Loop Pole (Read 514 times)

[pgunz3]

I just was notified of pretty bad loop pole. this league has, which should be addressed and not ignored.

Basically why is this salary cap league? if a guy like Ortiz($36) can be waived and the team that originally signed him, well get of the hook then owes him nothing,makes no sense.That has to be changed, it totally defeats the purpose of salary cap league and will cause shady deals.Just make it an auction league then.

In real MLB, if a player was to get cut example Gary Sheffield, Tigers payed him i think 9 mill even though the mets had sign him for i think 1 mil, over here your off the hook if is waived and unclaimed.Which will happen cause no one will sign a guy for $36 thats in down hill.

I am not saying pay the whole amount,but at least maybe half the contract for the remaining years.


I been in leagues were this was abused and exploited.

There has to be some responsibility for signing a player to bad contract. I really hope the league, just doesn't turn it's shoulder to this.It should really be discussed.

[Deleted]

Players decline all the time, players may not be worth th deal they were signed for. Take the Matt Cain contract for example..he isn't worth $32 but this is what he was bid in hopes it would be too much for the owner to sign him..Owner matches and becomes cash strapped down the road..

The player could be waived and claimed within the first 48hrs, after 48 hours he is free to be bid on, but the money does not return to the contract owner unless the player is bid on...

Works both way teams might want to see a team stuck with the contract and not bid ala Ortiz, too force the owner to be stuck with the contract

Also 2-3 teams drop out each year, to not saddle a new owner with horrible deals, they can waive guys with big contracts and recoup the cash if the players are bid on, they are not allowed to require the player the have waived


Goods pints all around and rules have been changed here multiple times

[pgunz3]

And what if player, was traded to another team then cut from there in agreement ,that the original team would bid on him,not shady move?

Well if they bid on Cain,i guess they went off on upside and talent at that moment (understandable). on that argument, it should an auction league cause theres no use for salary cap.Yes players get old, but why would someone bid $ on old player.I think the owners should be responsible for their actions before bidding and building their teams and make sure it's the right move for them.

I can understand why 2-3 teams drop out ever year now. again i am not saying the owner should pay the whole contract,but at least half for sure

[Deleted]

These types of things have never really become a problem. Every gets along and "shady" things don't usually happen in a free league, best part about playing in it

[pgunz3]

Thats not true,i been free leagues where it happens.It happens more in free league then in pay leagues.

[johnnybravo]

While it seems there is no punishment for signing a bad contract, I think you'll find during the season that there is a drag on the system. Some schmo will sign a Brian Moehler or a Dave Bush to a contract, cause ya know, he needed an arm attached to a corpse. Then he'll discover that the corpse can't pitch worth a damn, cause ya know, he sucks; and he'll be stuck with said sorry contract (thankfully only a $1). Even if he gets one of his trading partners (we'll use the Rangers here cause he'll bid for corpses) to bid on the corpse, he's now stuck with the $1 body bag. It aint much but somebody is carrying the $$ even if it's only a buck. I will defend the owner losses as having mostly occurred bc this league is daily, highly competitive, and active. Most of our recent losses have been bc said owner didn't have time, not bc of motivational or conflict issues (the new A's/Rangers rivalry notwithstanding. After a year, we might be able to only tolerate one of them and have to run the other off, but that's for another time)

[bosox]

i think if we ever can get 14 solid owners and we stay together for more than 1 year certain changes like this one make sense and might work.

until then losing 1 or 2 guys every year means finding new owners would be even tougher than it already is with contracts handicapping improvement.

not everyone can pawn off overated overpriced players to the astros.

[cubsgm]

I really don't think it is a Loop Hole being that all owners have been aware of this. ( Newer owners may have not.)
I think there is not a whole lot of Rfa turn over inless you trade so being held to a contract would mean even less chance for someone to improve their team.
Again you are loosing that player, and in most cases the player is a good player, but overpaid in order to keep or get him in Rfa. the chance of getting a better player after Rfa is very low.

[pgunz3]

Not if he plans to release him them,then welcome cap space.sucks cause i know the new owner did not know.Reyes/Zambrano $90 or he could have trade over priced player to sign him later on when released.

[lewjo]

As Rangers indicated, some of the reasons players in this league have incredibly high salaries is the bidding frenzy that happens once a year.

Numerous teams want Matt Cain - and the owner of his RFA rights either did not have the cap room, or had overextended himself on other offers to be able to afford the current bid - and either has to trade his RFA rights for whatever he can - or make other trades to free up the cap space.

This is what makes the league so complex - and I believe the reason some do not stay.

If Indians were to waive Matt Cain (on Jan 22 or later), everyone would have 48 hours to place a waiver claim on him.

If noone did, everyone, except the Indians (the team who waived him) would be able to bid on Cain as a unrestricted free agent.

This access to players by all teams (except the current owner) prevents shady deals from occurring, and allows teams desperate for players a chance to get some.

You are right, the waiving team, once someone else bids on Cain, would remove Cain's entire old salary from his cap - but he would not get anything else for him.

For all new owners, note that some trades can involve bidding on a waived player, or owners may agree to bid on each other's waived players.

I agree that is a loop hole (loop pole) of sorts, but I wouldn't call it shady or a major defect.

After all, if someone bid up to $30 has a major injury and is waived, it allows other teams that are short on players to stock up for next season.

[bosox]

you cannot bid on a player you have waived.

if say reyes gets waived to save the 60 bucks then unless he can work out a trade later on he cannot get reyes back.

that is the risk taken when you waive a good player,odds are someone else gets him much cheaper and improves while you get weaker and hope the cash saved gets you something else.

sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't but either way the waived guy is lost.

[pgunz3]

Not if he is trade 1st to another team, so he is not lost. The other team wins-loses the cap,the other team wins-they get their original player back at lower cost-no cap hit for either.why call it salary cap league?

[johnnybravo]

somewhat speaking out of turn here as I'm commenting on another owner's $60 contract (tampering anybody?) but here goes. Reyes at 60 offers a prime example of what has happened in the past as Angels described. When Reyes was signed at $60 as an RFA, it was sign him or lose him. He was signed and worth it to that owner (now no longer with us due to participation limitations). Now, Phils has the unenviable decision of keep him (tough to say he's worth 60 with a bad hammy), cut him outright (that sucks, cause when healthy, he's worth considerable steals and decent peripherals) or find some poor sap other than the Astros with the room to accommodate 60. He can expect to receive little in return since the other owner is taking on 60 of cap. With those three scenarios, the punishment to Phils if he cuts him is no more Reyes and no bidding on FA Reyes. The benefit is obvious, 60 in cap room to apply to another player. Just like the real life Alex Rios, CHW got the whole contract, TOR got cap space for nothing. If Phils tries to reacquire Reyes in the future via trade, speaking to some of your concern, he damn sure wont get the new and improved $20 Reyes for a song, it'll take some talent, so there is some fairness. In the end, the greater issue, collusion, to date has not been a problem in this league. If it were, I think the senior players would either run off the colluders (my word) or simply fold up and go home. I think while it seems slightly unseemly on the surface, I think after a year of seeing it practice you'll find its not as a bad as you think. Kinda like having a slightly overweight girl that likes to sunbath nude living next door. It really aint right, but in the end, its tolerable.

[bosox]

just becuase a player was dealt to another team and gets waived it does not mean you get him back at all.

say cain is dealt and waived and indians tries to bid and get him back.

nothing says he will be high bidder as he could easily get beat out by any of the other 12 possible teams.

any bidding is a crapshoot with risk.

[pgunz3]

I wish some of the new owners would speak up.