Change to reward for a GM posting an in-season prospect thread

[blurred]

The TL;DR – Our current rules state that when bidding on prospects in-season (after 1st May) that the GM posting the player receives a 20% discount on the final amount if they win them. This is a) a slight benefit to GMs for identifying a potential asset, and b) a slight disadvantage to a GM who doesn’t unearth new players, and relies on players posted by others.

The proposal is to remove this discount and replace it with a mechanic that allows the GM posting the player to match any bid made by another GM, essentially meaning any GM responding to a thread posted by another would have to outbid them in order to win the player.

The detail:

Prospect Contract (PC) bids count as a bid of $300k, with the first $3m of bids coming out of your non-tradeable bonus pool. You could spend your bonus pool on one player (PC + $2.7m) or spread it out over as many as 10 PC-only bids. If promoted to the majors, PC players are assigned a $600k contract.

Let’s use a couple of examples from last year to see the potential impact of the rule change - Dane Myers firstly

CLE posted the player, and bids came in from MIN and KC. Ultimately, CLE bid PC + $700k and won the player, but as they’d posted him initially this $1m total was reduced by 20% to give a final hit of $800k to cap.

Under the new system CLE would have been able to place a bid of ‘match’ on KC’s PC + 400k bid and potentially won the player for a lower amount. Had KC been willing to bid after that, however, up to $600k or $700k, while CLE would have been able to ‘match’ that bid and take advantage of being the first to post the player, ultimately he would have cost CLE more under the new proposals than the old rules in that situation.

The second example is Jeremy Rodriguez

TOR posted an initial bid of PC + $200k, but as opening bidder this amounted to a total of $400k cap hit to him, if successful. To outbid him, any new GM would need to bid PC + $300k ($600k to them).

Under the new rules he might be more inclined to bid PC only, as he could match any minimum raises from other GMs. Had someone bid PC + $200k, while he could have matched it under the new rules, it would have cost him $100k more in cap.

Ultimately there was no further bid, and TOR won the player for a $400k cap it.

In most cases the rule change will only have minor effects of a one or two hundred thousand here or there on a handful of players, because how much cap space you have and how much you’re willing to bid on a player has more effect than the method by which you achieve it, so it broadly comes down to which system you prefer.

[oldmancoffee66]

Yes... love this

[SandlotLinC25]

Agreed. Much better reward IMO.

[jeffwp91]

Having seen it in practice, not crazy about it. I get the wanting a reward for a diamond in the rough, but we're playing in a 30 team league with deep rosters. I do not assume whoever posted a player is the one who "found" him and gets matching rights for a player they didnt previously own.

[PiratesGM (BTL)]

As a veteran of 20 years of leagues this size, let me weight in a little bit:

I am going to assume that there are some people in a league this size who have little to no knowledge of prospects, probably might peruse some top 100 lists from MLB Pipeline but that’s it. This is absolutely a small percent of owners in leagues like this.

I’m also assuming that the standard owner here has a better knowledge of prospects. They’re going a little off the beaten path to find public top prospect lists, but with fantasy slants, and probably use some kind of top 300-500 dynasty asset list.

There is also a larger portion of owners that probably approaches the “standard” owners who is heavily invested in leagues like this. 500 or more prospects rostered doesn’t scare them. They likely pay for at least one premium service to get resources and lists that are behind paywalls. The beginning of June starts a holiday of sorts, with the MLB Draft, Complex and DSL starting up. I am one of those, and I can usually tell which owners are using those services based off who is on their roster, and especially come FYPD draft time……bonus points if you can tell me who actually was the first to tout Elly De La Cruz.

That being said, I still don’t think you should be able to match a player. No one is truly “finding” a player here, we’re all getting notes from premium services and Twitter reports from those people. Some of the owners who are in the small minority without prospect knowledge or standard knowledge might start bidding on some players just if they see some action on them, but this is basically saying “hey, people who subscribe to premium services already get the jump on prospects, and we’re going to make it even easier for you to build a dominant farm”

[Dmayfield73]

I couldnot have said it better Pirate. Been playing 25 years and I have a dewp pssion for the minors and development of them. I say keep it as is

[Kube20]

Keep it as is

[Fiorious]

Like the change

[oldmancoffee66]

TB got Elly from KC in a trade before he really, really took off.

My Google sheet is always growing.... probably 200 if it gets condensed.

Interchangeable TBH.

Owner that initiated the process, should get the small benefit of matching the offer.

Adds a wrinkle to strategy.

I can always nuke a bid, but let the others decide if it worth continuing.

[fantasysportsdc]

Match, I like it