Rule Clarifications for 2022

[Athletics GM (Jared)]

Two items have come up this year that just aren't clear enough in the constitution and need to be clarified. These aren't changes and aren't up for a vote, rather this is notice of how the constitution will be interpreted going forward.

1.) Real-life contract extensions

Here's what the constitution says:
"If any player with a real life contract or rookie scale contract receives a real life extension, that extension will apply to the player beginning with the start of the next season. In other words, if a player receives an extension in the middle of a season, his salary does not change here until the following season."

What it doesn't clarify is if the player's FMode owner is forced to accept the extension even if the extension might negatively affect his or her strategy or if they have the option to decline the extension. This became an issue in our sister league when a player received questionable extension right before the season. Because he was on my team and the rule wasn't clear, I chose to eat the contract. But that isn't the intent, nor should it be. In reality I should have had the option to decline the extension and still have the player for this season and that wouldn't preclude a franchise tag being applied at the end of the season if I were to reconsider.

So, going forward...if your player gets an extension before the current contract is up you will have 72 hours to decide if you are going to accept the extension or keep the contract as is.


2.) Off-season IL

Last offseason I allowed players to be placed on the IL even if they weren't on the real-life IL if the team owner could provide information about a long term injury. Frankly, it was a giant hassle and it was gamed a bit in a few instances. I'm going to make it real simple on myself going forward.
- At the end of the season, all IL players return to the 40 man roster.
- To place a player on the IL, he must be IL elligble on Fantrax. That might mean that a player is injured and doesn't get put on the IL until the very end of training camp. Yeah, that's going to impact your roster...but it will be the same for everyone and it keeps me from having to make judgement calls.

If you have any questions. Please let me know.

Thanks,
Jared

[Deleted]

Makes sense to me, on both items.

[Angels GM (Todd)]

Question about number one. When you say we have the choice to accept the extension or keep the contract as is, how does that work if the player was pre-free agency? How would we keep an arbitration contract as is when there will be no more arbitration rulings? And if they are pre-arb, we would be allowed to keep them at those prices for 2-5 more years? I'm not sure I understand what the options are here.

[Athletics GM (Jared)]

Aug 8, 2021 23:12:40 GMT Angels GM (Todd) said:

Question about number one. When you say we have the choice to accept the extension or keep the contract as is, how does that work if the player was pre-free agency? How would we keep an arbitration contract as is when there will be no more arbitration rulings? And if they are pre-arb, we would be allowed to keep them at those prices for 2-5 more years? I'm not sure I understand what the options are here.

That’s an excellent question. If you turn down an extension you are giving up all years covered by the extension. If the extension is for a pre-arb player you’re basically releasing them. I don’t think this will ever happen since 99% of pre arb and arb extensions are positive, but it should be addressed specifically.

[Deleted]

Also just trying to get clarity here, I think I follow but I’m going to verify:

If a player in the last year of his deal signs an extension in season, you get a window after the season to decide if you want the contract

If a player going into the last year of his deal signs an offseason extension you have 72 hours to accept the contract or keep him on a 1 year deal that hits Free Agency (barring a franchise tag) after the year

If a player buys out their arbitration seasons but not into their free agency seasons they remain eligible for the offseason non tender rule

I think I’m all good and I agree with all of that. I guess the one question I would have left is what about those cases where a player signs an extension with more than a whole season on his contract? I think that’s only about 1% of extensions and typically reserved for star players, but it happens

[Athletics GM (Jared)]

Aug 9, 2021 11:02:50 GMT @cody said:

Also just trying to get clarity here, I think I follow but I’m going to verify:

If a player in the last year of his deal signs an extension in season, you get a window after the season to decide if you want the contract

If a player going into the last year of his deal signs an offseason extension you have 72 hours to accept the contract or keep him on a 1 year deal that hits Free Agency (barring a franchise tag) after the year

If a player buys out their arbitration seasons but not into their free agency seasons they remain eligible for the offseason non tender rule

I think I’m all good and I agree with all of that. I guess the one question I would have left is what about those cases where a player signs an extension with more than a whole season on his contract? I think that’s only about 1% of extensions and typically reserved for star players, but it happens

I'll answer these one at a time:

1.) No, your 72 hour window comes at the time of the extension. You don't get to decide after the season. Since there is the possibility of an extension going unnoticed by anyone for several weeks, the 72 hours starts when I become aware of the extension and notify the team owner that their 72 hours has started. If I don't receive a reply, the extension will be applied.

2.) Correct.

3.) Nope. I'm not keeping track of which fully guaranteed contract years used to be arbitration years. Once the extension applies, you can no longer non-tender the player.

4.) If a player has multiple years left on a fully guaranteed contract and receives an extension (like you said, pretty rare occurance) the only years you can keep without applying the extension are years that are left unchanged by the extension. Say the player has 2 years left, 1 at $10m and 1 at $12m. The new extension leaves the $10m year in place and adds 4 more at $15m. If you decline that extension you only get the $10m year.

[Deleted]

So always a 72 hour window to decide on extensions, and if the player has guaranteed money beyond the current season there are no non tenders, thank you sir

[Athletics GM (Jared)]

Aug 8, 2021 22:00:12 GMT Athletics GM (Jared) said:

2.) Off-season IL

Last offseason I allowed players to be placed on the IL even if they weren't on the real-life IL if the team owner could provide information about a long term injury. Frankly, it was a giant hassle and it was gamed a bit in a few instances. I'm going to make it real simple on myself going forward.
- At the end of the season, all IL players return to the 40 man roster.
- To place a player on the IL, he must be IL elligble on Fantrax. That might mean that a player is injured and doesn't get put on the IL until the very end of training camp. Yeah, that's going to impact your roster...but it will be the same for everyone and it keeps me from having to make judgement calls.

Ok, this is not proving to be less hassle and more fair. It's actually more of a pain in the ass and less fair because Fantrax simply doesn't maintain status properly and/or teams play with status in the offseason. I can't tell.

I don't like making rule changes once an offseason has started, so we'll soldier on as is until opening day. BUT...We're going to make this VERY simple for 2023. There is no IL in the offseason. You will be able to carry 60 assets during the offseason and your 3 IL spots will be closed. On opening day you may begin moving players to the IL and it will be up to you to put them in an IL slot on Fantrax BEFORE posting your transaction. I will look at your roster to verify that the player is in an IL slot before processing it on the spreadsheet and thus opening a roster spot for you. That might not be what we want, but there's no question that it will be the same for everyone.