Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

1901 - Present Keeper League Discussion

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I plan on changing the playoffs to 7 games for both rounds

    The bottom 4 teams going to the lottery is also a change I am making but haven't written it in yet

    The franchise player rule is just a way to keep up to 2 players at below market value. I think with the RFA we will see some overbidding for players and I like the Idea of having a couple lifers available that won't break the bank.
    Baseball statistics are like a girl in a bikini. They show a lot, but not everything. ~Toby Harrah

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Wade8813 View Post
      If you've had a Franchise player on your team for the whole career so far (18 years?) you can choose to keep them for a decreasing amount of money (say 1 mil cheaper per year, to a minimum of 5 mil). But in order to receive this discount, you have to keep the player rostered until they retire.
      I've been reading some of these threads but haven't commented until now. But, it looks like I'll be in so I'm paying a bit more attention.

      I see there's been some discussion on franchise players, including Wade's idea (referenced here). I don't know much yet about how this game is played, but I do know quite a bit about player history. The idea of franchise players, as described by Wade, has some appeal to me, but I think we should be careful about this. Wade suggested 18 years as a dividing point, where salaries could start going down. The reality is that only a few players in ML history have had more than one season after their 18th which could be called "all star" quality, e.g. about 4.5 WAR, or perhaps 20 WS. When you get past a few obvious outliers like Ruth, Cobb, and a couple of others, almost no great players were putting up "all star" performances after their 18th season. And, as is known, the dropoff among even great players, varied widely. Some remained strong up through years 16 or 17, some started tailing off as soon as year 11 or 12!

      I guess what I'm trying to say is, the idea is interesting/appealing, but I at least wouldn't be very interested in being saddled with even a great player for 18 seasons unless his name was Ruth, Cobb, Aaron, Mays, and 1 or 2 others.

      What do others think?

      Comment


      • I don't think Wade meant that it has to be 18, rather, he was using that as an example of a year when a player might say they want to start lowering a player's salary.

        I don't really like the idea because it seems needlessly complicated. Franchise players should be a simple way to keep a great player at below market value, not a means of exploiting the system or something that will become a burden. I'm also against them being traded because to me that defeats the notion of a "franchise player", but if everyone else is for it I don't really mind.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BigRon View Post
          I see there's been some discussion on franchise players, including Wade's idea (referenced here). I don't know much yet about how this game is played, but I do know quite a bit about player history. The idea of franchise players, as described by Wade, has some appeal to me, but I think we should be careful about this. Wade suggested 18 years as a dividing point, where salaries could start going down. The reality is that only a few players in ML history have had more than one season after their 18th which could be called "all star" quality, e.g. about 4.5 WAR, or perhaps 20 WS. When you get past a few obvious outliers like Ruth, Cobb, and a couple of others, almost no great players were putting up "all star" performances after their 18th season. And, as is known, the dropoff among even great players, varied widely. Some remained strong up through years 16 or 17, some started tailing off as soon as year 11 or 12!

          I guess what I'm trying to say is, the idea is interesting/appealing, but I at least wouldn't be very interested in being saddled with even a great player for 18 seasons unless his name was Ruth, Cobb, Aaron, Mays, and 1 or 2 others.

          What do others think?
          You aren't saddled with anyone for 18 (or however many) seasons.

          For the first 18 seasons, the player would be under the current system. You could trade or drop the player at any time. Even after 18 years, you can continue to keep the player at the original rate. You're only stuck with the player IF you choose to use the reducing salary option.

          Originally posted by Erik Bedard View Post
          I don't think Wade meant that it has to be 18, rather, he was using that as an example of a year when a player might say they want to start lowering a player's salary.

          I don't really like the idea because it seems needlessly complicated. Franchise players should be a simple way to keep a great player at below market value, not a means of exploiting the system or something that will become a burden. I'm also against them being traded because to me that defeats the notion of a "franchise player", but if everyone else is for it I don't really mind.
          Apparently people have trouble understanding the concept (which may just be me not explaining it properly), but I assure you, once you understand it it's incredibly easy to implement.

          I do agree the idea of trading them seems counter-intuitive. I think I would lean towards there being at least restrictions on being traded. It would be stupid if you named someone a franchise player then traded them two years later.
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDxgNjMTPIs

          Comment


          • --I understand the concept just fine. I just think that 18 years before salaries start coming down means very few players would spend their career with a single franchise. It would have to start much earlier - meaning huge bargains on the outliers that remain stars deep into their 30s - to have much value in terms of hanging on to your long time stars. I think the restricted Free Agent option is a better option for allowing you to hang on to those players at something close to their true value.

            Comment


            • I've been silent so far regarding the franchise player on a single team through his career discussion but thought I'd weigh in. I actually don't have any problem with the rule as it is currently written. As an aging superstar with the franchise tag begins to fade, management can decide to if he's worth the franchise player's salary and either keep him or allow him to be a FA. If for sentimental reasons, I want to sign the former FP as a RFA, I can overpay market price and keep him or I can let him walk. I think this closely mimics what happens in real life. There are plenty of aging stars who think they're worth more than their career franchise are willing to pay them and they finish the last year or two of their career with a different team. The market, and to a degree the original team's sentimentality for the player, will determine what happens.
              Dan
              CKL - Maloy Boys
              P2PKL - Detroit Tigers

              Comment


              • Originally posted by rmadachik View Post
                I plan on changing the playoffs to 7 games for both rounds
                Good, glad to hear that.

                The bottom 4 teams going to the lottery is also a change I am making but haven't written it in yet
                Glad to hear that too.

                The franchise player rule is just a way to keep up to 2 players at below market value. I think with the RFA we will see some overbidding for players and I like the Idea of having a couple lifers available that won't break the bank.
                I'm definitely not opposed to it, as I was one of the original proponents of the Franchise Player rule. It was merely offering the alternative option.

                Let me say that I think you've done a great job whipping this together, and I hope it has the same success as the CKL has had.
                You see, you spend a good deal of your life gripping a baseball and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. J. Bouton

                Comment


                • Originally posted by scubadan View Post
                  I've been silent so far regarding the franchise player on a single team through his career discussion but thought I'd weigh in. I actually don't have any problem with the rule as it is currently written. As an aging superstar with the franchise tag begins to fade, management can decide to if he's worth the franchise player's salary and either keep him or allow him to be a FA. If for sentimental reasons, I want to sign the former FP as a RFA, I can overpay market price and keep him or I can let him walk. I think this closely mimics what happens in real life. There are plenty of aging stars who think they're worth more than their career franchise are willing to pay them and they finish the last year or two of their career with a different team. The market, and to a degree the original team's sentimentality for the player, will determine what happens.
                  Actually, under the RFA rule I don't think you would even be overpaying, or not very much. RFAs are likely to get bid to their true market value, or very close to it, and the present team only has to match the highest offer, not raise it, in order to keep the player. You might occasionally overpay slightly if you choose to keep the guy, but probably not by very darn much.

                  I personally think the RFA rule was a real stroke of genius on Rich's part and is a great rule. As for Franchise Players, I also like Rich's idea of one batter and one pitcher, although if you're going to have more than one my absolute preference would be letting the owner choose both. This FP thing seems to be the last issue to be hammered out, and getting a lot of discussion on it is a good thing.
                  You see, you spend a good deal of your life gripping a baseball and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. J. Bouton

                  Comment


                  • Thanks guys. I think we are going to roll with the Franchise player rule as it is currently written. As things stand now we are at a firm 11 owners and on the fence with one more. I will be releasing a final file for the 1901 season once I get the team info, and I would like to draw for the redraft so we can start putting together our draft boards. I will work it so our offseason does not coincide with the CKL off season from this point on.
                    Last edited by rmadachik; 02-08-2012, 09:24 PM.
                    Baseball statistics are like a girl in a bikini. They show a lot, but not everything. ~Toby Harrah

                    Comment


                    • If I may offer one belated suggestion to the franchise player debate, what about letting people have any number of "franchise players" but at an ever increasing cost? The first one would cost 10 or 12 million, whatever we decided on. The next one could cost 4 or 5 million more and the third another 4 or 5 million. So it could be something like this:
                      1st Franchise player 10 million
                      2nd Franchise player 15 million
                      3rd Franchise player 20 million

                      If you cut one, the remaining franchise players still have the same contract. So if you have 3 and you cut your 10 million man, the other two still have 15 and 20 million dollar contracts, but your next franchise player will only cost 10 million.
                      "I will calmly wait for my induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame."
                      - Sammy Sosa

                      "Get a comfy chair, Sammy, cause its gonna be a long wait."
                      - Craig Ashley (AKA Windy City Fan)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Windy City Fan View Post
                        If I may offer one belated suggestion to the franchise player debate, what about letting people have any number of "franchise players" but at an ever increasing cost? The first one would cost 10 or 12 million, whatever we decided on. The next one could cost 4 or 5 million more and the third another 4 or 5 million. So it could be something like this:
                        1st Franchise player 10 million
                        2nd Franchise player 15 million
                        3rd Franchise player 20 million

                        If you cut one, the remaining franchise players still have the same contract. So if you have 3 and you cut your 10 million man, the other two still have 15 and 20 million dollar contracts, but your next franchise player will only cost 10 million.
                        Great suggestion Craig. I like this idea, although with the RFA rule Rich has implemented it might not be necessary.
                        You see, you spend a good deal of your life gripping a baseball and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. J. Bouton

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rmadachik View Post
                          Thanks guys. I think we are going to roll with the Franchise player rule as it is currently written. As things stand now we are at a firm 11 owners and on the fence with one more. I will be releasing a final file for the 1901 season once I get the team info, and I would like to draw for the redraft so we can start putting together our draft boards. I will work it so our offseason does not coincide with the CKL off season from this point on.
                          Rich, I don't know if you've already answered this question somewhere and I missed it, but I presume this will be a snake style draft rather than a straight draft, correct? That is, whoever gets the #1 pick won't pick again until #24, while the poor schmuck who gets #12 will also get #13.

                          I'm also presuming that once you set up the draft list, we will select ballparks in reverse order of the player draft. Is that correct?

                          Thanks!
                          You see, you spend a good deal of your life gripping a baseball and in the end it turns out that it was the other way around all the time. J. Bouton

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by catcher24 View Post
                            Rich, I don't know if you've already answered this question somewhere and I missed it, but I presume this will be a snake style draft rather than a straight draft, correct? That is, whoever gets the #1 pick won't pick again until #24, while the poor schmuck who gets #12 will also get #13.

                            I'm also presuming that once you set up the draft list, we will select ballparks in reverse order of the player draft. Is that correct?

                            Thanks!
                            both of those assumptions are absolutely correct
                            Baseball statistics are like a girl in a bikini. They show a lot, but not everything. ~Toby Harrah

                            Comment


                            • I posted this before, but I think it was the wrong thread

                              Originally posted by Wade8813 View Post
                              Also, are we going to have some sort of waiver system? I'd be against that idea.

                              I can't remember off the top of my head... are we going to allow trading for draft picks? I believe CKL does, but I don't remember seeing it spelled out in the rules.
                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDxgNjMTPIs

                              Comment


                              • There is no waivers system. free agents can be signed at any time for a minimum 250k one year contract. Trading for draft picks will definately be allowed and encouraged.
                                Baseball statistics are like a girl in a bikini. They show a lot, but not everything. ~Toby Harrah

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X