An Idea About Expansion

Have a suggestion for the league? Bring it up for discussion here.
User avatar
Ted
General Manager
Posts: 4720
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 102 times

An Idea About Expansion

Post by Ted » Fri May 17, 2019 12:23 am

First off, I'm not going to debate this, so don't expect me to read any responses here. This is just an idea, and that's why I'm posting it in the "suggestions" forum.

Why would we hold an expansion draft? This is all made up. Just make up new players for the incoming teams. The worst part of expansion is the way it dilutes the existing talent pool. The most annoying part for existing GMs is having to alter their plans to not lose players. If you don't want to make the new teams terrible, you have to make an obnoxious number of players available. Frankly, we never hit that number and the new teams are terrible anyway.

So don't do it. Think outside the box. Don't hold hard and fast to systems that don't apply to us simply because real life teams have to do them. If pro sport leagues could just come up with entire new rosters of players when they expanded, they'd do it in a heartbeat. It would be better for their product, plain and simple. It's clearly better for us,

So just give the two new teams rosters that would be around .500. Make up some minor league talent for them too. All it takes to figure this out is a little math.

If you have to have a draft, then let the two new teams draft against each other from the pool of new players.

To me, this is such a no brainer that to choose to both dilute our talent pool AND force exiting GMs to give up talent they've worked so hard to accrue is a vastly inferior option.
Ted Schmidt
California Crusaders (2021-present)
Image

User avatar
usnspecialist
League Advisor
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 9:39 am
Location: Manama, Bahrain
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by usnspecialist » Fri May 17, 2019 12:31 am

i can honestly say this has not been discussed at the GB level, but certainly some good points that we can bring up. Would also ease the burden on the expansion GMs because the time when the lists are finalized and the draft is fairly short as is.
Randy Weigand
Havana Sugar Kings/San Fernando Bears: 2032-
453-357

Landis Champion- 2034
Johnson Champion- 2034
Frick Champion- 2036, 2037
Johnson League Southern- 2034
Frick League Pacific- 2037
Wild Card- 2033, 2035, 2036

Image

User avatar
usnspecialist
League Advisor
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 9:39 am
Location: Manama, Bahrain
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by usnspecialist » Fri May 17, 2019 1:18 am

curious what the rest of the league thinks about this one.
Randy Weigand
Havana Sugar Kings/San Fernando Bears: 2032-
453-357

Landis Champion- 2034
Johnson Champion- 2034
Frick Champion- 2036, 2037
Johnson League Southern- 2034
Frick League Pacific- 2037
Wild Card- 2033, 2035, 2036

Image

User avatar
JimBob2232
General Manager
Posts: 2668
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 12:54 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by JimBob2232 » Fri May 17, 2019 5:28 am

Honestly, I dont want to lose any players either, but I worry about things like stats. These guys either will have zero stats history, or its all made up. either way, that seems odd to me.

because of the way I am, i;d get more joy as an expansion owner if you just gave me $110M and no players and told me to go fill it via FA and the draft. Maybe give me a couple extra picks at the bottom of each round for numbers, but thats about it. Let me start from zero and build a champion rather than poaching from other teams. But i get that i am in the minority there.
Check out sureveymonkey for my trade block (Last updated 12/7/2018)

User avatar
handaspencer
General Manager
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by handaspencer » Fri May 17, 2019 5:54 am

Good idea but I prefer the announced plan. Organizational purging especially the deeper ones is never a bad idea.

User avatar
Bumstead
General Manager
Posts: 1039
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by Bumstead » Fri May 17, 2019 7:15 am

Boise can't afford to lose any of these great players. I haven't listened/read the expansion plan, but i did notice we were reducing the number of divisions while adding teams...Ok...with everything we do at the insistence of mimicking MLB, it seems odd to me that we would want less teams to have a chance to win a division...but then again, I'm not sure I understand the need to expand...

As to Ted's "suggestion," I'm going to agree with him in the spirit of camaraderie and the fact that it makes sense.

User avatar
bschr682
UMEBA GM
Posts: 6226
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:24 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by bschr682 » Fri May 17, 2019 7:55 am

The idea of injecting even more talent into an already bloated system seems poor to me. Jim’s idea is interesting though...

User avatar
7teen
General Manager
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 7:59 am
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by 7teen » Fri May 17, 2019 9:31 am

I personally like the system and the plan and with what we've done before. Each team is protecting 19 players and players with less than 3 years of pro service time are protected. As Matt said in the podcast, teams are going to be able to protect nearly everyone on their 27-man roster. As a GM who has been through a few of these, I like taking the time strategizing who to keep and then maybe hoping someone takes that overpaid player I didn't protect in hopes of losing his contract. I've never ran an expansion team but think trying to scour all the other team's unprotected guys would be fun to start. Seems to me the guys that most teams potentially lose are those overpaid Vets they hope an expansion team nabs or those AAAA guys you hope to hold onto for depth but aren't regulars.

I personally do not like the idea of creating a whole new set of players. That's just me. No real reason, just doesn't sound right to me. Not a knock on the suggestion, just preference.
Chris Wilson

LB Surfers
FL Pac Champs: '95

Madison Wolves
JL MW Champs: '99 to 2009, '17, '20, '21
JL Wildcard: '12
JL Champs: '01, '04, '09, '12
FL Heartland Champs: '32
FL Wildcard: '31, ‘33
MBWBA Champs: '04, '09

Image

User avatar
Ted
General Manager
Posts: 4720
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by Ted » Fri May 17, 2019 11:30 am

7teen wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 9:31 am
I personally like the system and the plan and with what we've done before. Each team is protecting 19 players and players with less than 3 years of pro service time are protected. As Matt said in the podcast, teams are going to be able to protect nearly everyone on their 27-man roster. As a GM who has been through a few of these, I like taking the time strategizing who to keep and then maybe hoping someone takes that overpaid player I didn't protect in hopes of losing his contract. I've never ran an expansion team but think trying to scour all the other team's unprotected guys would be fun to start. Seems to me the guys that most teams potentially lose are those overpaid Vets they hope an expansion team nabs or those AAAA guys you hope to hold onto for depth but aren't regulars.

I personally do not like the idea of creating a whole new set of players. That's just me. No real reason, just doesn't sound right to me. Not a knock on the suggestion, just preference.
Okay, I said I wouldn't debate, but one of these statements is just wrong. 19 players with more than 3 years of pro service time is not "nearly everyone on your 27 man roster". If you protect ZERO upper level prospects, which for most people would be a pretty bad idea, this formula is 70% of your 27 man roster. That's not even close to "nearly everyone". If you protect a few guys in AA or AAA who are about to be ready, you're talking more like just over half of your 27 man roster.


The argument that being able to protect 19 players means you won't be losing anything of substance is just wrong. A good number of teams don't have "overpaid vets they hope an expansion team takes". For many people, the 17-20th players on their 27 man roster are actually decent players who contribute 2-3 wins.

And this argument SHOULD be wrong. In a traditional expansion draft, the new franchises SHOULD have access to decent players. If you're not going to allow that, then you may as well go with Jim suggestion of just letting them start from scratch and only get players from FA.

I'm not arguing that 19 is too many or two few. Just that if Matt did make this statement, it is factually not correct. If he didn't, then this interpretation of it is not. (I didn't listen to the podcast and am not going to. The subject matter is largely something I think is a really bad idea, and I'm sure I won't enjoy it. I'll wait for the details to be publish in a format that is easy to refer to.)

The only argument I've seen here that isn't basically a version of "This sounds different that what I'm used to and I'd prefer not to try something new even if it might be insanely better" is Jim's about the stats issue. From a historical perspective, I can understand that. I think it's worth just dealing with, obviously, but there's an argument to be made there.

I think the thing that's being lost is that this is a way to make these teams not suck. For reference however, the MLB protection list in the last expansion was 15 for the first round, and increased by 3 each round after that. So these teams will likely be terrible. I know we have a couple years until expansion, but look at the standings this year. Do we really need more 60 win teams? Wouldn't it be better to inject two teams into the league that can compete right away, and not further drag the competition level down? Wouldn't it be better to do so without harming existing franchises?
Ted Schmidt
California Crusaders (2021-present)
Image

User avatar
Ted
General Manager
Posts: 4720
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by Ted » Fri May 17, 2019 11:36 am

bschr682 wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 7:55 am
The idea of injecting even more talent into an already bloated system seems poor to me. Jim’s idea is interesting though...
So, we've discussed this before. But I think you aren't looking at it correctly. The talent pool IS bloated. But that is because everyone wanted bumper drafts and the game engine cant neuter all the players that come in through them. You get rid of ratings bloat by changing the PCMs, the modifiers that dictate how the incoming players look, and by having the feeder leagues make appropriate numbers of players (something that the GB is looking into). Adding players that are designed to create a. 500 team will not notably affect the talent pool in any way. And not adding players (.i.e a traditional expansion draft) will only "dilute" a bloated system for a year or three, and then the feeder leagues and PCMs with ramp the pool back up, because they are SET to make the league like it is now.
Ted Schmidt
California Crusaders (2021-present)
Image

User avatar
indiansfan
General Manager
Posts: 2428
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:39 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by indiansfan » Fri May 17, 2019 1:07 pm

I like the process that was announced. It adds an element of strategy for both the teams protecting players and the teams drafting. Plus we already have enough talent. I can think of 6-7 guys rotting in my minors or bench that should be starters. This gives them the shot
Kevin

Image
Calgary Pioneers 2004- Present
BBA Landis Champs 2018, 2021
FL Champs 2018, 2021
FL Pacific Champs: 2016, 2019, 2021, 2034
FL Wildcard 2018, 2026-29, 2031-32, 2035
FL Manager of the Year 2019, 2034

Email: khdickson5@gmail.com

User avatar
bschr682
UMEBA GM
Posts: 6226
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:24 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by bschr682 » Fri May 17, 2019 1:09 pm

Ted wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 11:36 am
bschr682 wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 7:55 am
The idea of injecting even more talent into an already bloated system seems poor to me. Jim’s idea is interesting though...
So, we've discussed this before. But I think you aren't looking at it correctly. The talent pool IS bloated. But that is because everyone wanted bumper drafts and the game engine cant neuter all the players that come in through them. You get rid of ratings bloat by changing the PCMs, the modifiers that dictate how the incoming players look, and by having the feeder leagues make appropriate numbers of players (something that the GB is looking into). Adding players that are designed to create a. 500 team will not notably affect the talent pool in any way. And not adding players (.i.e a traditional expansion draft) will only "dilute" a bloated system for a year or three, and then the feeder leagues and PCMs with ramp the pool back up, because they are SET to make the league like it is now.
Are you ok? The speed at which you flip the switch to let’s argue mode is not normal.

Honestly. Listen to the podcast, write down your concerns and hopefully potential solutions and let’s podcast it. This weekends weather is crap so I can’t take my motorcycle trip anyway.

User avatar
Ted
General Manager
Posts: 4720
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by Ted » Fri May 17, 2019 1:51 pm

bschr682 wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 1:09 pm
Ted wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 11:36 am
bschr682 wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 7:55 am
The idea of injecting even more talent into an already bloated system seems poor to me. Jim’s idea is interesting though...
So, we've discussed this before. But I think you aren't looking at it correctly. The talent pool IS bloated. But that is because everyone wanted bumper drafts and the game engine cant neuter all the players that come in through them. You get rid of ratings bloat by changing the PCMs, the modifiers that dictate how the incoming players look, and by having the feeder leagues make appropriate numbers of players (something that the GB is looking into). Adding players that are designed to create a. 500 team will not notably affect the talent pool in any way. And not adding players (.i.e a traditional expansion draft) will only "dilute" a bloated system for a year or three, and then the feeder leagues and PCMs with ramp the pool back up, because they are SET to make the league like it is now.
Are you ok? The speed at which you flip the switch to let’s argue mode is not normal.

Honestly. Listen to the podcast, write down your concerns and hopefully potential solutions and let’s podcast it. This weekends weather is crap so I can’t take my motorcycle trip anyway.
I'm good. I'm just argumentative by nature and can't help myself if it's a topic I care about. As I said, listening to the podcast is not interesting for me. While I appreciate the effort, all I want to know is the facts. To me, an entire podcast is just a sales pitch for a product I'm not interested in buying. The arguments for or against expansion are not different than the were when it was proposed a season ago. The only difference is that parity has continued to erode, as evidenced by the fact that three divisions were decided by July this year, and five are decided at the end of August.
Ted Schmidt
California Crusaders (2021-present)
Image

User avatar
usnspecialist
League Advisor
Posts: 2875
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 9:39 am
Location: Manama, Bahrain
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by usnspecialist » Fri May 17, 2019 1:56 pm

There is going to be a written explanation of everything coming shortly.
Randy Weigand
Havana Sugar Kings/San Fernando Bears: 2032-
453-357

Landis Champion- 2034
Johnson Champion- 2034
Frick Champion- 2036, 2037
Johnson League Southern- 2034
Frick League Pacific- 2037
Wild Card- 2033, 2035, 2036

Image

User avatar
ae37jr
General Manager
Posts: 1886
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 1:37 pm
Location: Davenport, FL
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 78 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by ae37jr » Fri May 17, 2019 2:04 pm

I'd be against filling expansion teams with newly made up players. I know it's a video game but it's real to me. Plus the struggle of losing players makes the good times better. This isn't supposed to be easy.
Alan Ehlers
GM of the Brooklyn Robins
Image

User avatar
Ted
General Manager
Posts: 4720
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by Ted » Fri May 17, 2019 2:15 pm

ae37jr wrote:
Fri May 17, 2019 2:04 pm
I'd be against filling expansion teams with newly made up players. I know it's a video game but it's real to me. Plus the struggle of losing players makes the good times better. This isn't supposed to be easy.
This has nothing to do with being easy. It has to do with the league not getting totally unbalanced. The previous two expansion teams are awful, and have made no measurable progress towards improving. We have a ton of teams currently on the downswing. In my opinion this is because there has over the past half decade been no draft pick priority advantage due to the overly deep drafts and massive scout find and IFA contributions. There have been MULTIPLE analyses done showing that we are currently in a low parity era.

All I'm saying is that perhaps thinking outside the box could make our league more competitive. You know what's easy? Adding two more chumps to beat up on that don't have a chance in hell of competing.

As far as "realism", sports history is riddled with absorbing 2-4 (even more at times) teams from failing leagues and adopting their players. It has happened literally dozens of times. This would be no different.
Ted Schmidt
California Crusaders (2021-present)
Image

User avatar
Ted
General Manager
Posts: 4720
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 2:50 pm
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by Ted » Fri May 17, 2019 3:12 pm

The other thing I'd add is that I care far less about losing players than some of the comments here seem to me to be concerned about. That's not the point. Losing a few players is annoying, but really of little impact after a couple seasons. (It is more annoying that it's completely unnecessary). The more important part is that this is a way to expand without changing the talent pool. You avoid two changes people would have to adapt to. 1)Dilution from expansion. 2) A more gradual adjustment as the dilution effect is erased by the game engine over time.
Ted Schmidt
California Crusaders (2021-present)
Image

User avatar
jiminyhopkins
General Manager
Posts: 1888
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: OH
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by jiminyhopkins » Fri May 17, 2019 5:04 pm

I like the idea of creating new players. I'm with Ted on this one. (did I just write that??)
Current GM, Phoenix Talons (2029-??), BBA
FORMER GM, Munchen Brauers (2024-28), EBA
FORMER GM, Washington Bobwhites (1999-2010), MBBA
Owner, Phoenix/Traverse City Talons (1995-2036), Global Baseball Consortium

User avatar
bschr682
UMEBA GM
Posts: 6226
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:24 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by bschr682 » Fri May 17, 2019 6:14 pm

While I think it’s a bad idea, if you are gonna go for it, go for it. Make them playoff teams and cause true chaos.

User avatar
recte44
Commissioner
Posts: 27082
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:14 pm
Location: Oconomowoc, WI
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 108 times
Contact:

Re: An Idea About Expansion

Post by recte44 » Fri May 17, 2019 7:14 pm

Ummmm.....
Matt Rectenwald
Commissioner, GM: Las Vegas Hustlers

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest