It should not be a secret, by now, that I feel very strongly about MBL's current rules regarding free agency. I've posted numerous times on the league boards about my feelings regarding prospects, free agency, the draft, etc. and how I see it as having a significantly negative impact on the league. This year, as usual, my complaints have fallen on deaf ears. They were met by jeers and dismissal just as they always are. But, this time, I've decided to hash out my stance and why I'm over here in a more articulate fashion. I hope you take the time to read this and think on it critically. This opinion comes from a position of love; this is, by far, my favorite one of our fantasy leagues because of the people involved, the amount activity and trades as well as the enjoyment it brings day-in and day-out throughout the summer. But, with all of that said...
I don't say this in a way that's meant to be "we've irreparably damaged our league's power structure to the point where this will never be fun". I say it in the way that means "we've created a rule system that incentivizes non-competitive and even anti-competitive behavior that is detracting from the balance of the league to the point where even implying that this fantasy league is somehow competitive is a misnomer".
The rule in particular that is most broken is the ability to, at any time, add any player in the ESPN player pool.
The consequences of this rule are staggering. We've created a league where talent is distributed ad hoc, whomever decides on a given day that a given player should to be on their roster can make that a reality. This is notably important for the case where the player in question is a baseball prospect currently in the minor leagues. No major professional sports league operates this way. Why? Well first because in the real world it would be slavery, but really it's because without access controls on their most important resource (players), it creates a system ripe for exploitation and anti-competitive behaviors like making poor trades to tanking.
In almost every league (professional or fantasy), players are added to teams rosters through some form of competitive acquisition process: a draft, an auction, recruiting, competing signing bonuses, trades, etc. No team is given unfettered access to the player pool, especially the players that are "most valuable", such as major league prospects. This creates a broken incentivization system in our league. In order to best "rebuild" ones roster, they can simply go out and grab the talent they want. In most other leagues, they'd need work through one of those acquisition systems: trading for draft picks, trading for talent, spending more in signing, reworking their recruiting organization, etc.
Imagine an NBA where LeBron James was simply put on the Boston Celtics' roster because they had the resources to scout him first. Imagine an MLB where Bryce Harper was added to the Mets because he's from Las Vegas and someone on the 51s saw him... it'd be madness, owners would quit
The fact is, in our league the teams that are already winning take very little risk by adding a prospect to their roster. As long as the majority of their roster stays healthy, the few bench spots that are taken are inconsequential. They can add top tier talent whenever they choose and when a prospect doesn't pan out, they can simply add someone else. Their roster is already loaded, they can afford the (minimal) risk and don't have to sacrafice draft picks or their current top tier players to find younger ones to rebuild with.
If they find themselves in a situation where they have an injury, they usually can place the player on IR and make a trade from their significant position of power. By hoarding prospects, they can ignore their bench depth, knowing they can shuffle things around as needed. Often leagues institute a way so that the have-nots can get priority on the top tier talent to create parity via a slingshot effect (see: houston, worst to first), but our system doesn't offer any form of balancing mechanism.
When I say our league isn't competitive, I mean that the rules in place don't allow for a competitive distribution of talent. Without a talent acquisition system in place, the results are weighted towards those that already have the resources to acquire talent. There's nothing blocking their exploitation. Also, our system promotes tanking in a way beyond what is seen elsewhere which we generally consider a huge problem in other leagues.
If you want to "get gud" in this league, your best bet is to drop/trade away anyone that's proven to not be a stud and load your roster with minor league players. If teams that already have a winning roster are taking little risk by adding a prospect, than teams that are tanking are taking next to zero.
Of Baseball America's top 3 prospects from 2010 (when we started the league) until 2015, only two of them have been drafted: Kris Bryant and Xander Bogaerts. Corey Seager, Bryce Harper, Byron Buxton, Jurickson Profar, Jason Heyward, Giancarlo Stanton, Stephen Strasburg, Mike Trout, Matt Moore, Dylan Bundy, Oscar Taveras and Addison Russell have all been simply added to rosters
Granted, there're a few of those names there that haven't panned out, but it's no denying that the theoretical "best talent" in this league isn't being distributed in an organized fashion. This doesn't promote a healthy league. This is not some equitible or organized distribution of talent. This is chaos. This is bullshit.
I propose a new system of player aqcuisition. This system is not dramatically different than the system that we currently have in place. There are a few simple rules that will be added that, I believe, will greatly enhance our leagues enjoyment factor for everyone involved. More trades, more drafting, less tanking, less bullshit.
The premise behind this rule is simple: players who are not in the major leagues shouldn't be add-able to rosters without a waiver process. This rule significantly cuts out the pattern of teams late in the season who are out of contention dropping players from their roster in favor of "risky" minor league players, knowing that they can hold them all offseason to evaluate their stock again in the spring draft knowing that they can use the draft to fill roster holes. It's essentially 0-risk.
I've proposed this in the past, so allow me to address specific concerns that have been raised:
- Yes, minor league players that get called up to the majors would be add-able. The prevailing theory here is that players that are "worth a damn" and might be called up will have already been drafted. Might there be a few misses? sure, but I'd expect the vast majority of cases to "work". Remember, teams will have less incentive and ability to add low-level minor leaguers to their roster since they represent more risk than players higher in the majors since there's less chance of another team grabbing a given prospect randomly
- Who will enforce this? Everyone. It'll be pretty easy to spot people cheating on this. I'm absolutely certain there are enough people watching the waiver wire to enforce this rule. In the case of call-ups, it'll be easy to check the transactions feed to see if a player was added before the transaction went through
Every year during the All-Star Break, we will hold a second draft. This draft can either be just 1 or 2 rounds depending on a poll, of course, but since the only way to add minor-league talent is by through the draft or when players are called up, this will give teams a way to adjust their rosters for the second half and make the moves that the wish to make. I think this will also be fun from a trades perspective, more draft picks to trade as well as teams realize they either need to push for wins or start the rebuild.
Also, drafts are fun.
Seriosly. I think these two rules alone will make our league better and more fun. They will encourage more competative behaviors and they'll make our drafts a lot more fun.