I understand what you are trying to do, and I do think that you are on the right track, I just think that the current method of measurement is a little biased. It actually also works against those teams with high PB values, as well as those with low. Only the middle teams are able to benefit with your plan. Teams with 60-70 PB point can almost always be assured of good picks (as long as the manager is half decent.)
As you for not buying the argument a bad team cannot be improved in two years, you obviously have never owned a pathetic team. I took my team over and began rebuilding right away. Yes, I have benefited with high rookie picks etc... but my team is still young. Torii Hunter, Vernon Wells, Ichiro Suzuki, Josh Phelps, Eurbiel Durazo, Billy Koch are all players I've drafted and yes, looking at them I can see a decent future, but it has taken three years to amass this talent. It is not easy to trade when you have nothing, and it is even harder when the really really good teams have no impetus to do so either (which is why I'm in favour of a cap).
And I'm not as shortsighted as you'd believe me to be. I see myself in 2 or 3 years as being one of the teams impacted by the cap (Especially if I manage to secure Eric Hinske this year). Ask Mike, I've always said that I have a 5 year plan with my team (next year is year 4, year 5 I expect to challenge for if not secure a playoff spot).
I'm fully aware and I hope to be impacted by the new rules. The object here isn't to try to help only me, as you seem to believe I am trying to do, it is to improve the game. I don't plan on being in the basement forever you know.
- but I don't want to see something placed into the game that penalizes team for something not of their control.That being said - if the majority/concensus is to accept it, I will. I'm just making sure that the view point of the little guy is heard (since I suspect most of the little guys have long left their team to the robot already this year...)