|
|
Post by Oakland Athletics on Oct 6, 2023 23:06:17 GMT
I agree with that, would also like to re vote on the long term/offseason IL. My team alone has 3 guys who would be eligible, and I’m sure there’s plenty of teams with at least 1 or 2 guys who will be out for some or most of 2024. To add to this, I think it should be ONLY for guys who are confirmed to have some major surgery that was performed this year/during the offseason or other issues (Franco, Urias). This should NOT be used for guys who have minor surgery or general ailments through the offseason/Spring Training. Sandy Alcantara out all next year for me with tommy John. Perfect example |
|
|
|
Post by Kansas City Royals on Oct 7, 2023 14:55:28 GMT
I have 2 arb suggestions. MLBTraderumors has released their arb projections. So I think we should do one of two things.
1. Just use them as the arb figures for 2024. Everyone would know up front what a player's salary was and in plenty of time for free agency.
2. Use them as placeholder figures. If a player's arb status gets settled before free agency, then we input his actual deal. But we use the trade rumors numbers for everyone whose case hasn't been settled by then. Obviously, if they sign a multi-year deal, we'd input the real numbers for 25 on, but I just think this could save a lot of headaches for everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakland Athletics on Oct 7, 2023 16:37:32 GMT
I have 2 arb suggestions. MLBTraderumors has released their arb projections. So I think we should do one of two things. 1. Just use them as the arb figures for 2024. Everyone would know up front what a player's salary was and in plenty of time for free agency. 2. Use them as placeholder figures. If a player's arb status gets settled before free agency, then we input his actual deal. But we use the trade rumors numbers for everyone whose case hasn't been settled by then. Obviously, if they sign a multi-year deal, we'd input the real numbers for 25 on, but I just think this could save a lot of headaches for everyone. I'm a fan of #2 Soto is projected to make 33m and Kyle tucker a lot too. Having them in there as placeholders would make it alot easier to get in the budget ballpark and plan. Also will prevent people from spending millions of dollars they don't have in our free agency As another suggestion. I think there should be some type of penalty for people that aren't roster/budget compliant by the day they're supposed to be. A few owners were basically MIA for all of free agency and weren't compliant while the rest of us are cutting players, trading players we want to keep, etc... Putting time in... Lose a pick, cap penalty, etc... something. |
|
|
|
Post by Los Angeles Dodgers on Oct 7, 2023 22:38:17 GMT
I like option #2 and oak idea
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2023 14:42:20 GMT
We will go with option 2. We will keep an eye on it. If you know your player signed a deal, you can let us know and we'll fix it. But yes, we definitely do not want to keep it blank for all of free agency. I'll update the spreadsheet now.
|
|
