Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 2:57:09 GMT -5
I don't think there is a rule anywhere that decides the order that comp picks are placed in. I could be wrong but I think that could be a sticky situation. I'm looking over the draft picks to make sure we have every pick in the correct hands and I came upon this. Edwin Encarnacion and Adam Wainwright both were offered the same amount of years and AAS, it seems like Encarnacion wasn't matched and Wainwright was auto-not matched...so why is it that the Wainwright comp picks (that Orioles originally received, traded to Angels) are listed before Encarnacion?
|
|
|
|
Post by Giants GM (Ron) on Feb 2, 2015 7:47:19 GMT -5
I believe it is in order of declination. The earliest to decline gets 1st comp pick.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 7:50:18 GMT -5
I think it should go by highest AAS then earliest to decline if we need a tie breaker.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brewers GM (Larry) on Feb 2, 2015 10:46:33 GMT -5
I think it should go by highest AAS then earliest to decline if we need a tie breaker. This sounds good to me |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 16:22:07 GMT -5
I think it should go by highest AAS then earliest to decline if we need a tie breaker. I think it should go like this: 1. AAS 2. Years + AAS (3 trumps 2 with same AAS) 3. Whoever declined to match first |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 16:32:05 GMT -5
The length will count only for rounds 2-5 as with the first round all years are the same
|
|
|
|
Post by Giants GM (Ron) on Feb 2, 2015 16:45:53 GMT -5
This is not the way it has been done in the past so in my opinion this represents a rule change that should be effective next year. You don't make changes during the year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 16:46:57 GMT -5
How did we do it before? First come first serve on comp picks?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 17:32:04 GMT -5
I agree that we shouldn't change a rule in the middle of the year but...was there a rule in the first place is my question.
|
|
|
|
Post by Giants GM (Ron) on Feb 2, 2015 18:02:12 GMT -5
I am not sure. But without a specific rule you follow what has been done in the past. Until there is a vote to change it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 18:52:38 GMT -5
In order to do what we did what did we do?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 18:54:04 GMT -5
People won comp picks in RFA last January and I was just curious if there was any reason certain teams were stacked ahead of others...I didn't see a rule so I thought it was something we should figure out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Giants GM (Ron) on Feb 2, 2015 20:55:06 GMT -5
In order to do what we did what did we do? First come, first served. |
|
|
|
Post by Giants GM (Ron) on Feb 2, 2015 22:54:40 GMT -5
The way I view the RFA process, ultimately is as a trade. If someone offers my RFA player $13M and I decline I now own that teams 2nd Rd pick and a compensatory pick. If that same team offers someone else's RFA $14M, that team then decides to shop for a better deal, can't find one and declines his RFA, well IMO that 2nd Rd pick has already been traded as has the first rights to a compensatory pick. To me that is logical. Otherwise, do I now have the option of backing out of my deal? Once an agreement is reached another team has no right to change the terms because their AAS is higher.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 23:22:35 GMT -5
I don't understand your point?
Are you saying if the same person wins 2 RFA players? If they are separate bidding sessions, whoever declined in the first bidding session gets the players actual 2nd rounder. The 2nd bidding session player would then get 2 comp picks. If it was the same bidding session, higher AAS would win over first posted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2015 23:28:29 GMT -5
Yea Ron I think you're a little confused on what I was bringing up, I believe what you are worried about is already done clearly and correctly.
I'm worried about the actual order of why one comp pick is ahead of another...I think the easy to follow system Anton and myself suggested would work fine...I was just curious how it was assessed for this ongoing draft
|
|
|
|
Post by Giants GM (Ron) on Feb 3, 2015 6:09:09 GMT -5
Perhaps Seth. My main concern was that this comp question could go back to the initial 2nd rd pick. That would be awarded on AAS. But the actual pick and comp pick are part and parcel of the same deal so my opinion is both are first come, first served. But whatever is decided is fine with me as long as the 2nd round pick remains first come, first served.
|
|
