Suggestions

Forum >> Suggestions >> Idea About Waiver Claims  

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function
#51656	07/27/2017 8:19:05 pm		Ignore
wickersty Joined: 05/11/2017 Posts: 1002 Deadwood Perambulators II.1	First, a caveat. I have not fully thought this out, and I know it's more complicated than I'm describing. And also, it may just be a bad idea. But here goes: We know some of us have long stretches of not winning any waiver claims. Furthermore, my team is a dreadful LL6, and I absolutely hate it when I lose out on 60+, 80+ claim players to a LL1 mega-powerhouse team. It just doesn't seem fair. What if there was some kind of system where the game tracked how many "claims" got placed on players that you cut, and that sort of had an effect on increasing your odds of winning your next claim. Especially since we don't have trades in BB. Every time I cut someone who still has some playing time and performance left in their career, but I can no longer afford them, and I watch 20 or 30 claims (or more) be put on him, I can't help but think it sucks that I'm releasing players into the system that have value but getting nothing in return. With this idea, I'm sort of building waiver credit by releasing players of value into the system that will increase my odds of winning future waiver claims. I know it's a rough outline of an idea, but does anyone think there might be something to this idea? Jeff
#51659	07/27/2017 8:32:34 pm		Ignore
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9603 Haverhill Halflings III.1	There have been quite a few ideas posted in the past, including priorities claims where a team can pick a claim to get extra tries against. In general I am against any idea that rewards you for cutting a player. Cutting players is a natural mechanic to improve your team already. Doesn't seem like there should be extra rewards for doing it. Plus teams that get extra lucky with drafts/waivers would be the ones who benefited the most from a reward (since their cuts would draw the most interest). This cancels out the leveling mechanic of roster limits. Currently roster limits help to level the playing field by forcing extremely lucky teams to choose some players to release which gives unlucky teams a chance to acquire some decent second hand talent. If you reward lucky teams for cutting their excess talent, then you have essentially eliminated that balancing mechanic from the game. And making it harder for the weaker teams since they would be losing out on these same rewards since they don't have good players to release. Any idea based on rewarding cuts would really create imbalance in the game. Updated Thursday, July 27 2017 @ 8:35:41 pm PDT
#51662	07/27/2017 10:34:58 pm		Ignore
Alyksandur Joined: 07/19/2017 Posts: 228 Boca Raton Gryphons II.2	Legends and II teams already cut players (who will get dozens of claims) because, frankly, they already have better players. This idea would really only serve to give them a better chance to win a high-claim waiver player later, exactly the opposite of what you're trying to accomplish.
#51669	07/28/2017 6:56:48 am		Ignore
wickersty Joined: 05/11/2017 Posts: 1002 Deadwood Perambulators II.1	I see what you guys are saying, and you're right. I'm just trying to brainstorm something that works. It hurts watching a legend nab the high claim player you've been hoping for as a VI team. Would seem that the worse teams should have elevated chances/higher choice priority than the great teams, for competitive balance and fairness. I'm not whining. Just thinking of ways that things could be tweaked or improved.
#51670	07/28/2017 7:00:31 am		Ignore
brentswagger Joined: 03/22/2016 Posts: 265 Lakeville Bears IV.2	It is what it is. I haven't claimed a single player this year (well, I did on accident, I put in a claim I forgot to clear out and got him and dropped him). I think the random way is the fair way. I think giving lower level teams a better chance can also be dangerous because they may be claiming salaries their attendance can't support.
#51681	07/28/2017 10:23:39 am		Ignore
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	If you think it hurts in LL VI, try being in the same league as those mega-powerhouses, and watch them win those claims you had a claim on as well while you win claims on guys who put up ERAs over 5.00 for you and put up terrible peripherals as well.
#51688	07/28/2017 1:22:34 pm		Ignore
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9603 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Yeah, the envy doesn't really go away just because you raise in league level
#51775	07/31/2017 3:30:19 pm		Ignore
Squiddcatt Joined: 02/25/2016 Posts: 375 Inactive	-1 to original idea
#51778	07/31/2017 4:00:34 pm		Ignore
wickersty Joined: 05/11/2017 Posts: 1002 Deadwood Perambulators II.1	-1 to snide comment
#51799	08/01/2017 1:43:40 pm		Ignore
Squiddcatt Joined: 02/25/2016 Posts: 375 Inactive	Normal people say +1 so is -1 against the law or something?
#51949	08/05/2017 7:24:20 pm		Ignore
itsjustmath Joined: 09/20/2013 Posts: 34 Plymouth Pilgrims IV.4	I often thought about there being a draft pick compensation based on the quality of player that was lost and losing a pick based on the quality of a player signed. Since you can't trade away players.
#59396	06/17/2018 6:02:16 am	Jul 2nd, 2036	Ignore
tamale Joined: 02/19/2018 Posts: 357 Concord Jets Legends	Sorry to bump an old discussion, but I just came across this thread and really like the idea. At the risk of making things too complicated, for something like this to work, I think you'd also need to have that winning waiver claims would reduce your chances of winning claims in the future. The waiver wire would then act a bit like trading, where the value traded is determined by the number of claims. This season it looks like my team will finish 6th. Ideally, I'd like to see some mechanism where I could move some current assets for future value. For example, a good bullpen arm like Stewart might be more valuable to someone else, but there's almost no incentive for me to cut him. I don't think the extra money, playing time or roster space is strong enough, as I've got a lot of other worse players with minimal value that I'll get rid of first if needed. I don't mind the system as it is, but I think that this idea would be more fun because it would allow more aggressive roster building. But you'd also have to think carefully about who to target, rather than just slapping claims on anyone decent. Contending teams might also release more prospects than we see on waivers now, which rebuilding teams could target. It would also reduce the randomness of waivers a bit, but I don't think it would be any less equitable. Updated Sunday, June 17 2018 @ 6:17:33 am PDT
#59406	06/18/2018 8:23:08 am	Jul 7th, 2036	Ignore
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9603 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Once you have been with the game a bit longer, and have rebuilt your team, you will find that you don't just claim every decent player. You will have to think a lot more about who you put claims on. In general, you need to have a plan for your system, having 6 1B/DH doesn't do you any good, and uses up spots you need for other players. You still have 4-5 more years from Steward. No reason for you to drop him if you think he is decent. He can help your team as much as the next guy. Dumping rosters to tank and rebuild is generally a bad thing in multiplayer games like this. I think its good we don't encourage that sort of behavior in this game. You have to be more strategic in your moves. I personally never tank. I think its a more interesting challenge to keep your dynasty going strong once you have built it up. That said, if you are sure the ship is going down and you want to save some money, it probably wouldn't hurt to cut a few of the pricier 30+ year old guys. That is the main incentive for people cutting good players. Its the reason I cut my stud manager last year. EDIT: Worth mentioning that implementing something like this would put your team at a big disadvantage. I doubt you would get many takers for that guy. You'd be dropping a player to try and get something, but get little in return. Essentially just weakening your team. On the other hand, many of the Legend Teams have had ridiculous luck in the draft and are gorged with talent. So if they cut the worst guy on their roster, they are likely to get a lot of interest. Teams at the top would benefit the most from this. Meaning, they would get to claim all the good players, and you would have nothing to rebuild your team with. Updated Monday, June 18 2018 @ 8:31:00 am PDT
#59419	06/19/2018 4:10:37 am	Jul 9th, 2036	Ignore
tamale Joined: 02/19/2018 Posts: 357 Concord Jets Legends	Thanks for reading, and you make some good points. Hopefully we'll eventually get to the point where the cuts become tough decisions! I'm definitely not trying to tank, just that looking at my league I thought that our team was the weakest, and I didn't see how we could quickly change that without multiple expensive FAs. We had almost no minor league system when I took over (I think I've only kept 3 players), so it's taking some time to build but it is looking a bit better now. And as for having no plan and winding up with 6 DHs... well I am an Orioles fan after all...
#59426	06/19/2018 1:23:52 pm	Jul 9th, 2036	Ignore
Jason2327 Joined: 09/02/2014 Posts: 720 Abilene Patriots III.2	@tamale you only have 1 1B/DH for certain in your minors right now,so you’re not in bad shape there. As to winning waiver claims,I always run with 46/47 players to allow myself room to win multiple claims. It works very well for me. I have rebuilt my minors quite nicely the last 2 seasons thru waiver claims. Most guys will tell you to always run with 49 but this way is working great for me 👍
#59427	06/19/2018 1:26:10 pm	Jul 9th, 2036	Ignore
Jason2327 Joined: 09/02/2014 Posts: 720 Abilene Patriots III.2	@tamale you only have 1 1B/DH for certain in your minors right now,so you’re not in bad shape there. As to winning waiver claims,I always run with 46/47 players to allow myself room to win multiple claims. It works very well for me. I have rebuilt my minors quite nicely the last 2 seasons thru waiver claims. Most guys will tell you to always run with 49 but this way is working great for me 👍
#59443	06/20/2018 7:41:06 am	Jul 14th, 2036	Ignore
tamale Joined: 02/19/2018 Posts: 357 Concord Jets Legends	Haha, hopefully I was referring more to 2018 O's nihilism than my own team there... and that's an interesting approach. I've generally tried to keep it flexible, usually having 49 but maybe opening up more spots if I want another player I have a decent chance at getting (usually they've been better than the guys I cut). At least I don't think I've missed out due to having a full roster yet.
#59445	06/20/2018 9:01:38 am	Jul 14th, 2036	Ignore
Cactusguy21 Joined: 07/25/2017 Posts: 815 Presque Isle Vikings III.4	@tamale O's fans unite! My team's built around taking walks and stealing bases, because I wanted to give a huge middle finger to Duquette
#59462	06/21/2018 1:29:13 am	Jul 16th, 2036	Ignore
tamale Joined: 02/19/2018 Posts: 357 Concord Jets Legends	Haha nice one! My way of doing that so far has been drafting lots of players from Latin America... unfortunately though we've been hitting a bit like the O's

| |

Reply