two questions:
1) do we keep keepers (there's certainly a better way to say that) or blow everything up?
2) if we DO maintain keepers, do they stay outside the auction, or do we take last year's ESPN valuation as the 'price' for keeping them?
3) how many keepers.
that was three questions, i guess.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
i'm for blowing everything up, then resuming with a contracts system, the details of which can be thrown up for debate.
if we hold onto the previous keepers, we should use some kind of standard value (like a 3 yr avg or ESPN's rankings or whatever) to determine worth against salary cap.
in the event of that, i'd say 3-5 would be ok with me. i was not a huge fan of the 8-man keeping; i don't think it forestalled competitive balanace or was otherwise untenable, it was just boring to have principally the same teams two years in a row.
i think we should keep 2 hitters and 2 pitchers. or 1 and 1. or just 3 keepers. or no keepers. i don't care. let's do this thing.
As much as I have players who I would like to hang on to after lovingly nurturing their growth in my farm system, I would like to blow up the rosters and start fresh. I thought the poll came out in favor of a clean slate? I really want to see the bidding for Santana and Peavy and not ink them based on some published projection. Especially if people want contracts, we should determine the value of our players. Otherwise, we end up with two classes of values: what ESPN says is the value for our keepers, and what we decide through the auction process for everyone else. I believe in the popular sovereignty mumbo-jumbo.
Also, I still say boo to contracts. I prefer a simpler world. And if we are going to have contracts, forcing me to bother with such strategery, then I am looking ever more favorably on Carter's suggestion of contracts for everyone.
I'm holding off stats discussion 'til these questions are resolved.
re: blowing things up--the poll seemed to be split 3-3. Obviously, we need the rest of the votes. To continue our long running political analogies, I feel like this should be a constitutional issue, not a statutory issue, i.e. a simple majority in favoring of blowing things up does not strike me as sufficient for such an important decision.
To my make pitch again, I really do not want to start rosters from zero. I like my players. I've nurtured them for two seasons. I made moves last season expecting to be able to keep at least some of my players.
Obviously, keepers from last season will make the transition to an auction more difficult. Using ESPN, etc. as a proxy for our auction value is an imperfect device. Of course, if an owner feels that the proxy is too high, he need not keep the player. Moreover, the owner that most highly values a player should end up possessing that player regardless of the proxy price--we still have trades after all.
Post a Comment