League decisions

[Sand Gnats (Matthew)]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Taveras was on oversight on my part in TP, in hindsight I would have definitely given compensation for him if I had it to do all over again. The timing of Taveras' accident during the off-season made it more of a blip on the radar and had I given it proper thought at the time I would have come to a different conclusion. I stated as much in our TRP discussions and felt as though Jimmy was of a like mind on the matter. I also have the opinion that there is no need for a "rule" and a case by case discussion is the best course of action. Jose Fernandez was a generational talent losing him tragically the way we did is unprecedented and I feel losing a player of his ilk should be compensated to some degree. Losing Corey Lidle suddenly is still a loss, but not on the scale of Jose Fernandez, so case by case basis is the way I'd go about it. A pick at the end of 1st and the end of the 2nd is nowhere near to value Fernandez represented, but it is better than nothing and does give some relief to such an unforeseen tragedy.

[Deleted]

Look, no one's tearing anyone down, just trying to understand what's going on, I can understand oversights, but if it was just an oversight, it could be corrected and you could give comp for Taveras. Otherwise, it becomes precedent and seems odd to flip that after it's established. I'm fine for commish having lattitude, It's just it's impt for the league that there is consistency in the decisions. That could be a rule as others suggested, but it could also just be trying to maintain consistency with past decisions.

[BlueSox GM(Matt P)]

I have a problem with giving compensation for Taveras. Based on your argument, based on Taveras' potential, that he should have been compensated for, Brandon Wood, had he died following the 2008 season, or Delmon Young following 2006 season, would have been compensated for. Compensating a team for a once in a generational talent who has proven himself, and was entering his prime, is one thing. Expecting that a top prospect will actually do what is expected of him for the length of his career, and before he has proven himself, and compensating them based our estimation of who they could be, seems counter-intuitive.

[Generals GM (Pete)]

I honestly really am fine with whatever is decided. I am also fine with the commish and/or board making a decision. And I am not big on creating rules just to create rules. BUT the back and forth in this thread, to me, says there needs to be some sort of criteria so that for future happenings people feel they are all treated the same.

I get Fernandez was already a star and probably only getting better, and I get that Taveras wasn't yet proven, but trying to decide who is more valuable to one team or another is really hard. Once again, the day before Taveras was killed, would you have traded him for Jose Fernandez, the day before he was killed??? Hard to say because prospects are usually overvalued and there is obvious value to the years of PP. But maybe one his first day back in spring training, Fernandez blows out his arm., who knows.  The fact that we value things differently makes if fun.  If we all valued everyone exactly the same, well we wouldnt have any trades.

I had suggested using a set criteria, Fantrax seems like it would be fair since that is what the league is based on. It could be based on the current or most recent Fantrax rankings, so it objective. If my counting is correct, based on last years stats, Fernandez is ranked #30 overall, including pitchers and position players. I don't care where the line is drawn or what the comp is, just pick something and make it consistent. Don't want to include prospects, that is fine, want to include them, then use some 3rd party rankings (MLB top 100??) if people feel it is that important. Want to keep it simple, a player ranked in the top 50 gets compensation and no one else. Want to tier it and do different levels, that's fine. This is not a knock on the job the board is doing, just a suggestion, I just think it is better than someone having to make a decision if it happens again.  And even thought you guys are trying to do the right thing, someone will always feel slighted.

So two things, 1) Let's all hope it doesn't happen again, regardless of the level of player and 2) THANKS again to the commish and the board for running the league for the rest of us (probably hasn't been said enough)!!

[Javelinas GM (Scott)]

Oct 31, 2016 8:48:01 GMT -5 BlueSox GM(Matt P) said:

I have a problem with giving compensation for Taveras. Based on your argument, based on Taveras' potential, that he should have been compensated for, Brandon Wood, had he died following the 2008 season, or Delmon Young following 2006 season, would have been compensated for. Compensating a team for a once in a generational talent who has proven himself, and was entering his prime, is one thing. Expecting that a top prospect will actually do what is expected of him for the length of his career, and before he has proven himself, and compensating them based our estimation of who they could be, seems counter-intuitive.

In order for this argument to hold up it has to be generally understood that top prospects are over valued, unless of course you are arguing that compensation wasnt awarded for Fernandez based on league value but rather based on actual major league contribution value.

I think a simple clarification to the rules would make sense.
"Compensation for sudden and tragic death applies only to ML players that have crossed 50/150 and even then is subject to commissioner discretion." Therefore it is understood that holding value in the form of a prospect is a little bit more risky than holding value at the ML level.

[Sand Gnats (Matthew)]

I don't think we had any discussion on Taveras at the time, at least I can't remember having one. Had there been one I'm pretty sure I'd have argued in favor of giving at least a 1st round comp pick, I know I would have done that in my league, but it never came up or if it did it was nothing more than a blip on the screen and not something I put any thought into at all. That said, I don't think it's a good idea to give compensation for an oversight made two years ago since I don't want to venture down that rabbit hole.

[Deleted]

My thing on this is just that the precedent matters. My understanding is too is that Taveras was discussed and it was decided not to give comp, not that it matters because it's precedent either way. I was just reacting to the comment that it was just a mistake. If it was a mistake it's not too late to correct it. But if it's not going to be corrected, then the predecent needs to be applied to following decisions, otherwise there's a lack of fairness. which is more imporant than any comp. even if you think maybe the original decision was wrong, that's not a reason to do sthg different now, that's sounds like a Goodell thing to do. Once a precedent is established the league needs to keep consistency or else it's just not a fair shake. I realize there a different managers are on trp over time, but that's all the more reason to ensure consistency rather than just letting how we function change based on the whims of who is on trp. Biscuits was on trp before, was he against taveras, would be a weird irony for instance if him getting off trp is part of why he gets comp now. Now, I get that the league described thing here isn't what gnats said, but rather that it would be established stars. That's at least acknowledging the previous precedent since its basically saying other guys like Taveras would be also not receive comp, even if it feels it bit forced as a way to do one without the other to accomplish a result. At least as I said, it tries to incorporate the previous precedent even if it's problematic.

At the end of the day, it's about fairness, I don't the picks and never asked for or complained about not getting them, but I do take what seems like a lack of consistency and fairness as treating taveras as just an overaight as a wrong,it wasn't just an oversight, because even if it was a mistake it's still precedent.

(Fwiw, as to other suggestions, Taveras had passed the rookie thresholds so a crossing 150/50 sort of thing doesn't work, as was NOT a prospect when he died).