Post by Marlins GM (JoeyTTU01) on Nov 5, 2013 15:31:39 GMT -6
If you would like to post an application for one of our potentially available teams, please post in this forum.
Information we will want is below .... Name (At least First) AIM/YIM/MSN/Email Fantasy Experience? Dynasty Experience? Contract League Experience? Teams you prefer in order (if none are listed below, you don't have to list a team you want as none are available at that time) They would then be offered to the GM on the waiting list 1st. You also don't have to take a team offered, as you can continue to wait on a team you want.
Can I suggest that we have existing GMs "adopt" the open teams at least in the short term? The Angels are in pretty rough shape, the White Sox have an ok prospect list but incomplete roster, the Rangers have a lot of holes, and the Orioles don't have a prospect list but have a pretty good major league roster. I'm concerned about being able to find GMs as we've seen a few check in and then get turned off by how much work will go into rebuilding and record keeping with these 4. Ideally it would be a temporary situation until a dedicated GM can be found. Collusion safeguards could be put into place, like no GM can trade with himself or make waiver claims between his 2 teams.
As the Angels are in terrible shape I would offer to take it on if allowed. My primary motivation is that the NL East is a beast with active owners while the AL has 4 open teams so it's out of whack. What do you think?
Post by Marlins GM (JoeyTTU01) on Mar 9, 2014 8:33:59 GMT -6
Not sure I am really open to this idea but I could be in the minority.
I would be okay with trying to fill out their rosters by finding guys in their minors but not really sure I am okay with allowing anyone to make trades/waivers move for them who is not their permanent GM.
I think we would be better off just trying to get the teams overall pages in better shape so a potential new GM would know where to even start from in regards to his roster and prospects.
We had a good GM for the Angels but he didn't like some things in the other league and quit there and here which was unfortunate b/c that Angels team is not awful and could have done some damage in free agency had he stuck around.
For what it is worth, as a newbie I agree with the Mets idea on some level.
I was about 10 hours deep of message board back and forth; trying to find who was on what team when I just about pulled the plug on this thing. I know the other recruit the Mets found backed off because of the same issue.
Last Edit: Mar 10, 2014 10:58:05 GMT -6 by Cubs GM
I think getting the best daily roster out on the pitch, from what they have.
This would include promotions from their minor system, but NOT waiver claims, trades and FA bidding (due to potential conflict of interest)
To me the issue with allowing waiver claims or fa bidding is not conflict of interest as much as potentially giving a future GM a player/contract they do not want. Its just not something I think we should do but combing their minors and trying to fill out at least a competitive roster couldn't hurt for sure while also maybe getting their minors in better order and what not so a potential new GM isnt trying to figure it all out on the fly.
Making sure the roster was active and cleaning up the prospect/transactions records was my original intent. While there are very few active MLB free agents available right now (Jon Rauch? Sean Rodriguez?) I suppose you wouldn't want to set that precedent. If the Mariners want to tackle the Angels, I can help out somewhere else.
Yeah I'll take on the Angels, make sure they have the best team it can field on Fantrax daily, plus clean up the minors and old roster move as well.
When I came here in May 2011, the former Yankees GM was doing that for the Phillies. He was setting the daily lineups and checking old trade records for potential owned players. He had seen that the Phillies had acquired prospect Justin Smoak from the Rangers in 2009 and had just done a callup on him right before I arrived. He also called up C Lou Marson who I just non-tendered. lol. I guess one for two isn't bad.
2010: 109-136-19 .449 (4th NL East)(previous GM)
2011: 106-125-21 .462 (3rd NL East)(took over team May 2011)
2012: 107-125-20 .464 (5th NL East)
2013: 125-121-30 .507 (3rd NL East)
2014: 162-101-13 .611 (WON NL EAST - WON NL)
YankeesGM-ElGuapo: What about just raising the FYP Draft to 5 rounds? That seems easily handled and wouldn't cause much fuss... not much research; not much alteration in the league format.
Feb 28, 2015 4:12:22 GMT -6
metsgm: Hot stove action!
Feb 28, 2015 8:41:54 GMT -6
Braves GM (rock30): I just have no interest in anything more than 3.
Feb 28, 2015 9:38:39 GMT -6
Marlins GM (JoeyTTU01): I don't see us going past 3 rds for the FYPD that is plenty if you want more picks make some trades for them.
Feb 28, 2015 10:44:06 GMT -6
drewfullcws: No reason to have a longer DD than one round - the padres/pirates can only draft so many players in any given year. However, I'd enjoy further attention paid to the minors and a longer FYP draft, especially if we (throwing it out there) broaden it
Feb 28, 2015 12:22:47 GMT -6
drewfullcws: to include international players
Feb 28, 2015 12:22:52 GMT -6
Marlins GM (JoeyTTU01): discussion is fine but many of us have done this for awhile (me since 2005) and I don't see many changes esp to how we do the FYPD happening. Doesn't mean it can't but I don't see it happening.
Feb 28, 2015 12:43:06 GMT -6
GM Phillies: White Sox have pick #2 in each round of the FYPD this year.
Feb 28, 2015 13:07:50 GMT -6
Marlins GM (JoeyTTU01): Being able to trade for FYPD is also unique and not something all leagues allow teams to do you could trade players or spec(s) to acq more picks in a 3 rd draft. I once traded most of a draft which I regret doing.
Feb 28, 2015 13:08:08 GMT -6
GM Phillies: Not sure everyone noticed but the list is already up giving the order. Thanks to Braves for making it.
Feb 28, 2015 13:09:35 GMT -6
rangersgm: thanks Braves
Mar 2, 2015 20:06:32 GMT -6
Braves GM (rock30): Everyone is not welcome except for the TAB and Rangers. That said, Brewers definitely smoking some bad weed giving up that much for Betts. I like Betts but he's not worth that much to me. I'm betting Brewers bets he likes Betts way too much.
Mar 2, 2015 23:28:53 GMT -6
marinersgm: Yeah I'm going to need to look at this in detail a bit more this afternoon before voting, it does seem like a lot but Betts was very consistent at every level in the minors
Mar 3, 2015 8:50:06 GMT -6
Reds (Phil): Just for the record I did have another offer on the table that was offering nearly as much. Maybe more depending on how much you value the players involved.
Mar 3, 2015 9:43:35 GMT -6
rushmore (LAA): i actually don't mind the trade for brewers
Mar 3, 2015 10:37:35 GMT -6