RFA Changes for 2017 POLL (Read 1,090 times)

[Yankees]

Ok so what if 7 vote no and 7 vote for change of some kind? Are the three change votes tallied to 7?

[Deleted]

Yes, leading changes will go to separate votes, with no change being a voting option again. After discussion, to determine specifics then we can put to a vote- no change needs to be an option throughout

[bwags]

Royals are indeed out if the country in Indonesia until 2/29. I do not know whether or not he has access to texts/ emails during this time. Scott has reached out to see how he wants to vote, guess we will have to see if we get a response.

[Deleted]

Looks like he was online at 0630 this am, so he has some access albeit limited

[toby]

I vote changes.....serious consideration for a max bidding period of 48 hrs on RFA (like ebay) and then owner of rights has 24 hours to match high bid....
KC Jim (Toby) from ROYALS.

[toby]

So i vote no repeated extensions on RFA every time a bid gets upped...48 max....same for UFA..BUT of course no match...just high bid in 48 hours wins it....
Got internet access in Jakarta now....its hot!!!

[Deleted]

with voting complete- no changes got 7 votes changes from major to minor, other got 7 votes. We will consider the following ..
1. 1 or 2 options each year, only exercised once on same player $15 or $25 for a one year extension plus versus vote of against options
2. Owner can start bidding on his player, but not raise to reset clock versus Against
3. Player can only start three RFA's at once versus against
4. RFA bidding for RFA's is 48 hours only Ebay style high bidder signs or owner can match

[Deleted]

I think the time change with no timer resets would be ok. 48 hours from first bid

[Deleted]

would likely only consider the rya bids this style for players rated in the top 25 for yahoo

to be clear all RFA'S BEING UFA'S, cap changes, tiered bidding died as major changes

[toby]

Agree with Nationals. And glad the other changes not made....

[Giants]

I'd propose the status quo for another year. I'm not a fan of any of the minor proposed changes. The 48 hour window is an interesting idea, but I think it would make it harder for weaker teams to improve.

[toby]

Wouldnt reduce the chances for weaker team....just shortens process...

[Giants]

I disagree. I think you'll see even more matches because teams will want to get their own RFA's locked up, so money won't be as spread out given the time frame. At least with the current system, the longer a player drags out, the more chance a lesser team has to land said player. Look at the Mets this offseason. The issue is money isn't getting spread out, causing the high prices and the low prices. I'm not sure how to reach a middle road at the moment with that.

[Deleted]

All changes will need 8 votes and other option will be a vote against

[lewjo]

The key problem with the "top bid within 48 hours" is not everyone in the league may have the ability to check in as often as others.

Our process may be slow now, but at least it gives everyone a chance, regardless of any constraints to their league access.

I also agree with Giants. If the 20 best players share the same 48 hour window (pretty much), and you only have 12 or so roster spots (and you have to leave room to sign your own RFA's), you cannot bid on as many players as you might be able to now.