I’m still thinking through the Franchise system but I think I would set a rule that you can only tag players you originally sign (the first team to sign the player). So, if you cut Pollock and someone nabbed him at $10, that team could not tag Pollock because you were the first team to sign him (and you couldn’t ever tag him again because you cut him).
I’m not sure how this squares with your other proposal that you can tag players you pick up for cheap off the wire (eg $1 Edwin Diaz). I can’t see a meaningful difference between nabbing a cheap Edwin Diaz off the wire and nabbing a $10 Pollock off waivers.
Having read Joe and Miguel’s input on the other thread, I tend to agree that the system should not be used to keep salaries artificially low - I like their idea that all players should have to go through arb at least once before you can tag them.
I can see what you are trying to do - to reward teams for doing their research and being the first to unearth the next star for $1 - but I think having too many artificially low salaries floating around the league would ultimately be detrimental (and I say that as someone with a $1 Edwin Diaz on one of my rosters!).
However, having said that - I do think that player’s acquired in the main pre-season auction could potentially be tagged at the end of that season before arb. My reasoning is that all (or very nearly all) teams hit the draft in a position to bid on the talent available - whereas in-season some teams do not have the cap or roster space to make a speculative bid on a Edwin Diaz. So being able to tag ‘in season’ acquisitions rewards teams who are able to shed talent in season (ie not competing) at the expense of teams who need to keep their roster together.
Not sure how clear that is!
I’d be open to the idea of tagging players acquired in the pre-season draft before arb (though I’m not 100% committed to this)
But I agree with the set up in League 100 that players acquired off the wire (whether free agents or cuts) cannot be tagged until they have been through arb
I also think that the idea that you can only tag players that you originally sign may have unintended negative consequences.
Firstly, I think it would actually lead to less activity - because players would be more reluctant to cut players that they had signed originally, as the cost of cutting them would be higher than usual.
And secondly, it would lead to a raft of talented players (mainly ex-prospects) becoming ineligible for tagging. I’m thinking of Gary Sanchez as a particular example here. In most leagues he was first picked up in 2013 and then went through several teams before this year. If I picked him up for $1 off the wire at the start of this year, I’d be annoyed if I could never tag him just because someone bought him and cut him three years ago.
I understood the “players you originally sign” as an in-season thing.
So if a player is dropped and pricked up by a second team, that player can’t be franchised the first year - but if he makes it through the next year’s draft, that player could be franchised.
I would assume the same with trades… a player can be franchised if they were on your roster after the previous year’s draft.
Yeah I really like the franchise tag idea. I was going to propose it in another league I’m in.
Yes, you’re probably right - and I think that solves the ‘Gary Sanchez’ problem.
I still think it could lead to less activity, though, as people may be more reluctant to part with a player they had originally signed (and other teams may be less willing to trade for them, knowing that they can’t be tagged at the end of the season - whilst their existing ‘original’ players can).
I just wonder if League 100 has it right with its rule that every player has to go through arb and allocation at least once before they can be tagged…
Just catching up here but I am interested in this league as I read through. Looking to jump back into ottoneu.
For those that followed this thread previously, I will unfortunately not have the time to dedicate to this new league, so I’ve decided to wait until next year to create it. That said, I still have a strong preference for rewarding some incentives based on season-ending scoring tiers, but instead of coupons I think I’ve decided that the “5MiLB” system probably does the best (and simplest) job of pushing the standard Ottoneu game a little more towards a dynasty league, and that the 5MiLB would also be a great way to dole out these incentives. No specifics yet, but 5MiLB could be expanded to 10MiLB where every team automatically receives 3MiLB but can earn up to seven more slots of minor leaguers to hold “off roster” ($0) based on their season-ending scoring results. More to come, but this is the direction I’m leaning…