[USML Announce] Three Proposals

[john.fruit at usbank.com]

I'm FOR being able to trade FAAB dollars and AGAINST ever using NL stats.


                                                                                                                              
                      "Jim Barrett"                                                                                           
                      <chicagojab at yahoo        To:       "USML Announcements" <announce at usml.net>                             
                      .com>                    cc:                                                                            
                      Sent by:                 Subject:  Re: [USML Announce] Three Proposals                                  
                      announce-bounces@                                                                                       
                      usml.net                                                                                                
                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                              
                      02/03/2004 10:21                                                                                        
                      AM                                                                                                      
                      Please respond to                                                                                       
                      "USML                                                                                                   
                      Announcements"                                                                                          
                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                              




Is anyone else going to vote or comment on Rich's proposals?

"Richard E. Robbins" <RERobbins at iTinker.net> wrote:
 Jim,

 I would not be averse to your suggestion on the third proposal, but I need
 to think about it a bit more.

 -- Rich

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Jim Barrett
 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:18:39
 To:USML Announcements
 Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Three Proposals

 Rich,

 I vote as follows:

 Proposal 1 (Trading FAAB funds) - Yes (incl. Yes to trading player to
 another owner, who would then be able to waive and claim funds). I think
 it might an additional spark to deal making. Note that we may also have to
 clarify whether trading $25 FAAB balances a deal for an asterisk player.

 Proposal 2 (ebay style bidding) - Yes for the reasons I indicated in my
 email a few days ago

 Proposal 3 (keeping NL stats) - No. I think this is a risk we all
 knowingly undertake by having an AL only league. However, I believe that
 if this proposal is approved it should not be limited to just players that
 are traded to the NL. It should also players who are released by their AL
 team and then sign with an NL team as a free agent.

 "Richard E. Robbins" wrote: I submit the following three rule proposals
 and assume that these (and all others) will be gathered by Mark Blocker
 and circulated in a more formal fashion in the near future.

 If you intend to submit a proposal, please include the necessary changes
 to our rules to implement what you propose.

 I have attached a word file that contains text needed to implement each of
 my proposals. The file has been marked to highlight changes to the
 existing rules.

 Thanks,

 -- Rich

 Proposal ??" Permit Trading of FAAB Funds

 We should permit in-season trading of FAAB funds and, to be consistent, we
 should permit an owner who trades for an NL-traded player to claim FAAB
 dollars by waiving the player.

 As proposed, FAAB dollars acquired in trade would not be available for use
 until the next reporting period. Similarly, as proposed, an NL player
 acquired in a trade could not be waived until the next reporting period.

 If we do not adopt this proposal, we should modify Section 14.6 to provide
 that the only team that can claim FAAB funds by waiving an NL-traded
 player is the League team rostering the player at the time of the trade to
 the National League. This would be nothing more than a codification of
 existing practice.

 Proposal ??" Adopt Modified eBay Style FAAB Bidding

 I propose that we adopt a modified eBay style approach to FAAB bidding by
 awarding a player to the highest bidder and using a salary of one dollar
 more than the second highest bid, $5 in the case of a single bidder (i.e.,
 the minimum bid) and the highest bid in the event of tied winning bids.
 The rule would also prohibit collusive bidding to generate Asterisk
 Players. I recognize that a violation of the collusion prohibition is
 virtually impossible to prove. Nevertheless, I believe that USML
 participants are honest and that the explicit prohibition would suffice.

 Others have suggested an approach where we would use a slender bidding
 currency; with the result being that, FAAB players have salaries less than
 $25, which would mean that the FAAB acquisition process could not be used
 to generate Asterisk players. That approach is not subject to the
 collusive bidding problem found in my proposal. On the other hand, that
 approach will let teams that are close to the salary ceiling roster
 players that they would otherwise not be able to fit under the salary cap.

 Proposal ??" Count Statistics of Players Traded to the National League

 It is clear that there is no perfect solution to the problems created when
 a player is traded to the National League. We adopted our current rule
 many years ago in an effort to provide at least some compensation to the
 owner that loses a player to the National League. I believe that the
 compensation afforded by the current approach is essentially meaningless.

 Some will argue that allowing other-league stats is wrong because they are
 not comparable to American League statistics. That may be so. On the other
 hand, we do not do anything with statistics generated during inter-league
 play.

 Some will argue that like injuries, this is simply a risk of playing the
 game that we should accept. I believe that this is a risk that we can do
 without and one that we can (and should) eliminate. The injury risk
 problem is a different thing entirely. In the real world, general managers
 don???t wake up in the morning to discover that they have been stripped of
 a player (unless you work for George Steinbrenner).

 Some will argue that we should be able to identify the players that are
 likely to be traded, and consider that risk when bidding. That may be the
 case ??" on the other hand, it is really hard to predict whether a player
 is likely to land in the other league.

 The impact of inter-league trades on the USML season can be dramatic. That
 just seems wrong to me. Let???s avoid the problem.


 > ATTACHMENT part 2 application/msword name=Rule Proposal Implementing
 Text.doc