Time for some answers...

Money · Post by **Money** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:46 pm

There are two very pressing topics on the message boards this week. The pitchers DL rule and the approach to the integrity of the stats in each league. In my opinion both need to be addressed by the NFBC. There is no personal attack here as I have the same regard for Greg and Tom that everyone else does. These are are statements and observations that need clarification.

1. The DL Rule.

A clear and concise communication must be rendered. Each participant needs to know exactly what can and cannot be executed when setting lineups throughout the course of the week.

The fact that the longtime faithful (sometimes not even them) and no one else are in the know is absolutely unacceptable. Where is the fairness in that?

2. The Integrity of the Stats

I have never questioned these ever. This week it's been brought up that errors are being made. The response is that we'll re-run them. I personally want more. I want the assurance that these are above reproach and want to know exactly what happened. Has it happened before? Could it have happened and not been caught?

No one can follow every stat for every team, especially not when an overall prize is involved.

This goes to the core of the game and you (the NFBC) have nothing when these come in question.

These questions may have been answered in previous threads, no one can read every one. Two years ago there was direct and concise direction given to the DL rule, the same needs to occur now.

I've donated well over 20k to three different contests in the last 15 months. I've been unable to complete up until now and I was positive it was because everyone is so much better. I want to continue to believe that. Right now I'm not so sure. We play on an un-level playing field, tilted toward the chosen ones. I disagreed with the opening day Padilla situation last year, but at least it was immediately addressed and everyone new the outcome.

I'm sure the NFBC will be happy to see me go on my merry way, those that compete against me will not. The silence is deafening. I apologize for the negative approach here, I guess I'm a glass half empty type of guy. I started out coming to the board to learn, got carried away a couple of times and tried to come only to see what Doughboys was posting. Hard to ignore the issues and the disparity on how everyone is treated in certain situations.

This started out as a PM the NFBC, I decided I didn't want to be pacified on this. I apologize in advance if I've offended anyone.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 4:52 pm

The DL question has been answered about 10 times already, it is a legal move for 2011. For 2012 and beyond it will be addressed during the offseason. As for the fairness, it was there for anyone to figure out on their own if they read the rules.

[ June 23, 2011, 10:59 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

Money · Post by **Money** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:00 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The DL question has been answered about 10 times already, it is a legal move for 2011. For 2012 and beyond it will be addressed during the offseason. KJ, it has not been communicated to the masses, possibly only to those that follow every single post. You were involved in the debate two years ago and are passionate about it, I understand that. I simply believe that every participant needs to know what there options are. You and the guys that have been around (in my opinion) use it as an unfair competitive advantage.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:09 pm

KJ, in 2009 a ruling was made in the very first post of a thread made by Greg. Even though a ruling was made then, you helped keep the debate going for 13 pages because you weren't satisfied with it. Now that others aren't satisfied with a ruling this year that isn't consistent with what's been ruled in the past but falls on your side of the debate, you feel the argument is over. I'm sorry that others disagree this year as you did back then.

Joe, both your concerns are valid. Just because you aren't part of the chosen as you put it, doesn't lessen your concerns one bit. Whether you've been here for 8 years or one, spend $20K or $125, you're entitled to state your opinion on issues that honestly go to the heart of this contest. I for one agree with both of your concerns.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:22 pm

Originally posted by Money:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The DL question has been answered about 10 times already, it is a legal move for 2011. For 2012 and beyond it will be addressed during the offseason. KJ, it has not been communicated to the masses, possibly only to those that follow every single post. You were involved in the debate two years ago and are passionate about it, I understand that. I simply believe that every participant needs to know what there options are. You and the guys that have been around (in my opinion) use it as an unfair competitive advantage. [/QUOTE]The competitive advantage is miniscule if even positive, you can just as easily shoot yourself in the foot. It is certainly small in relation to just about everything else in this game.

Second, this is not a secret rule - anyone could have figured it out and used it, and if they didn't how is that any different than figuring out the best resources to use, or how to evaluate talent or how to bid on free agents? Should the NFBC send out a blast email telling everyone how the best players play the game?

You learn this game by observation, research and experience - some is baseball-related and some is strategy-related. When I hear that something isn't fair because someone didn't figure out a strategy that someone else did ... it just sounds like whining. This is not some secret backdoor entry into the STATS mainframe, it is a simple observation that can be made by reading the DL rule and then moving your player with a red tag.

Nonetheless, I've already said I'm in favor of clarifying this issue in the rules to squash these types of criticisms.

Money · Post by **Money** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:26 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by Money:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The DL question has been answered about 10 times already, it is a legal move for 2011. For 2012 and beyond it will be addressed during the offseason. KJ, it has not been communicated to the masses, possibly only to those that follow every single post. You were involved in the debate two years ago and are passionate about it, I understand that. I simply believe that every participant needs to know what there options are. You and the guys that have been around (in my opinion) use it as an unfair competitive advantage. [/QUOTE]The competitive advantage is miniscule if even positive, you can just as easily shoot yourself in the foot. It is certainly small in relation to just about everything else in this game.

Second, this is not a secret rule - anyone could have figured it out and used it, and if they didn't how is that any different than figuring out the best resources to use, or how to evaluate talent or how to bid on free agents? Should the NFBC send out a blast email telling everyone how the best players play the game?

You learn this game by observation, research and experience - some is baseball-related and some is strategy-related. When I hear that something isn't fair because someone didn't figure out a strategy that someone else did ... it just sounds like whining. This is not some secret backdoor entry into the STATS mainframe, it is a simple observation that can be made by reading the DL rule and then moving your player with a red tag.

Nonetheless, I've already said I'm in favor of clarifying this issue in the rules to squash these types of criticisms. [/QUOTE]I respectfully disagree. GFY.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:30 pm

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

KJ, in 2009 a ruling was made in the very first post of a thread made by Greg. Even though a ruling was made then, you helped keep the debate going for 13 pages because you weren't satisfied with it. Big difference being that in 2009 a written rule was being modified in-season (in the opinion of myself, Gekko, Jupinka, Dough and others). In this case, Greg is not changing the written rule, he is in fact comfirming it. Big, big difference.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:34 pm

Originally posted by Money:

I respectfully disagree. GFY. well that seems like a bit of a contradiction

Money · Post by **Money** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:45 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by Money:

I respectfully disagree. GFY. well that seems like a bit of a contradiction

[/QUOTE]To be perfectly honest with you I could care less which way the rule is interpreted. The fact is it's very, very vague. It's open for multiple interpretations. I simply want to know the exact interpretation. Just like the alias rule earlier this year, the NFBC stated that they didn't publicize it because it would render to much work on their part. I say to bad, everyone should have the same opportunity. The playing field in these parts are not level and I believe unfairly skewed to those in the know.

If you need quotes from the rules on how the masses interpret them, I'm not your guy. Once again they are VERY VERY Vague. I'm not willing to quote them, you know them by heart.

I'm done go ahead and take the last word.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:50 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by Glenneration X:

KJ, in 2009 a ruling was made in the very first post of a thread made by Greg. Even though a ruling was made then, you helped keep the debate going for 13 pages because you weren't satisfied with it. Big difference being that in 2009 a written rule was being modified in-season (in the opinion of myself, Gekko, Jupinka, Dough and others). In this case, Greg is not changing the written rule, he is in fact comfirming it. Big, big difference. [/QUOTE]Why do I have a feeling that the big, big difference is more that Greg has thus far ruled on your side of the debate this time?

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 5:56 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

You learn this game by observation, research and experience - some is baseball-related and some is strategy-related. When I hear that something isn't fair because someone didn't figure out a strategy that someone else did ... it just sounds like whining. This is not some secret backdoor entry into the STATS mainframe, it is a simple observation that can be made by reading the DL rule and then moving your player with a red tag. Strategy when it applies to baseball-related items is what this game is about. Strategy when it applies to holes in the software should be what we try to circumvent.

This kind of strategy is not why the DL rule was put in place. Greg decided that and stated it clearly in 2009. What has changed that now makes it part of accepted strategy in 2011? I've yet to hear a reason explaining why this issue is being treated differently this year except that the calendar turned.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:58 pm

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

Why do I have a feeling that the big, big difference is more that Greg has thus far ruled on your side of the debate this time?

Probably because you don't understand the way I think.

At the time I didn't care about the rule nearly as much as I cared about the rule not being changed once the season was underway - in a single league where everyone agreed with the ruling, that would be one thing; in a national contest with $100k on the line it could get ugly. I know at the time Greg disagreed with my interpretation and I don't want to re-open that debate, but that was my opinion.

My second concern was one of compliance. I think from one of my old posts I estimated that something like 30,000 (or whatever) transactions would have to be scrutinized over all leagues for 26 weeks to ensure compliance. Do you think the sparse NFBC staff has time to do that? My guess is no, not then and even less so now. So if you disallow the rule, the guys that play to win within the rules could potentially (yes, only potentially) be disadvantaged because guys who would be inclined to see if they can get away with it, or those who weren't even privy to the entire MB discussion, could be doing it and it would probably go unnoticed if no one in their particular league saw it. As is my nature, I will fight very strongly for equal opportunity but I have no interest in fighting for equality, especially in a competition. Let the best man win, and that includes strategy.

[ June 24, 2011, 01:06 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 10:35 pm

Originally posted by Money:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The DL question has been answered about 10 times already, it is a legal move for 2011. For 2012 and beyond it will be addressed during the offseason. KJ, it has not been communicated to the masses, possibly only to those that follow every single post. You were involved in the debate two years ago and are passionate about it, I understand that. I simply believe that every participant needs to know what there options are. You and the guys that have been around (in my opinion) use it as an unfair competitive advantage. [/QUOTE]I agree if for no other reason than I don't even know what you're referring to. Maybe you can start by being clear about what rule you're discussing. Is this about putting a DL pitcher in your lineup until Friday and then removing him to skip one match-up of a two start pitcher? If so, I have to say I was tempted to do that (mostly cuz I didn't know if Padilla was coming off the DL some weeks ago and wanted the option to remove him on Friday) and was sort of bewildered that that might be a loophole that's still not been closed.

Anyway, Money, before you ask Greg for clarification, I suggest you be clear about the exact rule/loophole you're referring to.

Money · Post by **Money** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 11:09 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by Money:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The DL question has been answered about 10 times already, it is a legal move for 2011. For 2012 and beyond it will be addressed during the offseason. KJ, it has not been communicated to the masses, possibly only to those that follow every single post. You were involved in the debate two years ago and are passionate about it, I understand that. I simply believe that every participant needs to know what there options are. You and the guys that have been around (in my opinion) use it as an unfair competitive advantage. [/QUOTE]I agree if for no other reason than I don't even know what you're referring to. Maybe you can start by being clear about what rule you're discussing. Is this about putting a DL pitcher in your lineup until Friday and then removing him to skip one match-up of a two start pitcher? If so, I have to say I was tempted to do that (mostly cuz I didn't know if Padilla was coming off the DL some weeks ago and wanted the option to remove him on Friday) and was sort of bewildered that that might be a loophole that's still not been closed.

Anyway, Money, before you ask Greg for clarification, I suggest you be clear about the exact rule/loophole you're referring to. [/QUOTE]Mr. Bojak, you've unknowingly helped me state this case. This week there has been a thread titled "Pitchers coming off the DL Peavy and Beachy". This thread deals with a loophole that is all together different than the use of the Pitcher DL move to avoid an unfavorable early week start for a 2 start pitcher. This thread is still open in active topics. It is quite enlightening on how to manipulate a very vague rule.

My main concern is that everyone (you and me included) had no idea that this strategy was even employable. I'm asking that everyone be made aware of the opportunity and that the rules more clearly spell out how players can and cannot be inserted into your weekly lineups. I realize this doesn't clear it up for you. I strongly suggest you go read the previous thread on the subject. We've both been in the dark on this one. It's not much fun finding out 3 months into the season.

TParsons · Post by **TParsons** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:41 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by Glenneration X:

KJ, in 2009 a ruling was made in the very first post of a thread made by Greg. Even though a ruling was made then, you helped keep the debate going for 13 pages because you weren't satisfied with it. Big difference being that in 2009 a written rule was being modified in-season (in the opinion of myself, Gekko, Jupinka, Dough and others). In this case, Greg is not changing the written rule, he is in fact comfirming it. Big, big difference. [/QUOTE]Actually there is a rule being modified in-season. What do the rules state as the deadline for the 2nd period of each week?

TParsons · Post by **TParsons** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:44 am

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

Joe, both your concerns are valid. Just because you aren't part of the chosen as you put it, doesn't lessen your concerns one bit. Whether you've been here for 8 years or one, spend $20K or $125, you're entitled to state your opinion on issues that honestly go to the heart of this contest. I for one agree with both of your concerns. I agree. Joe, you paid money. You have the right to question any issue that you do not see as fair. I keep an eye on the MB, but rarely post unless there is something that I feel somewhat strong about. With everything that is going on in this industry, you have the right to question ANYTHING at this point. At the end of the day, if you aren't satisfied, you vote with your pocketbook.

[ June 24, 2011, 07:49 AM: Message edited by: TParsons ]

TParsons · Post by **TParsons** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:46 am

Isn't there typically a thread prior to the start of the season from year to year that shows what rules changes have been made? If there is one for 2010, I'd like to see if this rules change was included.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:36 am

"Time for Some Answers" implies, unfairly, that somehow Greg and the NFBC management has been somehow silent.

From just yesterday in the DL thread from Greg:

"There is nothing that can be changed about our setup involving the DL rule this year, and as Lindy said several people benefit from the DL rule in another way when they get a start from a player who then goes on the DL before Friday and they get another start on the weekend from a different SP. Not every loophole can be foreseen.

If it helps to put an example of this DL "loophole" we'll gladly do that in the next few NFBC newsletters we send out to every NFBC owner and alert them of how this works. We're not trying to hide anything; honestly it wasn't even on my radar before being mentioned on the boards here. We'll alert everyone because I'm sure it may be available again before season's end.

The bigger discussion is if we need to close this loophole and all the others. So carry on with these two discussions in place:

1) Do we want the pitcher DL rule to continue in all NFBC leagues or should that be changed slightly?

And 2) If we keep the DL rule, do we close this loophole or keep it the way it is? Do we also have to close the loophole that Lindy mentioned, allowing folks a second start on the weekend if a pitcher has already pitched during the week? This is getting the same benefit, yet that's what the DL rule was originally designed for: not getting a zero on the weekend from a player injured during the week. I'm travelling this week, so won't be real active here, but I look forward to the feedback.

Thanks and best of luck all. Tweaking the system through the first seven years has made the NFBC a better game and I'm confident we can solve this one as well."

Not only is there an answer, but the NFBC is reaching out, AS IT ALWAYS DOES, to the team owners on suggestions to make the competition better.

On the other issue, from the Wednesday topic on rerunning stats:

"Okay, thanks for the heads up all and we have found the problem from last night's games and are re-running all leagues now. We're blaming the big Chicago storm on this one, but either way it's fixed now. Some leagues have been re-run already, but look for all NFBC leagues to be re-run by this afternoon. It's good to go and shouldn't happen again. Everything will be up-to-date soon.

Thanks again all and thanks for your patience on this one. Enjoy today's afternoon games."

And...

"Joe, the stats for each player weren't inaccurate, but the totals did add in some stats from non-starters. There's no doubt that the heads up from NFBC players today alerted us to this problem before we found it ourselves. We likely would have caught it because of the number of players generating stats, but you folks led us to the trail first.

I think most players live and breathe their daily totals and know when things aren't accurate. I would suspect most players keep track of their daily and weekly totals, as they should. But I have no concerns that every stat earned by your teams in 2011 are reflected in your totals to date and going forward.

But you are correct, re-think that approach and double-check everything."

An anomalous event occurring at the wrong time and caused an error. Greg has never made any issue with the fact that the owners themselves are the best check and balance. In the past, as owners have noticed issues, the NFBC has accepted the observations, been open and honest about the causes in a TIMELY manner, actively pursued corrections, and requested additional ideas for improvements.

This will not be the last issue that will come up. To me, it is not the fact that events happen. It would upset me if we did not hear from Greg or Tom in a timely manner.

I understand the posts here and accept everyone's right to pose questions. I do, however, object to the tone implied by "Time for Answers" as if these items had not already been quickly addressed and communicated.

Money · Post by **Money** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:52 am

Wayne, you make some very valid points in defense of the NFBC. I agree with you but at the same time I stated that was has been communicated is not good enough for me. Others have stated the same, here and in similar posts.

I simply want assurance that the stats are correct and have been from day one. Possibly the glitch that occurred has gone undetected until now. This cuts right to the core of the game. Without statistical integrity we don't have a game.

As far as the DL rule goes the NFBC has flip flopped from previous years on the ruling, Why? The rule is written for open interpretation. I feel it's unfair that everyone does not know the interpretation of this rule. The setting of lineups is an important part of this game. Why shouldn't we all have the same opportunity's without having to search for ways to manipulate the system. Some have suggested a mass communication letting everyone know. I don't care what the rule is, simply let everyone have the same fair shot at setting their lineups each week.

TParsons · Post by **TParsons** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:55 am

Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

"Time for Some Answers" implies, unfairly, that somehow Greg and the NFBC management has been somehow silent.

From just yesterday in the DL thread from Greg:

"There is nothing that can be changed about our setup involving the DL rule this year, and as Lindy said several people benefit from the DL rule in another way when they get a start from a player who then goes on the DL before Friday and they get another start on the weekend from a different SP. Not every loophole can be foreseen.

If it helps to put an example of this DL "loophole" we'll gladly do that in the next few NFBC newsletters we send out to every NFBC owner and alert them of how this works. We're not trying to hide anything; honestly it wasn't even on my radar before being mentioned on the boards here. We'll alert everyone because I'm sure it may be available again before season's end.

The bigger discussion is if we need to close this loophole and all the others. So carry on with these two discussions in place:

1) Do we want the pitcher DL rule to continue in all NFBC leagues or should that be changed slightly?

And 2) If we keep the DL rule, do we close this loophole or keep it the way it is? Do we also have to close the loophole that Lindy mentioned, allowing folks a second start on the weekend if a pitcher has already pitched during the week? This is getting the same benefit, yet that's what the DL rule was originally designed for: not getting a zero on the weekend from a player injured during the week. I'm travelling this week, so won't be real active here, but I look forward to the feedback.

Thanks and best of luck all. Tweaking the system through the first seven years has made the NFBC a better game and I'm confident we can solve this one as well."

Not only is there an answer, but the NFBC is reaching out, AS IT ALWAYS DOES, to the team owners on suggestions to make the competition better.

On the other issue, from the Wednesday topic on rerunning stats:

"Okay, thanks for the heads up all and we have found the problem from last night's games and are re-running all leagues now. We're blaming the big Chicago storm on this one, but either way it's fixed now. Some leagues have been re-run already, but look for all NFBC leagues to be re-run by this afternoon. It's good to go and shouldn't happen again. Everything will be up-to-date soon.

Thanks again all and thanks for your patience on this one. Enjoy today's afternoon games."

And...

"Joe, the stats for each player weren't inaccurate, but the totals did add in some stats from non-starters. There's no doubt that the heads up from NFBC players today alerted us to this problem before we found it ourselves. We likely would have caught it because of the number of players generating stats, but you folks led us to the trail first.

I think most players live and breathe their daily totals and know when things aren't accurate. I would suspect most players keep track of their daily and weekly totals, as they should. But I have no concerns that every stat earned by your teams in 2011 are reflected in your totals to date and going forward.

But you are correct, re-think that approach and double-check everything."

An anomalous event occurring at the wrong time and caused an error. Greg has never made any issue with the fact that the owners themselves are the best check and balance. In the past, as owners have noticed issues, the NFBC has accepted the observations, been open and honest about the causes in a TIMELY manner, actively pursued corrections, and requested additional ideas for improvements.

This will not be the last issue that will come up. To me, it is not the fact that events happen. It would upset me if we did not hear from Greg or Tom in a timely manner.

I understand the posts here and accept everyone's right to pose questions. I do, however, object to the tone implied by "Time for Answers" as if these items had not already been quickly addressed and communicated. With all due respect, this really hasn't been communicated until a newsletter is sent out. A very small porition of the player pool read these boards. It needs to be sent to EVERYONE stating that you are allowed to take advantage of this DL loophole, and the deadline for doing so is whenever the IT guys decide to remove the DL tag. Hopefully direct phone numbers to the IT guys are included so we can get regular updates on when they plan to remove the DL tags for different players.

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 3:19 am

Well put Wayne. I just don't see a fire here. We pay Greg to make decisions in cases like this. We're free to protest them ( I myself and many have

) but I eventually move back to following my teams which I enjoy doing more than getting my angst up. But that's just me

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:03 am

Originally posted by Quahogs:

Well put Wayne. I just don't see a fire here. We pay Greg to make decisions in cases like this. We're free to protest them ( I myself and many have

) but I eventually move back to following my teams which I enjoy doing more than getting my angst up. But that's just me

I think the difference between you and I on this money (we agree on needing a better way to correct Stats errors) is that things like that take time. I do not want a 24 hour response of we now have a plan in place. I want them to acknowledge that they should do better and then spend some time and resources to fixing it the right way. We need answers now is counter productive and he cannot win. If he answers you now with a bs answer then he gets called on it later. If he quietly goes about a real solution then no you are not happy.

I could not care less about the DL thing it is mnor in the overall scheme and as long as everyone is playing by the same rules. I never, ever want a rule changed midseason though.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:24 am

Hey guys, Greg has said that we can put something in our next newsletter that addresses all this. That's no problem and it's what we would typically do and have always done in the past. We'll talk about that and figure it out and put that in our next newsletter on Tuesday. Again, no problem there.

TParsons · Post by **TParsons** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:06 am

Originally posted by Tom Kessenich:

Hey guys, Greg has said that we can put something in our next newsletter that addresses all this. That's no problem and it's what we would typically do and have always done in the past. We'll talk about that and figure it out and put that in our next newsletter on Tuesday. Again, no problem there. Are there any pitchers set to come off the DL Monday or Tuesday? If so, then Tuesday's newsletter is too late imo. It needs to be addressed before that logical "deadline" you guys have set passes. Hopefully the IT guys don't get itchy trigger fingers when it comes to removing DL tags for the coming week. This makes so much sense...absolutely genius! There have been plenty of fantasy sports spinoffs. Perhaps someone can create one of those daily leagues with a deadline of "whenever our IT dept wants it to be."

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:08 am

Originally posted by Money:

quote:Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by Money:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The DL question has been answered about 10 times already, it is a legal move for 2011. For 2012 and beyond it will be addressed during the offseason. KJ, it has not been communicated to the masses, possibly only to those that follow every single post. You were involved in the debate two years ago and are passionate about it, I understand that. I simply believe that every participant needs to know what there options are. You and the guys that have been around (in my opinion) use it as an unfair competitive advantage. [/QUOTE]I agree if for no other reason than I don't even know what you're referring to. Maybe you can start by being clear about what rule you're discussing. Is this about putting a DL pitcher in your lineup until Friday and then removing him to skip one match-up of a two start pitcher? If so, I have to say I was tempted to do that (mostly cuz I didn't know if Padilla was coming off the DL some weeks ago and wanted the option to remove him on Friday) and was sort of bewildered that that might be a loophole that's still not been closed.

Anyway, Money, before you ask Greg for clarification, I suggest you be clear about the exact rule/loophole you're referring to. [/QUOTE]Mr. Bojak, you've unknowingly helped me state this case. This week there has been a thread titled "Pitchers coming off the DL Peavy and Beachy". This thread deals with a loophole that is all together different than the use of the Pitcher DL move to avoid an unfavorable early week start for a 2 start pitcher. This thread is still open in active topics. It is quite enlightening on how to manipulate a very vague rule.

My main concern is that everyone (you and me included) had no idea that this strategy was even employable. I'm asking that everyone be made aware of the opportunity and that the rules more clearly spell out how players can and cannot be inserted into your weekly lineups. I realize this doesn't clear it up for you. I strongly suggest you go read the previous thread on the subject. We've both been in the dark on this one. It's not much fun finding out 3 months into the season. [/QUOTE]Now I could go read 9 pages about Peavy coming off the DL. Great. Thanks. If you were so concerned with getting this knowledge out there, you'd contribute. That's okay; I'm a pretty good guesser. People are activating Peavy for Wednesday's start and then taking him out for Friday *before* he actually comes off the DL. If I go read 9 pages and find out that's all, you're a jerk.