Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Interesting concept of what a "good" GM is

I read some of the posts around the new GM system, and I have to say, I'm puzzled at what some people think being a "good" GM is. There seems to be a train of thought that that GDR is rewarding "bad" GMs who make "ridiculous" offers. Remember, the GM rating is supposed to reflect the desire of players to negotiate with that GM.

So given that the GM rating is designed from a players' perspective, it's really kind of silly to call an offer ridiculous or a GM bad for making an offer that you consider to be out of the market. The player certainly doesn't see it that way, right? The player LOVES the GM that does this, just like Scott Boras loves Brian Cashman. We don't see anyone calling Cashman a bad GM do we? Well, maybe Boston fans, but get over yourselves (and that coming from a diehard O's fan and Yankee hater). GMs spend money on players when they have it & when they think the player is worth it to their team (i.e. that ONE missing piece), and GDR is no different. So let's stop with the value judgments and agree that one guy's overpay is another guy's bargain, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Personally I think the GM point system works as it should with the recent adjustments, the only thing I would add is to echo what others have said about being able to go above the 100 point mark. I was between 95-100 points most of today & I found myself actually incentivized to rescind offers or lower them because, knowing that 2 more signings were coming my way and that I was at 100 points, there was absolutely no good reason to be a "good" GM (i.e. not rescinding or lowering offers) because I knew I was at the point cap.

I do agree with others that the blackout period is heavy handed. It seems to take up the bulk of the remaining time slot and does not give legit owners a chance to respond to someone outbidding them just before the blackout hits. I think the solution to this is to program the system to NOT blackout anyone with green or yellow status on a player. The blackouts need to penalize true snipers, those who wait on the sidelines, giving no clue that they are interested in a player, and pounce 2 seconds before the bidding ends. Cueing the blackout periods only for GMs who have not previously bid on a player should take care of that nicely.

In the Mays league I have invested in young pitching. My strategy there is to take on some risk (Harden's health, Felix's bad sophomore year, Matsuzaka's adjustment to MLB), but to spread the risk among enough players that if I hit on most of them (say, 5 of 8?) that the payoff should be pretty big, to the tune of 18 fpg or so at a price below most of the 20 fpg SPs. I did try to also add THE proven SP talent to that mix with Johan, but was outbid $16.5M/3/NT to $17.5M/3/NT. Fair enough.

For hitting I am also aiming mostly towards breakout-year types, with a couple of vets thrown in & 1 trade hopefully to come that should solidify my lineup from 1-7. In spite of the "win now" mentality in this league (since you're penalized for a poor finish) I've been mixing in a few long-term sleeper contracts (Adam Lind, Miguel Montero) with more clear-cut emerging stars (Nick Markakis, Stephen Drew, Ian Kinsler). I am looking for solid 2.8-3.0 fpg performances from that group & don't think it's unreasonable given their trajectories. If I can get that performance 1-7 in my lineup, I think the pitching, lineup bonuses and park effects will be strong enough to carry most matchups. Let's hope so!

No comments: