[USML Announce] USML Rules Voting

[SpringKerb at aol.com]

In a message dated 2/9/2004 9:17:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, JHWinick writes:

> Then may I encourage you to modify your vote and switch to option A from option C.  That would be, by far, the easiest 
> solution to strengthening the salary floor.

I think C implicates lowering the cap (due to less FAAB inflation) rather than raising the floor.  As it is, we provide $40 more "headroom" with our cap ($360 v. $260) than the downside flexibility we provide with our floor ($200 v. $260).

200 is actually a pretty tight floor already.  Take, for example, a team forced to dump when one or two stars are out for the year with injury or traded to the NL.  You could be at the floor already, without even dumping.  Then you can't do anything at all.  That would simply encourage owners to check out of the league completely for the year.  I'd much prefer to have someone active and dumping, than have them completely inactive because the rules have put them in a straight jacket.

Mark