[USML Announce] Serious Rule Change Proposal
Richard E. Robbins
RERobbins at iTinker.net
Wed Mar 28 11:56:17 EDT 2007
This is clearly an issue about which reasonable people can disagree.
It's also one that might be handled (if that's what the majority wants) in a
variety of different ways.
We could impose a blackout period at the start of the season for these
players. We could craft another kind of imbalanced trade rule.
This is not a trivial proposal and, in my view, it shouldn't be dealt with
in a lightning quick fashion without meaningful discussion on what is
essentially the eve of the draft. I'm confident that there will be a
variety of unintended consequences if we were to adopt what Andy suggests.
Now is not the time.
-- Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf
Of JOHN FRUIT, FAF ADVISORS
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 11:35 AM
To: announce at usml.net
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Serious Rule Change Proposal
I can appreciate your strategy arguement...like all sports teams one must
make a decision whether to build for the future or play for the here and
now....my concern is that it seems like that decision needs to be made
earlier and earlier each year, rendering the whole season meaningless for
all but a few teams.
----- Original Message -----
From: Brad Jansen <announce at usml.net>
At: 3/28 10:45:59
John:
I understand your point, but note:
(i) Teams get ridiculed no matter where they finish in the standings.
(ii) There are already anti-dump rules in place and they are sufficient.
(iii) Each year is different and no one can predict if or how many teams
may dump and when they may do so. The "marketplace" should decide what
teams do-- not more rules that react to a prior season's events.
(iv) The proposal just takes out another element of strategy that makes
the game so challenging.
(v) If Andy hadn't blown his budget last draft on the likes of Craig
Hansen we would not have this discussion.
(vi) I told Andy not to keep Garko, but no....So one must question his
judgment on all things at this point.
BLJ
On 3/28/07, JOHN FRUIT, FAF ADVISORS <jfruit1 at bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
> As people digest this, I would point out last year's league experience
> as a prime example of what Andy is battling against. Three teams
> dumped in April/ early May...severly handicapping those of us who
> didn't realize we were required to make a decision whether to "play
> for this year" or "next year"
> before the season was even 3 weeks old, and then get ridiculed for
> finishing 4th or 5th when really just trying to compete in the spirit
> of the game. That is all.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Doug Shabelman <announce at usml.net>
> At: 3/28 10:17:47
>
> Brad,
>
> Do you need more time to think about it?
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On
> Behalf Of Brad Jansen
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:15 AM
> To: USML Announcements
> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Serious Rule Change Proposal
>
>
> I vote no.
>
> Respectfully,
> BLJ
>
>
> On 3/28/07, Andrew R. Klein <anrklein at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> League-
>
> Here is a serious rules proposal. My usual caveat applies -- I
> have
> been part of the league for 18 years and hope that we're still
> playing
> 18 years from now. The proposal is not end-of-the-world stuff; it
> just
> reflects some issues that have impacted my enjoyment of the game.
> Here's the proposal:
>
> Article XII
>
> 13. No player may be traded until his USML contract is running.
> This
> rule shall not apply to players retained by team owners before
> April 1,
> 2007.
>
>
> My reasons for making the proposal follow.
>
> 1. As you know, I do not share the enthusiasm that many league
> members
> have for prospecting. I'm fine with prospects supplementing a
> league
> based on major league players. But in recent years I feel as if
> our
> league has worked the other way around. My proposal would allow
> prospecting in the rotation draft to continue unabated. An owner
> could
> watch prospects develop and then retain them (or trade them) after
> a
> call-up. But the proposal would eliminate the movement of
> top-flight
> major leaguers for players who are years away from contributing to
> our
> actual standings. To me, this would be a good thing. No longer
> would
> the biggest leg-up on competitiveness be the ability to engage in
> dump
> deals for minor league prospects.
>
> 2. Our current rules encourage people to dump very early if they
> want
> to position themselves to win a future title. I know that a number
> of
> league members dislike this aspect of the league and would rather
> have
> rules that encourage teams to play for a while before looking to
> next
> season. The proposal would make early dumping harder to accomplish
> and
> a riskier proposition.
>
> 3. The proposal contains a grandfathering clause so teams that
> have
> gathered prospects under our current rules (like the Riptorns) are
> not
> disadvantaged. Administering this would be easy. We could simply
> list
> the names of the 30 or so exempted players on usml.net and cross
> them
> off as they become active or are waived.
>
> That is all for now. I ask our esteemed commissioners to tally
> votes.
>
> -Andy
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
>
>
http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_____________________________
____
______________announcemailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> Material based on data from sources deemed reliable;
> accuracy/completeness not guaranteed. Not for use as a primary basis
> of investment decisions; not to be construed to meet needs of any
> investor. Not a representation or solicitation of an offer to sell/buy
> any security. Securities may not be eligible for solicitation in all
states. Opinions subject to change. U.S.
> Bancorp Piper Jaffray, Inc. (USBPJ), its officers or family members
> may own/buy/sell these securities. USBPJ may make a market in the
> company's common stock. Past performance does not guarantee future
> results. Securities products/services offered through U.S. Bancorp
> Piper Jaffray, Inc. member SIPC and NYSE, Inc, a subsidiary of U.S.
Bancorp.
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
announce mailing list
announce at usml.net
http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Material based on data from sources deemed reliable; accuracy/completeness
not guaranteed. Not for use as a primary basis of investment decisions; not
to be construed to meet needs of any investor. Not a representation or
solicitation of an offer to sell/buy any security. Securities may not be
eligible for solicitation in all states. Opinions subject to change. U.S.
Bancorp Piper Jaffray, Inc. (USBPJ), its officers or family members may
own/buy/sell these securities. USBPJ may make a market in the company's
common stock. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Securities
products/services offered through U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray, Inc. member
SIPC and NYSE, Inc, a subsidiary of U.S. Bancorp.
More information about the Announce
mailing list