Now that the FAAB system is the norm league(s)-wide...
(I was completely unaware this was a global change, but that's more so on me for not reading the new rules/updates than Yahoo for implementing the change. Also, if it's called the FREE AGENT Acquisition Budget, players shouldn't just automatically be listed as "W" in the player list. FAAB system or not, a FA is a FA, and the player is considered as such unless they were recently dropped, and have to "clear" waivers, just like before. A FA bid takes a day; a waiver bid takes two days).
As a 17-year veteran in Yahoo Fantasy Baseball, I hate it. Where was I when the vote to implement this happened? Anywho...
Someone mentioned a few a years ago that a minimum bid should be required in order to pick someone off waivers now, say $1, since your waiver priority is still used as a "tie-breaker" for bids of the same amount. I agree, I think that should be a thing. If you're not going to call them Free Agents (call back), then the ability to pick them up shouldn't be "free."
I also think you shouldn't be "penalized" (monetarily-speaking) for placing a bid. If you place a bid of $10 for someone, and no one else makes a claim/bid, you shouldn't lose those $10 - you didn't bid against anyone - it's basically treated like a FA pickup. Now, if someone bids $0 against your bid of $10, the person who bids $0 should have the option to increase their bid in order to attempt to make that claim. Think of it a bit like eBay - you set a Max Bid (that's capped at a "reasonable amount," so people can't just bid $99 every time), and unless someone makes a bid that's higher than yours, you win the claim. If both people bid the cap, the waiver priority comes into effect.
If you have to increase your initial bid to out-bid the higher bidder, then you have to pay whatever that new dollar figure is for that bid, obviously.
The amount the winning bidder is deducted should be the difference of their bid and the next highest INITIAL bid, especially/specifically if the minimum bid rule is established. So if I bid $10, and the next highest bidder bids $9 - and they don't want to increase their bid to out-bid me - I'm only charged $1. That's a competitive bid. Now if I bid $10, and the next highest bidder only bids $2 (and even if they increase it to let's say $9 - since they'd have the option to do so to try to win the bid - but then back out), I'm "charged" $8. Think of it like penalizing people for purposely over-bidding to win the waiver claim. You still have to bid an amount you'd think is enough to win the claim, but you're forced to be smart with your bid for fear of losing too much of your budget with the bid.
I guess I'm saying all these (hypothetically-logical) things/ideas because [I'm quite perturbed] I don't like the global change, and because I've lost 1/4 of my budget to add players against 1/12 of the bid amounts.
Adam Michalak
shared this idea
Thanks for your feedback. I will pass this along to our engineering and product teams.