Winter Meeting Proposal #2
SEPTEMBER WAIVER/TRADE PROPOSAL
For the final month of the season (the periods following our trading deadline), I propose changing the way in which our waiver process functions. The proposed process would work as follows.
1) Any player nuked by a team would go through waivers (as is the current rule).
2) Teams would have priority to claim said player based upon reverse order of standings.
3) The lowest standing team bidding on the player, must negotiate a trade with the releasing team for that player, in order to acquire rights to the player.
4) If no agreement is reached, the nuked player is NOT put into the free agent pool, but rather “off the market” and made available to the entire league at the following draft.
I think changing the rule, to more closely mimic MLB’s September waiver process, would add some additional strategy to the last month of the season. Teams may bid on a player, with no intention of completing a trade, simply to block competing teams. Also, this would allow teams the flexibility of releasing injured players that are not DL qualified, if they know the opportunity for re-drafting the player the following year exists.
Why should a team be forced to reward the other team for nuking a player?
This only results in a win win for the team nuking the player. they either get something from the nuked player, or they block every other team from acquiring the player.
Why do want to reward the team nuking a player?
Scenario Llast year cc gets hurt in aug and wtny knows he’s making 23M and not keeping him the following, therefore he nukes him, then doesn’t trade him, and now every other team in the leaguye can’t pick up cc?
Again, I don’t know why we want to reward a team for nuking a player.
DMB
I could see allowing owners to place a player on waivers(not nuking him) with the intent of trying to acquire value.
Some tweaking might need to be done, to not allow teams to flat out reject all offers. Possibly a system where teams interested bid, and best bid wins player, not allowing the nuking team to block all teams.
Not a fan of this at all. Did EE propose this? Sounds like a direct result of his failed attempt to get anything in return for Dye.
Glad you were able to get to a “computer” JM. Did you have to go to the Andover Public Library?
Sounds like I was right.
JM, I think this is how most rules come to fruition – you’re not breaking any news here. Teams play the year, experience things, and find ways to improve the league. That is pretty much how the process work.
Posting from the Blackberry. Nice new format. I like this one the best. Only change would be to add the writer’s name to each new topic. Can we register to get emails sent with new entries?
So because you couldn’t get anything for Dye, you now want to create a system that blocks owners from claiming nuked players?
No, I want to create a system (in September) that allows for players to be traded. I forgot how dependent you were upon waiver scraps to fill your roster, sorry this hits so close to home for you.
Nice try. If that was the case your proposal would have been to extend or do away with the trade deadline. I wasn’t the team that claimed Dye off the scrap heap.
I like the trade deadline. It creates some late season buzz and gets things moving in SOT. I’m sure it also gives teams lower in the standings some late season involvement and allows them to keep their eyes (and spirits) toward the next year. So no, that was not my proposal.
I was hoping to create a system (in September) that promotes strategy, the possibility of trade, and also some additional flexibility for owners with guys that are injured but not DL eligible.
I like the idea of this, but I’m not sure about it in the current proposed structure. How can we best replicate the waiver process in MLB using SOT guidelines. And no, I haven’t thought through this yet.
I was thinking that teams could place a player on waivers instead of nuking them. Any team interested would submit bids and said team could go through all the bids and either explore the offers they like or pull the player back. For example you needed to pick up a pitcher but didn’t have the cap and need to move a bat, instead of nuking and waiting two weeks to add the arm you can place the player on waivers trying to free up cap and roster space to make your moves. We could move the deadline back to July 31st and have the waiver trades from August 1st until the last transaction period…………just a thought
By the time we are done with this year’s WM we will need to issue every owner a copy of the rule book. There is no chance every owner will know, understand and be able to keep track of everything.
Here is the problem with waivers. Most weeks teams may not know until 1:50PM what player they are nuking. This would make it extremely difficult to implement a waiver system.
I agree, Mike. I was just floating an idea out there. Well we should all have a copy of the rule book, I think that is a good thing
“Here is the problem with waivers. Most weeks teams may not know until 1:50PM what player they are nuking. This would make it extremely difficult to implement a waiver system.”
I think the idea would be to create a system that would last from one transaction period to the next, giving owners a full week to sort out waivers and claims. We understand it can’t happen in the hours leading up to a transaction period.