When is too many picks too much?

[WhiteSox]

This is no shot at Chris. He is doing a legitimate strategy. I just want to know when is too many picks too much? Currently Chris has 49 or 50 picks (might have miscounted). That's just about a 1/6 of the entire draft. In place we have a limit on pick ups per day and cap space. Is it time we put in a limit on picks a team can own? I mean yes he might not be able to move them all by the time the draft starts and might not have room on his roster to use them all so they might go to waste but more than likely he will trade some of the picks this year for next year picks and the cycle will continue on. I'm not trying to pick on Chris at all it just gets to a point like when a team tanks for several years that the question needs to be asked, "Does something need to be put in place?"

[Deleted]

Just about 50, wow, crazy. But I don't actually have a problem with it. He has acquired a ton of draft picks and IFA cap, but that's because he is allocating his assets in a different way than the rest of us. This is the same argument I made for open roster spots not costing $500K, I believe teams should be able to run their teams as they see fit. When you look at each individual trade, there's nothing that jumps out about any of them. We can only keep 13 on our rookie roster anyway so while he has 50 right now, he will eventually reallocate in a different way. Chris definitely goes about it in a different way, but I think that's what makes the Cincinnati franchise so different and unique here. But that's just my two cents on the topic.

[Deleted]

I have no issue with it. He's accepting the risk that he won't be able to use or trade the picks. Not the type of risk I would take to such an extreme, but not my place to tell him how to run his team. Hopefully it pays off for him.

[BrewCrewGM]

I got no problem with it. Chris knows the rules of this league when it comes to the rookie roster and what not. He'll figure it out.

[Cincinnati Reds - Chris]

No offense taken.

I'm not taking the mention of tanking as a shot at me. But since it was mentioned, could we maybe look at ESPN roster maintenance before we start looking at the number of picks a Manager acquires?

When I made the Seth Smith trade yesterday, it left me an OF short. And I'm in the process of making a move to fill that spot. Sure my roster is pretty bad, but

*My 36 man roster is better than what I inherited.
*My payroll close to 40m better
*My contracts team friendly
*I have one of the Top 15 farms scouting + production + ARL + youngest in TPB when the farm I inherited I don't recall identifying any prospects when I could recognize most of the BA Handbook top 30
*Pick collection the largest. And will be one of the best in TPB for how well I should pick for the Top 13 picks.
*IFA money is second to none (An asset deemed worthless by many, but was also questioned about the amount I've collected.) If it's deemed worthless by many, than why concern oneself with how much I collect? And please don't say because I can dictate market prices on IFA kids. Because that counters the argument of people thinking the money is worthless, if it's worthless or you're not interested in Highly regarded Int'l prospects than don't worry about what I'm doing with my money.

If an Manager poses a concern for the league about intentionally tanking in a detrimental specific way then address it. I'm one of the most active managers in the league and have set myself up for 2017 to IMO have a team that may push a .500 record with arguably the best overall farm in the league pumping my team perennially with cheap young prospects.

[WhiteSox]

That was already supposed to be something addressed but I don't think we as a league have been following teams close enough to make sure they're filling spots but it's still an issue.

[WhiteSox]

BTW I wasn't talking about you tanking I was talking about when we made it a point after Marlins tanked for a couple seasons

[Cincinnati Reds - Chris]

May 21, 2016 13:33:27 GMT -5 WhiteSox said:

BTW I wasn't talking about you tanking I was talking about when we made it a point after Marlins tanked for a couple seasons

I understand that form of tanking.

IMO tanking intentionally and negatively should be looked at as each situation on its own merit and what's warranting the calls of tanking.

The manager's cred' should be taken into account and what exactly the thoughts are on the tanking.

If you want I'll explain in detail to League Admins or a couple of others what I'm doing. But by no means should I be publicly accountable to the entire league.

[WhiteSox]

I wasn't saying you're tanking I was saying that tanking resulted in looking if teams were doing it intentionally and that caused a rule change and saying it'd be something out of the ordinary that causes a rule change like having 50 picks

[Deleted]

I have no issue with pick or IFA $ accumulation, nor did I have issue with Marlins tanking