|
|
Post by dm627100 on Jun 28, 2009 14:10:48 GMT -5
Hi Fellas,
There is an expression, that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
In baseball it`s the strong get stronger and the weak get weaker.
In our case, The BMFL, the top 3 teams are, and will continue to be getting stronger, while the rest of the teams remain the same or weaker.
I won`t get into the specifics of the teams as I`m sure you can read between the lines.
For many years I have tried to have a motion passed that would see the Draft proceed as any other professional sporting organization does. The last place team picks first and the first place team picks last. Over the course of a few years the top teams will fall and the lower teams will climb. And the cycle will continue. At this point all the players will enjoy the league and what it has to offer, as you will be on the winning curve, an average curve, and the losing curve. These cycles should be very minimal so everyone can enjoy themselves.
As for the Reserve List I think that instead of looking at the next available person, that " A Committee" should look at what is in the best interest of the league.
This is my last season.
My decision is due to age, and wear and tear on my body,not because of the Draft or the Reserve List.
However, the League could lose some players, and good players at that, due to the flawed process we now use for Drafting and the Reserve List.
Let`s try to make things better for the good of the BMFL, so that players will enjoy playing here for many years to come.
Dennis
|
|
|
|
Post by svinette on Jun 28, 2009 19:37:22 GMT -5
Well said Dennis! But I think it's already too late...  I do believe that this post will fall on deaf ears !!?? (or blind eyes!) Can't wait to see the replies on this one... Steph |
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorsejohnny on Jun 28, 2009 22:33:14 GMT -5
It sure would be nice if more people attended the AGM meeting in November.  |
|
|
|
Post by svinette on Jun 29, 2009 6:33:33 GMT -5
You are probably right, Johnny. More people should have probably attend the AGM meeting last November. But you don't need 30 different people to voice a concern... especially that it's a concern that have been voiced already for many years!!
Steph
|
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorsejohnny on Jun 29, 2009 8:58:07 GMT -5
The problem is many people hate change so it's very important to have more people out.
For the past couple years we've been lucky to have 6 or 7 people attend the AGM. A few yrs ago when I wanted to make the brother rule official, a bunch of GOBs came out and it made it easier to get thru.
|
|
|
|
Post by rejtable on Jun 29, 2009 9:08:55 GMT -5
We should always be open for change, but not change for the sake of change.
1. How would the draft have been significantly different using previous standings compared to ratings lately?
2. How would "A Committee" have done anything different with the reserve list the last little while? If Stan's (or anyone else) has any questions about the handling of the reserve list, I would be quite happy to hear concerns and field questions.
Rej
|
|
|
|
Post by svinette on Jun 29, 2009 12:43:33 GMT -5
The reason of "many people hating changes" is weak. If a player, team manager or whoever has an idea to improve the league, it should properly be tabled to a meeting and voted on.
About the "brother rule", WHHHHAAATTT??? You want to tell me that you brought in players of your team to vote on a proposal? I suspect that this ruling must have been very convenient for your team... 3/4 of voters are GOB players and the rest are league executives (approx. numbers). Well, so much for democracy!!
We are members of a recreational league where the underlying theme is fun. And I can tell you, a few teams in this league are not having fun at all! We are also in an era where time is very precious to everyone of us, especially to the members/players of this league that have families. It is very possible that not all players can attend the AGM meetings to vote on any proposals. We should therefore use other means in the voting process; bring the proposals to team captains and vote on the proposals after a game for example...
Rej, the two points brought by you are legitimate. A cannot really comment on the 2nd one. I believe Dennis could fill us in. I don't believe a lot of motions are passed yearly, so if a motion is brought forward, it has its on merit. A "change for the sake of doing a change" is also weak in my on opinion. I surely hope that any motions/proposals are discussed at meetings and voted on in the appropriate manner. If this is the case, I do not believe that would be a "change for the sake of doing a change".
As for a draft, I think this is the way to go. The needs of every team are different, and with a draft a team would select whoever based on those needs. With the current rating system, it is not the case. For example, team A needs a B rated player playing first base but none exists on the list. What do you do then? Furthermore, the ratings of players may be flawed. Team A may think player X is rated A, and Team B may think the same player is rated C. And those opinions are probably based on the needs of the teams.
I would also go to the extent that, after a season, all teams protects 7 or 8 players and the rest of the players are put into the draft. It would be a way to even the playing field. Mind you, this is just an idea... one that would need to be discussed extensively.
|
|
|
|
Post by rejtable on Jun 29, 2009 13:15:31 GMT -5
About the "brother rule", WHHHHAAATTT??? You want to tell me that you brought in players of your team to vote on a proposal? I suspect that this ruling must have been very convenient for your team... 3/4 of voters are GOB players and the rest are league executives (approx. numbers). Well, so much for democracy!! We are members of a recreational league where the underlying theme is fun. And I can tell you, a few teams in this league are not having fun at all! We are also in an era where time is very precious to everyone of us, especially to the members/players of this league that have families. It is very possible that not all players can attend the AGM meetings to vote on any proposals. We should therefore use other means in the voting process; bring the proposals to team captains and vote on the proposals after a game for example... I'm not sure what is more democratic than publicly holding a night where anyone from the league can have their say on prospective motions. Those motions are known in advance. The motions come from the membership. If people are busy or indifferent, that's not the league's fault. Guys somehow find ways to make it out roughly 30 times in the summer to play ball, be nice if a few more could find 2 hours in November to try and make their league better. A "change for the sake of doing a change" is also weak in my on opinion. I surely hope that any motions/proposals are discussed at meetings and voted on in the appropriate manner. If this is the case, I do not believe that would be a "change for the sake of doing a change". My point was that I'm not sure what anyone is proposing on either of those topics that would have changed things. I'd be happy to explain what has gone on with all three reserve lists claimants this year. If someone thinks a committee would have done things differently than a couple of goobers trying to play by the rules as they exist, that's fine, but I'm not sure it would be the case. And, again, changing the draft is fine in theory. I'd dearly love not to have to keep track of everyone's ratings, and then waste three hours of my life in January arguing with the three other people who bothered to show up about ratings. But, there are very legitimate reasons not to adopt previous standings, and I've never heard a better way to avoid those pitfalls. If you have a plan, great. I'm all ears and eyes. As for a draft, I think this is the way to go. The needs of every team are different, and with a draft a team would select whoever based on those needs. With the current rating system, it is not the case. For example, team A needs a B rated player playing first base but none exists on the list. What do you do then? Furthermore, the ratings of players may be flawed. Team A may think player X is rated A, and Team B may think the same player is rated C. And those opinions are probably based on the needs of the teams. I'm not sure you understand the draft. If Team A needs a 1B, nothing is stopping team A from taking one except their spot in the draft. If none exists, it has nothing to do with the ratings. As for the ratings, there is no doubt that there are some over and under rated players. But again, be sure nice to have more voices around the table to argue with in January. The ratings system is certainly not perfect, but I think on balance we are reasonably close for anyone having been in the league a couple of years or more. Steph, it's great that you have all these ideas and energy. Be nice to see you and others like you around the table once a month. Lord knows there are plenty of empty seats. And, lest my comments be taken as a shot at Stan's, you guys have certainly been among the best attended group in the league. Derek especially is a great asset to the league and to the exec. |
|
|
|
Post by svinette on Jun 29, 2009 15:28:28 GMT -5
I have to apologize for my last post. I was maybe a bit harsh. It was not my intent!
You have to understand, it's been a long season already. Actually, the last 5 seasons have been very long... It's very frustrating! If we could at least compete... It's even more frustrating when the top teams get replacement players of very high caliber, and we don't.
Rej said it well. I maybe don't understand all the rules/constitution, and I don't really have time to get involved due to personal/family related reasons. And on that, we might as well leave things as it is... the rules have been instituted for different reasons!
Again, my apologies...
Steph
|
|
|
|
Post by crazyhorsejohnny on Jun 29, 2009 18:40:38 GMT -5
Steph, the "brother rule" has been used by a few teams since it was passed at the AGM 3 yrs ago. Actually that's how Stan's got their CF this year and the Guzzlers the Barber brothers.
|
|
|
|
Post by svinette on Jun 29, 2009 20:22:55 GMT -5
That's exactly why the "brother rule" should be abolished.
In the coming years, when brothers will be joining the league, there could be a big difference in the level of play between them, improving one team and weakening the other... it's exactly what is happening now!!
Stan's got a good player in Jay. But, do you seriously want to compare what the Barber brothers bring to table to Jay?? Jay himself can tell you that!! John, I've been around this game for a very long time. Treat me with a little bit more respect than that... It's that exact mentality that will kill this league! And that's a shame...
I guess it's not really important anymore. I'm closing this chapter!
Steph
|
|
|
|
Post by whunter on Jun 29, 2009 21:41:20 GMT -5
A lot has been said regarding the draft and the reserve list so I will touch on a few points in no particular order.
1. The player ratings process, the registration process, the evaluation camp for new players, and the management of the reserve list are the responsibility of the Executive Vice-President. Unfortunately, this position has been vacant since Steve Bovey stepped down last November. The show must go on, so in the absence of a volunteer for this position, Rej and I have sucked it up and ensured that we, jointly, fulfilled the duties of the Executive VP. I understand and appreciate that a lot of people are busy, but I can assure you that Rej and I, as well as the other executive members, have families and busy lives as well.
2. Reserve List - Rej and I have specifically followed the guidelines and process established in the constitution regarding the management of the reserve list. All team reps are aware of the fact that if they have a special requirement for a pitcher or a catcher that they can identify that requirement when requesting a player off the reserve list. The Knights had only one catcher on their roster this year. Ideally, they would have been able to draft a catcher this year, however, there wasn't one available in their draft spot. The Knights even talked to a couple of teams in an attempt to trade their draft pick for a catcher, without luck. Immediately after the draft the Knights went to the reserve list requesting a catcher as their 13th player. It is very difficult to get through the season with one catcher. Within the first five games of the season, on two occasions the Knights had to pick up a catcher (Will Mood and Gary Larocque...who rarely catch on their own teams). As it turned out, both games got rained out. Each player who went on the reserve list was asked the same question...are you willing to catch? Over a month had passed before a player said yes they are willing to catch. This player was then assigned to the Knights. It is that simple and it is exactly how the reserve list is managed. I know that Stan's are struggling for catching as well and they could have made the exact same request. Dennis is probably the longest-serving team rep so I am certain he knows how the reserve list works. I can assure you that nothing deceitful occurred and Rej can concur. Any player selected off the reserve list must go in the draft the following year.
3. The Draft - I have been in this league since 2001 and on the executive for about 5 years. We have discussed on many occasions whether or not there is a better way or system to achieve parity in the league. Dennis has proposed that teams should always draft in reverse order of finish, but after debate, the general consensus in a democratic forum (the AGM) was that there would be inherent flaws in this system. Here are two flaws:
a. A team's place in the standings may not be truly reflective of how strong they are. (ie. a team's strongest players could miss a lot of games...or maybe their strongest pitcher does not pitch a lot of innings in the regular season. The team may be the strongest on paper, however, maybe they end up finishing 4th...and then picking ahead of a weaker team in the draft.
b. What if a team loses some of its better players over the winter. They may have finished 4th last year, but now on paper they have the 7th best team.
The player ratings are used in an effort to aim for league parity. After discussion, it was freely decided through an AGM vote, that Dennis' motion would not serve the league's aim.
When I first joined the league in 2001, The Knights, GOB, and Stans were perennial cellar dwellers. Over time, the Knights and GOB built decent teams fair and square through the draft. The most important thing for both teams was that their good players have continued to return to the team each year, and each year they only have to draft one of two players to replenish their departing players. Stans has not been as fortunate. Many strong players have chosen to leave over the years and therefore the rebuilding process has been much more difficult for them. I do know that when all their best players are there that they have a strong line-up and can beat any team on any given day...as evidenced in the playoffs vs the Knights last year. That series could have gone either way.
Another note on the draft...The Knights had the last pick in the pitcher draft this year and chose Ryan Chatten...after every other team passed on him. Ryan has pitched great this year. In 13 innings against the Guzzlers he has allowed only one run. I think he could have helped a lot of teams this year.
4. Annual General Meeting - the AGM is open to every league member. Motions are submitted to the executive at least two weeks prior to the AGM and available to all league members at least one week prior. The date of the AGM is always posted well in advance...will likely be the 1st Monday in November. I believe that we have a very good executive (minus the vacant executive VP position) and some very strong team reps. Collectively, we are all open to any ideas that may make this a better league. Please remember that there is an established process for change. The AGM is the forum for constructive debate and change.
I hope that I have made things more clear, but if not feel free to contact me offline.
Wayne
|
|
|
|
Post by rejtable on Jun 30, 2009 7:55:24 GMT -5
One other thing, I just want to point out that the "brother" rule was not what brought all three Barber family members together at the draft. At this point there is nothing in the constitution extending sibling rights to pitchers. The Guzzlers were essentially left with just one pitcher this year, so they had first crack at a pitcher. Had Jason returned, there would have been no guarantee for the family in question. Also, while certainly the rules that govern our league are the most important, the league was open to accomodating the Barber family as much as possible in keeping the guys all on the same team. We were clear with all three that we could not make any guarantees ahead of time. In the end, the Guzzlers needed a pitcher and we were able to accomodate the family all at once. As I recall, there was some discussion around the table at the ratings session, but I don't recall any single team jumping up and voicing any extreme displeasure with this arrangement. While the players in question are certainly solid players and maybe there are some short term balance issues, I think it reflects good on the BMFL that we were able to work together as a group to find a solution that aided a team and a family who just want to play ball (seemingly everywhere!!  Steph, I'm sure Derek and Andrew would have welcomed your input at the time since you feel so strongly. As Wayne said, we are just a bunch of volunteers trying our best to look after the league given the rules and guidelines motioned and voted on by our membership. I'm glad all this discussion is taking place, and that the forum is getting some views and some action. Having said that, anyone from the league exec would have been happy to have had these discussions before anyone got all hot and bothered about them. |
|
|
|
Post by baseracer on Jun 30, 2009 12:47:02 GMT -5
Hi guys,
I think we can debate the draft, reserve list and any special rules all we want. The part that upsets most people is that one of the lower ranked teams goes to the reserve list and gets a low ranked player, while one of the top teams leverages a rule to pick up a good player. Someone missed the common sense check. I don't think there is any magic rule that can replace common sense.
I think we all have to face the facts that this is a recreational league and the rules are not perfect. Everyone wants to get their hands on good players to help them win, and some teams are better than others at using the rules to their advantage. Not everyone is as gentlemanly as Dennis.
My personal opinion: I don't think adding one good player to a team makes that much of a difference in a league like this (except maybe the pitchers). I think most BMFL games are determined by the weaker players. The majority of BMFL runs are unearned.
- Andrew Bruce
|
|
|
|
Post by rejtable on Jun 30, 2009 13:32:26 GMT -5
Again, Andrew, I'd like to think a lot of this could have been clarified had someone from your team simply asked some questions.
First of all, the Knights were assigned a player on May 25th. That player was added to the list that day as per the rules. The Knights request for a C dates to roughly a month earlier than that. There is no "leveraging a rule." The Knights knew they needed a catcher in April, were proactive in asking for one, and they got the first one that came on board.
Stan's put in a request for a player from the reserve list on May 28th. As per the rules, they received the player 1st up.
Second, at the time of the request, I don't know anyone who knew how good the player who has been assigned to the Knights was. I had certainly never met him. Under the current rules, it would not have mattered, but I'm just saying that we often have names on the list with no idea who the players are. As far as I know, this was a case of a player blindly (with a face to face meeting) assigned to a team.
Look, it's easy to complain and criticize. The optics on these issues are obviously tough. You can say it's about common sense instead of rules, but we have to play by some kind of structure, or else there's no point to any of it. By all means ask to change the rules in November. But, if we are just going to ignore the rules we have in place in the name of someone's "common sense", then I think the complaining going on here would only be the tip of the iceberg.
|
|
