Final Roster Poll

[Deleted]

After a whole lot of discussion in the thread and behind the scenes with various teams this seems to be the best option of the 3 for the league on a whole. 

35 man MLB roster - max

15 man minor league roster - You may exceed 15 prospects but it will cut into your max MLB players.

Any 0/3 player will be allowed on your minors that will also create flexibiltiy with the 35 for players in MLB that are (0/3) on your roster

This will give us a 50 man roster year round and no more expansion at the draft. I know some are not in favor of the MLB max, me being one of them as I prefer 40, but really thinking about it I think this would benefit the league on a whole and would help with whatever balance may be needed and also solidly curbs worries of MLB hoarding. I know some feel that is not an issue but 35 is a lot when you think about it. At the same time though you are getting the roster expansion some want while not going crazy like some want. 50 year round. A prospect farm to grow and pull from, call ups and send downs, hard decisions down the line on cuts. More competitive bidding as FA will be helped. Out of what everyone wants, there is a some of what you do not like and some of what you do like, but this imo is the one opition that meets everyone in the middle with everyone compromising just a bit. You get some of what you want some of what you do not give and take for our teams and the league we need to have those teams. If it does not pass then we will obviously stay as is and that is cool. I will shut up now and let you decide what you think is best for the league.

Thank you to everyone for your opinions and input as it is appreciated

And as far as how to implementing this that can be discussed but it would be one of two options.

2 years - Down to 40 mlb with 10 minors this year // Down to 35 with 15 minors next season

3 years - Down to 45 mlb with 5 minors this year // Down to 40 with 10 minors next season // Down to 35 with 15 minors in '23

Honestly I think it can be done it 2 years just find since we will be putting minors guys on our farm right away....

Thank you, any questions or comments then shoot

[Deleted]

You are killing me Jon, this is why I hate the winter meetings. These polls all depend on which way the wind is blowing on a particular day. This poll has the same problem as the previous poll. There are only two options, give more than two options please. I could probably get to 40/10 split but this 35/15 poll is once again something that works in favor for your team. Who has all the highest end talent in the league? The Cubs. Who does limiting the MLB rosters help, the Cubs. Who did eliminating a utility spot in favor of an outfield spot help the most in this league? You guessed it, the Cubs. Dang man.


You are really taking the fun out of this league.

[Deleted]

When this one gets voted keep it the same. Do we try for 37.5 and 12.5? Cmon. It didn’t pass so we keep it the same This poll here doesn’t need to happen

[Deleted]

Polls go the direction of talks which is what WM is. You keep saying I am doing this for my benefit only and I do not know what to say to that because it is not true but you have your mind made up. I do not get how the work I put in does not show that I care about this league. My goal is to run the league the best I can and I am sorry if you do not like it. It is cool to disagree and here is your poll to show your dissapproval. To say I am doing it for my sole benefit only though I just do not get it... I mean is it the Brady effect. I am sorry my team is good but it does not mean I am hatching conspiracies to cheat the league.

You guy are not the only two owners I need to listen too

That is all I got because I am not doing this with you guys again. What makes WM hard is the same two teams coming with unconstructive comments when the rest of the league does. I was stupid as part of me actually thought you two would be surprised that I cut it to 35 as Braves you were worried I would just hoard MLB talent. Why would I ever think I could make you two happy. Anyway, thanks for voting.

[Deleted]

I’m basing my comments on the first poll failed so that should be the end of it. Not putting up another poll till the result is what ya want lol

[Red Sox GM (Andrew)]

Can we add an option for simple expansion? Something like 50 year round?

[Deleted]

Jan 8, 2021 15:14:14 GMT -5 @oaffit said:

I’m basing my comments on the first poll failed so that should be the end of it. Not putting up another poll till the result is what ya want lol

Well I suppose that is the only explanation. If you read the WM thread and the above post you will know why it changed or you could just ask as that usually works. The past two days I have been talking too people and reading those comments and thinking my ass off and getting a sense of what could work. Teams were holding their votes back because of the tweaks being talked about with a lot of the league. Then after all that discussion I came to the conclusion that this was best option to give the league to vote on. That is what happens after constructive conversation in WM with the league. The main reason being 40 mlb players seemed like too much after some thought with expanded rosters and a roster to put our minors on. I was against it. I would like it to stay the same so I do not have to toe that line of 35 but it imo is better for the league on the whole. You are assuming you know how that poll would end and assuming why I am doing something the only explanation is not a conspiracy. Not everyone is out to get you...

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

I would like to apoligize to the league for the above. I was hoping teams might ask quesions about why something that is being proposed for the league might be good just weigh pros and cons. Why the roster this way may do this or that. I do not know just discussion and then make an informed decision after thought no matter what that decsion was it would be respected. So please to not let the avove deter you from continuing the conversation if you so like about this proposition.

and I saw your post right before I was about to post this Tigers lol

[Cubs GM - Monty]

I can verify that this new poll is a result of feedback given about the initial poll. I was probably one of the loudest voices in objection to having 40 MLB. I was up at 0430 in the morning (EST) talking to the Cubs asking to have the limit lowered. I wanted 25 or 30 to be honest. I can compromise at 35 because I recognize others see it differently and were happy with 40.

This league has a serious competitive balance issue, and I am advocating for small steps to close that gap. Not handouts or crazy rules like if you make the playoffs you can’t sign a FA the next offseason. Just level the playing field for all of us. Many of us took over rosters that were a disaster. There are huge differences in our rosters. So putting a reasonable cap to spread the wealth a little bit can help a majority of the league.

[Deleted]

It would be nice if we could talk civilly and come to logical reasons to weigh for and against. Hard to hear anything through the loud noise tbh. If I get the time and motivation, I'll go through the other post and this one and aggregate all the thoughts into a bullet point form for and against the proposal to help the issues be more easily digested.

Personally, I don't see the 35 MLB spot limit as controversial or impactful. I would prefer the MLB limit be 25-30, like the Dodgers said, which would enable a more meaningful waiver wire market.  We aren't discussing that far, so moving on. Despite this not going far enough, IMO, I support it regardless for the same reason. 

On the other side, I would love a larger MILB roster. Sure, some GMs spend a lot of time and will uncover risers more frequently than others, hence creating additional value creation disparity. But that value is earned through hard time and work! Merit based. I don't see that as a reason for or against larger rosters. We set the bar high and as a GM, you're expected to compete. If you can't compete in a league with more MILB slots because of those MILB slots, then this level of dynasty might not be for you. I find it fun to search for, grab and watch those deeper prospects grow.

Happy new year everyone.

[Guardians - (Steve)]

So my head is mush trying to follow all the different thoughts.

Just my quick thoughts (which don’t mean much now) but maybe we should of had an open forum talking about rosters before posting a choose A or B poll.

[Deleted]

When would prospects transition to mlb contracts? Like, when is it required to place a pp0/3 on the mlb roster permanently? is it the year after they cross the thresholds? So they could be shipped up or down during the year that they are crossing the games to qualify?

[Deleted]

Jan 8, 2021 15:28:46 GMT -5 Red Sox GM (Andrew) said:

Can we add an option for simple expansion? Something like 50 year round?

The reason I do not think this one would be best overall is it does not help out FA and the leauge as a whole imo without the mlb cap. We help the FA pool and no so much in the sense that all the sudden there will be a bunch of stars to pick from as we are not looking to give handouts but instead a slight bump to the economy for example the FA pool. One simple example is it will make the decision harder for whatever LM to want to carry 5 or 6 MI while another team sits with none. Does another team have a prospect that is coming up. Which MLB will he have to cut to get that player up. It will not force teams to drop key players by any means.

Rockies put it best in this litte chart

3 -CI
3 -MI
2 CATCHERS
6 -OF
THAT'S 14
8 -SP
10 -RP

That's 32 and you still have 3 spots

Of course you can manipulate that anyway you want and is just an example. Those roster spots become just a bit more precious. That is all from the competion side, but then we have the 15 spots that expand the roster and allow us to grow a farm. That in combo with FA could help managers build a more balanced team. Which makes the league more competitive and better for us all. It is on the owner to actually build a good team but with a better economy there is more incentive to stick around which imo is another benefit. The poll above imo is a mix of a 50 man roster, stimulating FA economy, balance, competitive, and farm.

[Deleted]

Jan 8, 2021 22:21:49 GMT -5 @twoseamers said:

When would prospects transition to mlb contracts? Like, when is it required to place a pp0/3 on the mlb roster permanently? is it the year after they cross the thresholds? So they could be shipped up or down during the year that they are crossing the games to qualify?

My thoughts on this were that as long as a player was 0/3 they would be eligible to be on the minors roster. We could say that as soon as they hit their minimus they were no longer eligible despite being 0/3 for the remainder of the year but that would be harder to track. However I think my initial thought works best because if you are up in the big leagues and not preforming you get sent down. I think as long as he is 0/3 even if he is up in real life he can be on minors on our roster. That might even help create some flexibilty with the MLB limit at 35. I might be thinking to far out the box with that last statement but none the less there it is.

[Deleted]

Sounds right Jonathan. So to be clear, the 35 MLB limit is for Pp1 and above and show Contracts. In this case, 35 is a very high number for show and pp1+ contracts. I would bet no one has more than 30 on their roster right now. This definition might make those skeptical change their mind.

With the definition in mind, 35 seems like more than enough that it might have very little impact on your roster.

I suggest everyone go check how many contracts would be classified as MLB on their roster to get a sense for it and report back.

I have 22 MLB contracts and expect to have 9 cross to PP1 after this year so 2022 i would have 31 without making any more moves.

On the other side, the 15 prospects is actually 15 prospects plus rookies***.

[Deleted]

Yeah as long as their contract is (0/3) then they will be able to be on minors

I have 31 mlb contracts with players to drop, 2 of my current prospects will probably be up so they would not take up any space on my mlb roster. That will help with flexibilty and maybe alleviate somes concerns about the 35. Something to consider everyone.

[Deleted]

Maybe this league is not for me. I still agree with the Indians. I am not a follower of MILB so therefore I would not know what I am doing. I have always been a MLB. The way things are now, there seems to be more injuries then ever. I like to use depth and compete, Have not done this much since I been in this league. A lot of times I feel the smarts of all you guys. The reason I trade my Draft Picks every year because I do not have the patients to wait for PP to mature. I do not know players in the minors unless their very close to the majors. Cubs kill me year after year. I am not saying I am quitting, just saying should I be in This League.

Any way I am voting for things to be the same.

[Red Sox GM (Andrew)]

After more thinking I’m leaning no with this format. I don’t think teams should be forced to break down their roster a certain way unless the mlb roster number is bigger.

I would vote yes for 40-15

[Guardians - (Steve)]

I just need some clarity.

So no more than 35 MLB players
And no more than 15 (0/3) guys or can the (0/3) guys be part of the 35 MLB allotment?

[Red Sox GM (Andrew)]

Jan 9, 2021 12:34:01 GMT -5 Guardians - (Steve) said:

I just need some clarity.

So no more than 35 MLB players
And no more than 15 (0/3) guys or can the (0/3) guys be part of the 35 MLB allotment?

No more than 35 MLB but you can carry more than 15 MiLB

[Deleted]

Yes, no limit on minors just MLB, and an 0/3 player can be anywhere on your roster, MLB or minors even if he is up in real life

[deleted- former Mariners owner]

I voted no. If it was straight 50 with no restrictions then I’d vote yes

[Red Sox GM (Andrew)]

Jan 9, 2021 13:11:23 GMT -5 deleted- former Mariners owner said:

I voted no. If it was straight 50 with no restrictions then I’d vote yes

That too

[Cubs GM - Monty]

If everyone is voting no because this is not exactly what they wanted, then this will be voted down 20-0. Nobody got everything they wanted, but a lot of people got some of what they wanted. This is a compromise to work in as many requests as possible. There are 20 of us, with various backgrounds and strategies to build a fantasy baseball team. We are never going to 100% agree on anything.

I wanted a 30 man MLB roster with 20 minor leaguers. I didn’t get that, but I got some of it, and for the teams that wanted 40/10, I know they did not get it either. We met in the middle and compromised.

Don’t shoot this down because it is not perfect, because we will never have that.

[deleted- former Mariners owner]

Maybe in the future there should be a discussion board before any voting. After all the conversations have taken place, then put it up (revised or not) for a single vote. Might eliminate all this back and forth.

And true Monty, nobody is going to get exactly what they want. Maybe it’s just easier if I vote and don’t give a reason why.

[Deleted]

There should only be a maximum of 25roster spots × 30 teams= 750 mlb players that could possibly have an mlb deal at any time.

Subtract the bottom of each teams RP/bench (est. 3×30) and rookies (est. 4x30 = 120) and you've got 540 players mlb contract eligible.

540 /20 teams = 27 mlbers per team = Your prorata share of the highest possible number of MLBers.

I think it would be good for the league as a whole for anyone carrying 37 or 40 from one season to the next to have to make tough decisions in the offseason to decide who to drop or trade.

[Cubs GM - Monty]

No feedback is always good, and you actually just gave great feedback from all this mess. I think a discussion board before a vote on issues like this is an excellent idea.

Who knows, maybe next year there is a movement to realign the divisions. A discussion board before a vote on something like that would save us a lot of these headaches and confusion.

[Deleted]

As long as teams take the time to at least think for a few minutes and consider it then that is all that can be asked. Compromise is one thing but at same time what some consider compromise is also something that can be disagreed on so no matter the decison of a team we should respect it.

I will say this that IF the roster change does win I would be willing to put it up for a vote vs a 40/10 split. 2 options.

40/10

vs

35/15

The reason we could not put different ones up vs each other till now is because we need to have the "NO CHANGE" option in there as that is important. So again if the roster change wins I am leaning that might be more fair to the league to give option of the two especially considering how close it is and the type of change it is.

And WM is that discussion board guys... Thanks you for all the great feedback so far and your consideration.

[Deleted]

In fact we will just go ahead and do that. If the roster change wins then I will put the 35/15 vs 40/10 up and that will be it and we will call it done and dusted.

This poll will close tomm. 5pm EST.

Thank you again