Punishment & Competition Suggestion Thread

[Nationals GM (Preston - Old)]

It has recently come up that sometimes punishing teams out of contention by benching their entire lineup on CBS is not actually a detriment to them and can actually hurt other teams (for the entire statement on the Twins' violation of the salary cap, go here: pbfantasybaseball.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=newsfromthecommissionersoffice&action=display&thread=4395&page=1 ).

So instead, I'm creating this thread to try to gauge what others think would be a proper penalty in a case like this to appropriately punish teams that violate the rules, while also not hurting other teams (for example, teams get an advantage by playing teams penalized).

At the same time, there is concern about the competition in the league. For example, many teams at the top have close to ten starting pitchers recording stats while others have none (and likewise goes with hitters). So what do we do? Do we change the requirements of max/min major leaguers/minor leaguers to ensure teams still compete?

Right now, teams that fail to reach 30 IP 1/5th or more of the season are ineligible for the lottery. Is that enough? Also, do we need to add at-bat requirements?

Used this thread to discuss these questions and concerns. Your feedback is very much appreciated.

[Rangers GM (Victor)]

Well, letting them not receive stats this late in the season isnt punishment at all because like I said in cbox, its only punishing others, not him. I didnt know about the 30IP 1/5 of season rule, it doesnt affect me so never looked into it, but I think that is fair. I also agree with the minimum ABs requirements. I think i lost some hitting categories because some teams barely got 50ABs in a week. I dont think it is as important but when these last few weeks come down to maybe ONE game it does matter. I think having at least a 80AB limit wouldnt be too much to ask.. i think on avg most teams avg about 115 ABs per week and probably more. I really hope that the Twins accure stats this week, though I dont think they would win, but I would like to know if they would because it really affects this playoff race. I think if they violate both on consistent basis it should be grounds to replace.

On a side note, your link above doesnt exist.

[Royals GM (Mac - Retired)]

i think that punishments should start off with hits to the salary cap. or taking away draft picks. i agree with the rangers on the idea that giving a team zero stats can actually hurt others.

[Harris]

I think each situation should be taken on a case by case basis. In this case, I think it's different because the Twins easily could have gone $30M over cap by claiming the number of players they did. I don't even know what he was trying to argue after the players were claimed on him, but he did not own up to his mistake and I think for that the punishment should be greater.

I would suggest dropping Carlos Quentin from his team and making him pay the 50% penalty per year unless he is signed for higher than half the AAS.

[Royals GM (Mac - Retired)]

haha you just want to pick him up for the playoffs

[Harris]

I have no cap space...

[Deleted]

Aug 17, 2011 19:27:35 GMT -8 Royals GM (Mac - Retired) said:

i think that punishments should start off with hits to the salary cap. or taking away draft picks. i agree with the rangers on the idea that giving a team zero stats can actually hurt others.

If thats the case then teams could do the opposite. Id consider claiming a bunch of players if I was in contention, go over cap, and sacrifice the picks. I mean who cares if I lose a pick if I can increase my chances to win just by going over cap. Kind of a catch 22

[Royals GM (Mac - Retired)]

good point eric, but if someone blatantly does that and im sure that preston could tell, then the GM would be inline to receive not only loss of draft picks but also cap hits combined. i don't think there is any team in the league who would want to lose one or two draft picks and a percent of their salary cap for the next season ( just for example...a 3% hit off the books before the next season even starts and the loss of one or two draft picks)

we should establish harsh penalty system that the league follows. and if a GM violates multiple rules from the penalty structure, the GM recieves multiple penalties. no breaks for anyone.

[brosin]

I think you should consider invalidating moves that would've put them over the cap if it didn't happen a long time ago and the owner still has those players.

An owner should at the very least have to get under the cap, say X amount of hours / days after a move or it should have to be an invalid move, correct?

[Rays GM (Donavan)]

I agree, a transaction that puts a team over cap, should be void.
A team currently over cap should have to drop players and incur half or the remaining contracts, until they are on or below cap.

Also agree with the point regarding not meeting minimum IP counts in a full week-
1st occurence - Warning
2nd occurence - Draft Pick loss
3rd occurence - Salary Cap reduction for the next 2 seasons
4th occurence - Find a new owner

To make the team more actative to a new owner drafts picks and salary cap losses would be not be held against a new owner.

[Nationals GM (Preston - Old)]

I like the suggested ideas about draft picks, salary cap reduction, and finding new ownership, as Donavan highlighted and simplified. The problem with voiding transactions is that there can sometimes be a domino effect that is impossible to re-do. For example, in restricted free agent bidding, where a team can only target/win a certain amount of players that require priority lists, changing things after the fact can be very altering to many teams. In this situation too, it's hard to void the Brewers' use of option two because it appears that regardless he would have given the players away and has since made moves of his own. Anybody have any other ideas that doesn't involve voiding? Just a logistical nightmare for the CO too, especially in offseason bidding.

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

simple, don't make it complicated...

If some intentially benchs their team, and everyone sees and knows it...

You boot the owner and get another one...if you want to warn them, tell them they have one week to fix it......that kind of crap destroys a league and sends owners packing if it happens just once.

thats the only way it doesn't happen, harsh but swift. This is why the rule book is a nightmare to navigate....it could be condensed down to 1/8th of what it is...but I didn't read the rules so what do I know.

Unless this is too old of topic and works perfectly already.