|
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Jan 22, 2014 15:17:22 GMT -6
Foreign Policy:
The FYPD is only for High School and College kids who sign with their team on signing day. Foreign players WILL NOT be put into the FYPD.
The Contraction Draft is and will remain for only the teams no longer in the league, which would include any MLers or MiLers (including foreign players) not yet drafted or not passed the free agent mark.
In regards to foreign players, the only ones who will be Free Agents are those who sign a MAJOR LEAGUE CONTRACT. Meaning this will include those from Japan, Cuba, DR, Venezuela, Korea or any other country if they agree to a major league contract. If they sign a MINOR LEAGUE CONTRACT they will be the property of the team that signed them in real life just as any undrafted FYPD goes to the team that they signed with in real life.
Old Rule:
All players from Japan and Cuba were made free agents regardless of experience/age or even type of contract signed.
|
|
|
Post by morf1980 (Rays GM) on Feb 18, 2017 20:44:43 GMT -6
Has the league ever discussed having an international free agent signing period?
My thinking:
Teams can bid on any players that were signed as IFAs that season. All contracts are for 3 years and the 3 years don't start until the player passes rookie status. But the contract is good to own the players rights for 7 years. So if a player is won they count against the teams cap for the amount of the winning bid and are signed to a 7 year deal. When they pass rookie status they change to a 3 year deal at that amount. The length and risk should make teams think about their bids closely.
We could also institute a limit of say 6-8 mill per year per team, but then not sure how we would break ties, so pry better to just do it like free agency. I also think we should make the minimum bid be 2mill. That will make it so only the very best guys get interest. Then all the others will just default as usual to the teams that signed them in real life.
I propose this rule because it is a significant amount of talent coming to baseball this way and we just let the real teams dictate it which isn't fair since not all of the real MLB teams spend and act the same way in the international market.
|
|
|
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Feb 18, 2017 20:58:51 GMT -6
Its very hard to have a complete list of IFA signed each year its hard enough sometimes figuring out who signed ML Deals Vs MiL Deals as it is sometimes.
I would not be for this proposal personally. I would do a International Draft before this and I am not in favor of that either right now.
|
|
|
Post by morf1980 (Rays GM) on Feb 18, 2017 21:54:00 GMT -6
I'm saying don't worry about major league deals versus minor league deals. All in. It's really simple to pull up the list of MLB international signings by team and list of the top 50 international prospects.
If you had a minimum offer of 2 mill and it counted against your cap for 7 years I'm guessing there would actually be few bids. Only the top international guys. The whole thing could take like a week.
But why is it fair that just because someone has the right team name they get extra talent pumped in? Again, not all real teams spend evenly. Seems like an unfair advantage.
|
|
|
Post by Giants on Feb 18, 2017 22:53:52 GMT -6
With the CBA raising the IFA age to 25 years and 6 years of experience, the old CBA was 23 and 5...so if a guy is under 25 then they are eligible for whatever system you want to have in place here. If they are older they'd go into the standard Free Agent pool.
However, the CBA is also making the penalties pretty steep for bypassing the hard cap now instead of it just being a monetary penalty, so the Astros (which impacts everyone), Braves and Padres are screwed for the next two years because their real life teams are being punished because the new CBA is retroactive in regards to the penalties. A one round International bonus pool draft where in order to participate the owner would give up their lowest round pick in the FYPD that is available to them. Then anyone not chosen would be property of the team who signed them in real life would strike the balance between fair and simple, but I'm just theorizing.
I'm not really thinking about it from a balancing standpoint, because the teams that benefit now appear to be cyclical now with the changes to the CBA. It would just be fun to add a new thing to research and prepare for in the offseason. I don't know maybe some people are at their limits for participation and this wouldn't work but it might be worth considering.
|
|
|
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Feb 19, 2017 8:21:58 GMT -6
I am sure some teams do not like the FYPD but does that mean we should scrap it altogether or drastically change it too? This IFA Rule is barely 3-yrs old.
All teams for the most part spend internationally. Would this have been brought up if Padres hadn't gone nuts this year? I highly doubt it to be honest but at the same time SD is getting a little screwed here seeing as in RL they are likely getting a Top 5 FYPD pick and here likely a back-end pick.
Part of why we changed the rule was to keep from paying KIDS millions of dollars to toil in the minors.
Top International Prospects for TB according to Sickels
#9 Jesus Sanchez -- signed out of DR 2014 #15 Adrian Rondon -- signed out of DR 2014 #19 Genesis Cabrera -- signed out of DR 2013
I would do a International Draft before this and I am not in favor of that either right now we have enough issues getting teams to pick timely as it is sometimes in FYPD and DD.
|
|
|
Post by morf1980 (Rays GM) on Feb 19, 2017 9:41:38 GMT -6
I wasn't actually concerned with this years class at all really. In fact, I would think 95% of the guys would default to the team that signed them IRL. I was thinking more the top 20-30 guys overall that would even get interest at 2mill per year.
Take a guy like Maitan that signed with ATL. Was the top IFA this year. Probably better than any SS available in the draft and our league just lets an external source determine where that talent goes as if it's a throw in.
I wouldn't be in favor of a draft. I agree with all your concerns there. I'd like to mimic real life as much as possible and have a 1week FA period for international guys. 2mill minimum bid for 7 years of rights (3 yrs once they reach past rookie status). Everyone gets a chance at the top IFAs and teams can decide how to prioritize those players versus draft picks to build their teams. Some teams may bid heavy on these guys and others may decide they're not worth it. Again, I think with the minimum bid you will limit this to only the top guys each year that teams will bid after. But I think it would become a key building component.
|
|
|
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Feb 19, 2017 9:47:57 GMT -6
You trade enough if you like a IFA enough acq him. Not that hard you do it enough, right.
Sorry I remain against this idea but I am 1 of 28 so.
|
|
|
Post by morf1980 (Rays GM) on Feb 19, 2017 14:53:44 GMT -6
Yeah. I'm not too worried about my team. TB spends a little every few years on IFAs. Some teams never do. And then teams like NYY, LAD, BOS spend everything they can and more lol. Just thought it'd be fun to have those guys available for all to fight over 😊 I still would anticipate with my proposal that very few except the very best international prospects would get any bids.
Anyway, just a suggestion to add an element of realism and control to running your team. Last I'll say on it. Obviously Joey is a "no" and no one else has chimed in so if it's not supported then so be it!
But thanks for the discussion
|
|
|
Post by Braves GM (Isaiah) on Feb 19, 2017 18:44:01 GMT -6
I'm against it as well. Researching 16 year old international players doesn't sound fun to me. Granted, I have maitan now, but I personally wouldn't like a FA period for it.
|
|
|
Post by PadresGM on Feb 20, 2017 0:04:58 GMT -6
I don't really like the idea of bidding on IFA like they're free agents given how little information we have on them. If we were to do anything with them, i would prefer to have them in the FYPD. I do think this would also only limit the number of IFA's that would get moved, but also without burdening a team with unused cap for multiple years
|
|
|
Post by White Sox GM (Jon) on Feb 20, 2017 12:48:01 GMT -6
I'm not sure how I feel about IFA's. It sucks that guys like Maitan get auto-assigned to whatever team signs them IRL, considering some organizations have made this a priority IRL gives those teams a bit of an advantage. But it's not a huge issue since these guys are 16 year old signings and most aren't going to work out, so it isn't gonna make or break a franchise.
One option to consider might be to make international signings available in the draft as well, so that first year players and the previous periods international signings are both available for drafting in the FYPD. But I don't really see an issue with how it runs currently either.
|
|
|
Post by morf1980 (Rays GM) on Feb 20, 2017 13:06:10 GMT -6
I don't really like the idea of bidding on IFA like they're free agents given how little information we have on them. If we were to do anything with them, i would prefer to have them in the FYPD. I do think this would also only limit the number of IFA's that would get moved, but also without burdening a team with unused cap for multiple years What about a points system? Like each team gets 50 points to spend every 5 years? You can blow all 50 on one guy to add him to the system or you can spread it out. Minimum bid is 5 points on any given player-meaning the most a team can sign is 10 guys over 5 years. No need to track years, contracts, rights, etc then since you'd just own the player. But gives teams the ability to control this market. A tie would default to the team with the worse record the previous year (in the case multiple teams bid all their points on the same guy).
|
|
|
Post by stevew (MARLINS GM) on Feb 20, 2017 19:39:12 GMT -6
I think the easiest would be to add them to the FYPD. I'm torn on the issue as it is a little fun to get a random bonus of signing a Maitan by ur club IRL but understand the frustration if ur club doesn't really do anything in the international market. But don't worry about Maitan guys, Braves will mess it up somehow or Angels with overpay for him in trade...
|
|
|
Post by morf1980 (Rays GM) on Feb 20, 2017 20:21:49 GMT -6
Lol. I'm not worried about Maitan or any specific player or team. The whole thing was about adding a touch more realism involving the big names in IFA each year. Not much scouting needed or worrying about comparing them to FYPD guys, etc. was just thinking it might be cool if teams somehow bid on those guys to add depth at positions of need.
I actually would oppose them being added to the draft. I don't want to scout a hundred IFAs to decide if I want to draft them. Just thought it might be fun if teams could bid it out for the top 10-15 guys each year.
|
|