[USML Announce] Serious Rule Change Proposal

[Andrew R. Klein]

Rich-

I can't say that I never thought about this before.  But it was draft 
prep that really prompted me to make the proposal.

-Andy



Richard E. Robbins wrote:
> I vote no.
>
> I wish you had raised this issue in the midst of the off-season and not so
> close to the draft.
>
> -- Rich
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf
> Of Andrew R. Klein
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:03 AM
> To: USML Announcements
> Subject: [USML Announce] Serious Rule Change Proposal
>
> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
>