Expansion Discussion

Topic: Expansion Discussion (Read 15909 times) previous topic - next topic

Expansion Discussion

October 23, 2017, 11:05:59 AM

Full overview of these changes is on www.msbsim.com

Here are the highlights.

Expansion Drafts
Each owner will be able to protect 25 players form their existing rosters. These players will remain on their original team. The expansion draft will provide 5 players from each 40-man roster and 5 players from each minor league roster to the expansion teams.

Expansion Drafts - Considerations
None of us want to lose a player. The rule-set attempts to impact each tenured team as equally as possible, provide the expansion teams some depth and quality, and not devastate a team. All teams will lose a player they like or were planning to be a part of their future. It is our hope that the changes to arbitration and usage counter the impact of these changes to your team.

Arbitration
Inaugural Contract Extensions which give an owner the possibility of adding a single year of control to a single player each year will be replaced by a process that simulates Arbitration. Arbitration will allow an owner to extend EVERY rookie player up to additional two years on a salary structure based on their prior year's performance.

Arbitration - Considerations
Introducing this rule with expansion was very important. Let's say you lose your 2B in the expansion draft. You were not planning on signing an additional infielder, so now you have to change your plans. With this rule instead of having to decide which single player was going to receive a contract extension this off-season you are now able to extend all of the players that were previously eligible for an ICE.

Usage
The performance penalty in DMB for a player exhausting their real life usage was set at 120%. This is being reduced to 105%. When a player exhausts their usage limit they will be penalized by DMB.

Usage - Considerations
This will increase the value of mid-tier players as owners will have to fill their roster with increased depth. The 120% benchmark allowed a player to miss an entire month in real life and still be able to complete a season in simulation. This negated the need for a utility infielder, a 4th outfielder, a 6th pitcher (let's be serious the need for even a 5th pitcher).

The Cutthroats and Scurvy Dogs are two examples that benefited greatly from this rule. Kershaw's month long injury had no impact on Rod using Kershaw all season long. Darrell was able to play Pomeranz and Martinez all season without any regard for their real life shortened seasons.

Summary
While arbitration and usage changes are meant to improve the simulation they have been included at this time to dampen the impacts of the expansion drafts. For example, we will be increasing the overall Salary Cap to $1.8 billion or another way to look at it is increasing the money spent in free agency to nearly $1 billion. Arbitration and Usage should offset any inflation concerns we anticipated.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #1 – October 23, 2017, 01:54:10 PM

Quote from: dgonser – on October 23, 2017, 11:05:59 AM

Expansion Drafts - Considerations
None of us want to lose a player. The rule-set attempts to impact each tenured team as equally as possible, provide the expansion teams some depth and quality, and not devastate a team. All teams will lose a player they like or were planning to be a part of their future. It is our hope that the changes to arbitration and usage counter the impact of these changes to your team.

Which group does the to be promoted minor league players fit into?

Quote from: dgonser – on October 23, 2017, 11:05:59 AM

Arbitration
Inaugural Contract Extensions which give an owner the possibility of adding a single year of control to a single player each year will be replaced by a process that simulates Arbitration. Arbitration will allow an owner to extend EVERY rookie player up to additional two years on a salary structure based on their prior year's performance.

Arbitration - Considerations
Introducing this rule with expansion was very important. Let's say you lose your 2B in the expansion draft. You were not planning on signing an additional infielder, so now you have to change your plans. With this rule instead of having to decide which single player was going to receive a contract extension this off-season you are now able to extend all of the players that were previously eligible for an ICE.

This is a welcomed change regardless of the expansion decision.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #2 – October 23, 2017, 02:35:31 PM

Quote from: FRANNY77 – on October 23, 2017, 01:54:10 PM

Which group does the to be promoted minor league players fit into?

This is a welcomed change regardless of the expansion decision.

1. They fit into your 15 minor league protections.

2. That's good to hear. We think this proposal will make the league a better place - with how good some young players have been, those $6.5M for 5 years of Mike Trout contracts are just too good a value. Let alone Darrell with his Corey Seager, Bryce Harper, Yasiel Puig combo for less than $4.25M total.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #3 – October 23, 2017, 02:37:39 PM

Quote

Which group does the to be promoted minor league players fit into?

Great clarification. Promotions will not happen before the expansion draft.
So if you have a player on your minor league roster that is eligible for promotion they will be part of the 15 minor league protections.

Let me know if that answers your question.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #4 – October 23, 2017, 02:41:57 PM

Quote from: dgonser – on October 23, 2017, 02:37:39 PM

Quote
Which group does the to be promoted minor league players fit into?

Great clarification. Promotions will not happen before the expansion draft.
So if you have a player on your minor league roster that is eligible for promotion they will be part of the 15 minor league protections.

Let me know if that answers your question.

It does, thank you Darrell and Rod.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #5 – October 23, 2017, 05:59:55 PM

Regarding Arbitration:

I love it. But a question/thought: Why don't we just call rookie contracts 3-year contracts, and eliminate any confusion about any difference between year 4 and years 5&6. Basically, the way it stands right now, it's only a "$500k/4yr" deal by force (for that 4th year). Why not call it a $500k/3yr" deal and allow GMs to pass on that 4th year if they want to (thus adding more players to the FA pool, which was a semi-argument about allowing for 5 years of team control with the ICE, if I recall)? MLB teams don't have to pay a player a major league salary in his 4th year if he sucks. Heck, they don't have to guarantee ANY money to players inside their first 3 years unless they're on the 25-man a certain number of games. I even kicked around suggesting we don't have multi-year rookie contracts at all - to better simulate real life - but after trying to explain it by typing it all out, I think that's a bad idea. But 3-year contracts seem to make sense, if you all know what I'm getting at.

So here's what I'm saying: Make rookie contracts 3-year/$500k deals (kicks in the immediate season after that player hits the thresholds, as stated in the proposed rule), with arbitration eligibility kicking in for years 4-6 using WAR from the previous year each new season.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #6 – October 23, 2017, 07:15:38 PM

I get what Kyle is saying and it makes total sense to me. I believe that until after the expansion draft is over that the 4th year of a rookie draft should still be looked at. The 2020 contract players are limited the most and it would be easier to keep those seperate.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #7 – October 23, 2017, 08:17:49 PM

Regarding the Expansion Draft:

Can you guys elaborate further on what the "rookie expansion draft" is? Does this mean I could lose 5 of my unprotected minor leaguers who are eligible to be promoted this offseason? If so, why is it separate from the first expansion draft? Is it because I get to further protect my players after the first draft?

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #8 – October 23, 2017, 08:38:31 PM

Yes. You could lose an unprotected player that is currently on your minor league roster.

There are two drafts to balance the arbitrary draft order and to allow owners a separate strategy based on the results of the major league expansion.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #9 – October 23, 2017, 09:24:28 PM

Plus the expansion draft will happen during the transaction freeze or in other words prior to you having an opportunity to promote them.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #10 – October 24, 2017, 04:32:24 AM

The statement about the expansion rookie draft following all other minor league draft rules confuses me.

The player pool is limited to current MSB Minor League rosters.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #11 – October 24, 2017, 05:53:46 AM

Do expansion teams have a minimum salary to reach by the conclusion of the expansion draft?

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #12 – October 24, 2017, 06:21:04 AM

How will the expansion teams be placed into the 2018 Minor League draft?

As a team having the #1 pick, I would really prefer to keep that pick as mine.

I'm not as frustrated today as I was last evening and I'm sure it will reduce as I'm able to plan and my strategy for the players I'm choosing to protect. The core of my team is 2019 contracted players I signed as free-agents coming into the 2017 season and from what I can see I am only going to be able to keep five of those core players.

I know the answers have been coming fast and furious, so address as allowed. The CO's are doing a good job of implementing all of this in the time frame that has been given to work with to keep the off-season on schedule.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #13 – October 24, 2017, 09:03:27 AM

Quote

The statement about the expansion rookie draft following all other minor league draft rules confuses me.

The player pool is limited to current MSB Minor League rosters.

This is simply meant to convey that rules regarding the allotted time to make picks, the window for when teams are on the clock, etc. will all follow our normal draft rules.

Re: Expansion Discussion

Reply #14 – October 24, 2017, 09:06:36 AM

Quote from: FRANNY77 – on October 24, 2017, 06:21:04 AM

How will the expansion teams be placed into the 2018 Minor League draft?
As a team having the #1 pick, I would really prefer to keep that pick as mine.

This is still being decided, thus it wasn't released. We understand wanting to keep the #1 pick and are trying to balance the need to provide expansion teams with an appropriate slot in the draft.

More to come.