Derrek Lee

Terry H · Post by **Terry H** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 10:04 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:Originally posted by SluggoJD:

In my case, the move I would have made is rather obvious - move Sweeney to 1B, and put Edmonds in at U...that is the move I would have made, and like I said before, it's rather obvious by looking at my team.This would be an illegal move--you can't shuffle players around to "make it fit." In fact, there were only three possible scenarios that could have happened with Derrek Lee:

(1) If Lee was at 1B, you could have replaced him with a 1B-eligible player from your reserve squad

(2) If Lee was at CI, you could have replaced him with a 1B- or 3B-eligible player from your reserve squad

(3) If Lee was at UT, you could have replaced him with any offensive player from your reserve squad.

From your previous post, I take it that scenario (1) applies to you. That being the case, you could not have moved Edmonds in for Lee.

Hope this helps you and others... [/QUOTE]KOQ, I believe you to be mistaken on this. In the above situation Lee was at 1B, Sweeney at Utility, and Edmonds was a Reserve.

If Lee is allowed to be removed from the active roster to the reserve roster because he's been put on the DL, then Sweeney would be allowed to be moved from the Utility position to the 1B position and Edmonds would be allowed to be put in the Utility position.

What I don't understand is, why is it that the people that checked their team page late Friday to discover Lee had been DL'd were allowed the advantage to remove Lee from the lineup and replace with an active player as opposed to those that checked their team page early Friday and found that Lee had not been DL'd and thus were not allowed to make a change? It should be a level playing field.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 10:20 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

NO he would not. if feedback is still ok...

if the same situation comes up this week, you said the switch wouldn't be allowed.

why not reinstate d.lee on the few line-ups that switched him last week and make ALL d.lee owners feel like they weren't hoodwinked? [/QUOTE]STATS followed the rules that I had in place at the time, even though I had conversed that no player would be added after 12:01 a.m. I have changed Rule 13 to make sure this doesn't happen again and I take full blame for that. It's now in black and white that no player will be added to the DL after 12:01 a.m. each Friday. Eight main event teams legally moved him to reserve and I'm looking at those now to get all the facts.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:57 am

Originally posted by SluggoJD:

Does this apply to auction leagues as well? And what's the bottom line here for folks like me who were unable to replace Lee on Friday?

In my case, the move I would have made is rather obvious - move Sweeney to 1B, and put Edmonds in at U. Edmonds was benched because of his sore arm, but he was back prior to Friday.

Edmonds sort of sucked Fri-Sun going 2-11, 1 HR, 2 RBIs I believe...but that is the move I would have made, and like I said before, it's rather obvious by looking at my team.

John Sluggo,

It's rather obvious...you're clueless. When will everyone learn that you can't have a fireman's drill when one of your player's goes on the DL.

Terry H · Post by **Terry H** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:53 pm

Originally posted by nydownunder:

Sluggo,

It's rather obvious...you're clueless. When will everyone learn that you can't have a fireman's drill when one of your player's goes on the DL. [/QB]Don't know why you are so insulting especially considering that it might be you that is ... to use your term, clueless.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:15 pm

Originally posted by Terry Haney:

quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:Originally posted by SluggoJD:

In my case, the move I would have made is rather obvious - move Sweeney to 1B, and put Edmonds in at U...that is the move I would have made, and like I said before, it's rather obvious by looking at my team.This would be an illegal move--you can't shuffle players around to "make it fit." In fact, there were only three possible scenarios that could have happened with Derrek Lee:

(1) If Lee was at 1B, you could have replaced him with a 1B-eligible player from your reserve squad

(2) If Lee was at CI, you could have replaced him with a 1B- or 3B-eligible player from your reserve squad

(3) If Lee was at UT, you could have replaced him with any offensive player from your reserve squad.

From your previous post, I take it that scenario (1) applies to you. That being the case, you could not have moved Edmonds in for Lee.

Hope this helps you and others... [/QUOTE]KOQ, I believe you to be mistaken on this. In the above situation Lee was at 1B, Sweeney at Utility, and Edmonds was a Reserve.

If Lee is allowed to be removed from the active roster to the reserve roster because he's been put on the DL, then Sweeney would be allowed to be moved from the Utility position to the 1B position and Edmonds would be allowed to be put in the Utility position.[/QUOTE]Greg, can you confirm this? My understanding was that you can only make a switch if it fits positionally (see the above example with Derrek Lee).

Don't want to accuse anyone of being clueless now...

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:34 pm

Replacing D. Lee...(who was at 1B at the time of the injury in this example)...with SOMEONE FROM YOUR BENCH...that was eligible at 1B...would be legal...under the new rules.

By "firman drill" he is simply stating that you are trying to mix-and-match non-DL'd players to optimize your lineup...not legal.

You...in your own example...end up replacing D. Lee with Sweeney...Sweeney is not eligible...not from your bench.

Edmonds could never factor in unless you had Lee at UTI...(not eligible at 1B)...in neither the old nor new rule.

~Lance

[ April 24, 2006, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:05 pm

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

Replacing D. Lee...(who was at 1B at the time of the injury in this example)...with SOMEONE FROM YOUR BENCH...that was eligible at 1B...would be legal...under the new rules.

By "firman drill" he is simply stating that you are trying to mix-and-match non-DL'd players to optimize your lineup...not legal.

You...in your own example...end up replacing D. Lee with Sweeney...Sweeney is not eligible...not from your bench.

Edmonds could never factor in unless you had Lee at UTI...(not eligible at 1B)...in neither the old nor new rule.

~Lance Too many ellipses there, Lance -- a couple more...and...you'd pull off...the William Shatner...cadence.

Cellar Dwellers · Post by **Cellar Dwellers** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:29 pm

"Too many ellipses there, Lance -- a couple more...and...you'd pull off...the William Shatner...cadence"

That may be the funniest thing I've ever read.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:29 pm

Sorry...bad habit!

I re-read it with the Shatner voice...it was much...better!

Good Call!

~Lance

Parnelli · Post by **Parnelli** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:29 pm

Gekko, You can't take legal moves away.

dedhed-j · Post by **dedhed-j** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:40 pm

Greg,

You state it is now in black and white????????????

Where???????????????????????????

If it is only on the message boards how is that fair, of the 330 teams, how many are active on the boards and how may actually now how to navigate through them?????????????????????????

Has the rule been e-mailed to all the owners like yesterdays stats are???????????????????

I have not got them.

You said it is now in black and white, is it on the NFBC main page??????

Is it on everyone's league page??? There is the "COMMISSIONER'S MESSAGE" on our league page and it is from March.

Also, I get an E-mail everyday with yesterday's stats. A

dedhed-j · Post by **dedhed-j** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:06 pm

Greg,

You state it is now in "Black and White"????????????

Where???????????????????????????

If it is only on the message boards, How is that fair? Of the 330 teams, How many are active on the boards and how many actually now how to navigate through them(the message boards)?????????????????????????

Has the rule been e-mailed to all the owners like yesterdays stats are???????????????????

I have not got them (yesterdays stats for my team, via e-mail).

You said it is now in "Black and White", is it on the NFBC main page??????

Is it on everyone's league page??????? There is the "COMMISSIONER'S MESSAGE" on our league page and it is from March.

I guess this is the $1,250.00 question?

Signed,

Everyone should play by the same rules!!!!

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:59 pm

Originally posted by King of Queens:

Too many ellipses there, Lance -- a couple more...and...you'd pull off...the William Shatner...cadence. lol!

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:17 am

Originally posted by dedhed-j:

Greg,

You state it is now in black and white????????????

Where???????????????????????????

If it is only on the message boards how is that fair, of the 330 teams, how many are active on the boards and how may actually now how to navigate through them?????????????????????????

Has the rule been e-mailed to all the owners like yesterdays stats are???????????????????

I have not got them.

You said it is now in black and white, is it on the NFBC main page??????

Is it on everyone's league page??? There is the "COMMISSIONER'S MESSAGE" on our league page and it is from March.

Also, I get an E-mail everyday with yesterday's stats. A Jason, it's Rule 13 in the NFBC Rules link for every league. And yes the rule update was e-mailed to every NFBC owner yesterday morning. If you didn't get it, let me know and we'll add you to the NFBC e-mail list. Your partner Mark definitely should have received it.

dedhed-j · Post by **dedhed-j** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:03 am

No, I did not get an e-mail. The only e-mails I receive from you are yesterdays stats.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 3:26 am

Originally posted by dedhed-j:

No, I did not get an e-mail. The only e-mails I receive from you are yesterdays stats. dedhed,

Pick up your game. Read the rules on the website.

Greg,

Let's put a minimum age limit on this competition next year.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:12 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

Greg,

Let's put a minimum age limit on this competition next year. Under the "Questions" link on the www.fantasybaseballchampionship.com homepage:

Q: Can anyone compete in the National Fantasy Football Championship?

A: No. The principal participant must be 21 years of age and cannot reside in the five following states: Arizona, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana or Vermont.

I've met dedhed-j, and can assure you that he meets both of these restrictions. Nevertheless, he's a paying co-manager for baseball -- so even if he was 5 years old, he'd should be allowed to speak freely.

[ April 25, 2006, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: King of Queens ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:24 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

Greg,

Let's put a minimum age limit on this competition next year. Under the "Questions" link on the www.fantasybaseballchampionship.com homepage:

Q: Can anyone compete in the National Fantasy Football Championship?

A: No. The principal participant must be 21 years of age and cannot reside in the five following states: Arizona, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana or Vermont.

I've met dedhed-j, and can assure you that he meets both of these restrictions. Nevertheless, he's a paying co-manager for baseball -- so even if he was 5 years old, he'd should be allowed to speak freely. [/QUOTE]I know he's of drinking age because I think I bought him and Gekko about 12 beers each in Las Vegas at the NFFC draft in 2004!

bp_ · Post by **bp_** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:37 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by dedhed-j:

Greg,

You state it is now in black and white????????????

Where???????????????????????????

If it is only on the message boards how is that fair, of the 330 teams, how many are active on the boards and how may actually now how to navigate through them?????????????????????????

Has the rule been e-mailed to all the owners like yesterdays stats are???????????????????

I have not got them.

You said it is now in black and white, is it on the NFBC main page??????

Is it on everyone's league page??? There is the "COMMISSIONER'S MESSAGE" on our league page and it is from March.

Also, I get an E-mail everyday with yesterday's stats. A Jason, it's Rule 13 in the NFBC Rules link for every league. And yes the rule update was e-mailed to every NFBC owner yesterday morning. If you didn't get it, let me know and we'll add you to the NFBC e-mail list. Your partner Mark definitely should have received it. [/QUOTE]I didn't get any email and I am in a satellite league. Why would I have to be added to a mailing list? Shouldn't I automatically be on a list as a participant? Seems that should be addressed for the future as well.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:36 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

Greg,

Let's put a minimum age limit on this competition next year. Under the "Questions" link on the www.fantasybaseballchampionship.com homepage:

Q: Can anyone compete in the National Fantasy Football Championship?

A: No. The principal participant must be 21 years of age and cannot reside in the five following states: Arizona, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana or Vermont.

I've met dedhed-j, and can assure you that he meets both of these restrictions. Nevertheless, he's a paying co-manager for baseball -- so even if he was 5 years old, he'd should be allowed to speak freely. [/QUOTE]Deadhed can speak freely all he wants. All I am saying is that it's about time some people in this comp start getting off their lazy arses and start reading the rules themselves. If the technology doesn't go according to the plan (the rules) then Greg and his crew will deal with it, but they shouldn't have to consistently waste their time explaining rules all the time when it's right there on the website. I've got a 4 day old child that is more proactive than some around here. You don't see him asking me if, how, and when he can sh*te and scream all night. Hell no, he has taken on that responsibility himself.

[ April 25, 2006, 02:43 PM: Message edited by: nydownunder ]

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:02 am

Originally posted by :

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

All I am saying is that it's about time some people in this comp start getting off their lazy arses and start reading the rules themselves. Isn't really about time you started fielding a quality team? 2005 was a bust for you and you're going down that SAME road again this year. [/QUOTE]Nice rock you are behind (ie login). You're right, 14th ranked Pitching staff in the whole comp won't cut it. Talk to me on Oct 1st...not April 25th.

[ April 25, 2006, 03:08 PM: Message edited by: nydownunder ]

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:52 am

Originally posted by :

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

Nice rock you are behind (ie login). You're right, 14th ranked Pitching staff in the whole comp won't cut it. Talk to me on Oct 1st...not April 25th. What place did you finish in 2005?

With the 14th highest ranked pitching staff, you must be in the top 20, right? What about top 50?Imagine what place you're gonna be in once your pitching staff starts getting beatup. [/QUOTE]200-ish. Considering it was my first year and I lost my whole pitching staff to injuries, very respectable. I'm obviously a lot prouder of who I am than yourself . But like I said, talk to me on Oct 1st or feel free to put your money where your mouth is. If not, go back in your closet.