea.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    --I've been playing around with increasingly more complicated ideas myself, but think maybe the way to go is actually a simple one. Several owners have indicated they are planning to draft for the long term, which is definately something to be encouraged. Carl Yastzremski and Bob Gibson have been brought up as possible first rourd picks, which is definately a long term plan, with neither an elite player in 1961.
    --The problem with that is the payoff in that long term plan is going to be prohibitively expensive. In our 10th year, 1970, Yaz and Gibby are arguably the best hitter and pitcher in baseball. However, they would be drawing a salary of 14.5 million even if no performance boosts come into play. They would more likely to be making 16-17 miillion and crippling their teams chances of building a competitive squad (the highest paid FA in DM got 12.5 million). You shouldn't be payig way over market value to keep the guy you have built your team around.
    --My solution is to allow teams to keep their number one pick at 12 million as long as they want. To keep simple inflation from pricing players out of reach I also suggest that nobody should set a new salary season via scheduled raises, but only through free agency. For example, if your second round pick won the Triple Crown (and presumably also RC) he would be due a 2.25 million dolllar raise. That would be capped at 2m so that his salary would not exceed that of the highest paid player from the previous year. You could still pay free agents whatever you want/can afford and the highest paid FA could raise the bar for potential salaries the next year. The raise scale would be the same as previously posted, except for the ceiling.
    --I also suggest that big ticket FA deals all be multi-year. For example, anybody signed for 8m+ would be required to be signed to a 3 year deal, max 4 years. 5m+ would be 2-4 and less than 5 could be one year with a max of 3. I'm still in favor of my original idea of having one free agent per team for the first 6 years (plus non-tendered players), based on positional standings, but will bend to the will of the majority. I don't think it actually penalizes the team with the best record unduly. In fact with 4 HoF in their prime and the AL MVP all being RFers, there is a good chance the team with the worst record will actually lose a better player than the team with the best.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    mariners country
    Posts
    23,570
    --Not much activity from some of our owners. I'm not worried about our returnees, but the lack of activity from our new owners is worrisome. No confirmation has been received from HWR or Dodger. As of Friday I'll have to consider alternatives. One possible replacement is already on the waiting list. I'd like to begin the draft a week or so after I get the 1961 software and post the defensive ratings and we can't do that without active owners. I'd also like to see everybody get their roster shell up on that thread ASAP.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    In case anyone was wondering.
    Posts
    2,938
    post the defensive ratings
    ..........

    Wow. This is all getting pretty complicated. I hope a fairly simple system for salaries and free agency can be worked out. Not sure if raising salary for performance is that good an idea. If a player of mine was competing for any of those titles, I'd be tempted to sit him out just enough so he wouldn't win which would be pretty contrary to the spirit of the game.

    If this was a progressive league with current players it would make more sense. But this is historical, so we already know about how well these guys will play when we draft them. Boosting pay for winning league titles seems like it would be kind of artificial and unecessary, and add more randomness. Can somebody explain to me how this would enhance strategy or realism?

Page 2 of 95 FirstFirst 12341252 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •