[USML Announce] USML 2006 - important league update

[Andrew R. Klein]

One other suggestion if we have a stalement on this issue.  

 

If we simply want to allocate more players, we could just add a few rounds
to the rotation draft - say one extra $10, $5, and $2 round.  I think we've
done that in the past.

 

-Andy

 

-------------------------------------

Andrew R. Klein

Indiana University School of Law-Indianapolis

(317) 274-2099

 

  _____  

From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf
Of RICHARD ROBBINS
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 1:54 PM
To: USML Announcements
Subject: RE: [USML Announce] USML 2006 - important league update

 

Just tell me the scenario that is the most likely to result in my owning
Gabe Kapler -- that's the one guy I've got to have.

 

  _____  

From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf
Of springkerb at aol.com
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 12:42 PM
To: announce at usml.net
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] USML 2006 - important league update

Rich:

Remind me to explain the economics to you, after the draft.

 

Mark 

 
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard E. Robbins <RERobbins at iTinker.net>
To: 'USML Announcements' <announce at usml.net>
Sent: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 06:50:58 -0600
Subject: RE: [USML Announce] USML 2006 - important league update

For what it's worth. .  .

 

With 11 teams, 23 man rosters and a team budget of 260 we have 253 players
to draft and 2860 dollars available.  That comes to $11.30 a player on
average.

 

With 10 teams, 23 man rosters and a team budget of 260 we have 230 players
to draft and 2600 dollars available.  That comes to $11.30 a player on
average.

 

With 10 teams, 25 man rosters and a team budget of 280 we have 250 players
to draft and 2800 dollars available.  That comes to $11.20 a player on
average.

 

I'm not sure what kind of impact on prices we are looking at either way.  If
we don't do anything, we will have fewer dollars in the draft chasing fewer
players.

 

I'm not averse to have a slightly richer pool.  The ten team 23 man roster
is certainly a very standard configuration.

 

I'm on the fence.

 

-- Rich

 

  _____  

From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf
Of SpringKerb at aol.com
Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 9:00 PM
To: announce at usml.net
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] USML 2006 - important league update

In a message dated 3/5/2006 8:53:33 P.M. Central Standard Time,
JHWinick at aol.com writes:

The change that Mark has proposed is one that is consistent with "official"
rotisserie rules.  The rationale is that with one fewer team, there are 23
fewer players to be drafted.  By adding one pitcher and one hitter to each
team, you "suck up" 20 of those 23 on active rosters.  The intention is
merely to try to keep a consistent amount of depth in the league and lessen
the amount of "starter-worthy" talent on the reserve rosters.  Mark didn't
mention that along with adding 2 player slots, the auction budget would be
increased by $20.

 

I don't think we'd have to waste too much time worrying about all of the
rules that might arguable be affected by this change, like innings pitched
and minimum at bats, but I could be persuaded.  I think all that we'd need
to change are the salary cap and salary floor.

I'd be inclined to make this adjustment and not mess with any of the innings
or at-bat rules.  They almost never come into play anyway.  It will keep the
prices and the talent pool in a more normal range.

 

Mark

_______________________________________________

announce mailing list

announce at usml.net <mailto:announce%40usml.net> 

http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lyra.siteprotect.com/pipermail/announce/attachments/20060306/960e7cb1/attachment-0001.htm