Why the Friday DL needs to be dropped

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:44 am

This could be a separate topic but I think it could go here.

Harden was DLed earlier in the week but was scheduled for a single weekly start prior to Friday.

How many teams activated him in his Dled status on Monday and then moved him from the active lineup Monday evening and replaced him with a pitchers whose first weekly start was on Friday or the weekend.

His mid-week start would have counted and by removing him from your active lineup on Monday night while he was still a DLed played, you would get that extra weekend start.

Seems like a once-in-a-season reverse application of the DL rule.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:58 am

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

I vote for the Friday DL, it reduces the overall impacts of Injuries on the game

I understand stand why people want a custom 'hand' DL or September call up rule. Frankly, I think this creates too much interpretation and could create many many frustrated owners. Or if you allow september changes you are going to see pitcher streaming which I think also dilutes the managerial choices one must make.

I VOTE: Keep the rule exactly the way it was. What about "2 weeks or more" for an AP report creates too much interpretation?

I've used it for TEN years w/o ONE problem for all six months of the season.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 9:53 am

Your complaining that because you didn't have injuries to your starter and others did, you were at a disadvantage? So, your starters aren't better than their replacements (plus the fact that they probably lost 2-3 days of stats between injurty time and Friday).

THAT IS PRETTY WEAK BJOAK!!! Re-Read what you wrote LOL... Are you sure that is how you want to be known? Spy, perhaps you should reread what you wrote and see if it makes sense. I've read it several times and still cannot divine any meaning from it.

One of two things happened in my league (as well as our Feb 21 league--the one where you're looking up at me): I lost points because others were using the Friday DL midweek (whereas they would not have gained any if there were no Friday transactions) or the other teams actually lost points because their reserves were subpar.

In the first instance, teams who picked unhealthy teams were given a crutch, pun intended, that helped them overcome their shortcomings. In the second instance, the rule that was meant to help EVERYONE actually hurt those who used it. Either way it puts some owners at a disadvantage.

I have no idea what you mean about 'what I want to be known as.' I was simply giving my vote and the reason for it. If they want to keep it, fine, I am happy to play by whatever rule they decide, but this thread was for opinions and I was giving mine.

[ September 23, 2006, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 10:12 am

Your complaining that because you didn't have injuries to your starter and others did, you were at a disadvantage? So, your starters aren't better than their replacements (plus the fact that they probably lost 2-3 days of stats between injurty time and Friday).

Actually, on the 19th reading I am starting to get it: you're saying that people who use it don't give themselves any advantage? Then what is the purpose for it in the first place?

Let's go to the team A and B model--that seems to work well with you.

Team A has no injuries in the first half of week one.

Team B has one injury to his 2B and replaces him.

Now let's say the new 2B gets just one RBI in the second half of the week with that team's typical AVG and no other counting stats.

At the end of the season Team B beats Team A by one RBI. Team B had an advantage over Team A that he would not have had, regardless of the quality of players and reserves on either team, if there was no Friday DL.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 2:06 pm

The whole point is that the DL doesn't create an ADVANTAGE, simply makes injuries less of a DISADVANTAGE.

If you are losing to by 1 rbi and your starters couldn't beat someone who had an injury and had to use a SUB, then your team wasn't as good as the other persons IN THE FIRST PLACE

Spy

Sack · Post by **Sack** » Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:01 pm

Spy: Better stop worrying about next year and concentrate on winning that Auction League battle.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:20 am

Originally posted by Walla Walla:

Ryan Freel DL. His replacement on my team if the rules worked. David Eckstein 3-4 1HR 1RBI 1R.

So one more time lets review this. The rule was to give more control to the owners and help out those with a injured player. I had no control and no help with the injured player. So the bottom line is the rule does not work. It's a bad rule that is being held onto out of pride not reason. John, this is what endears you to so many on the message boards. Everything is either black or white. Right or wrong. It either has to stay or has to go. The conversation here is about a rule that is intended to help all owners who may have a mid-week injury that leads to a DL spot. If there is a loophole in September that affected owners this year, then we're here to discuss how to close that loophole.

Yes, you were affected because Freel got hurt on Tuesday night and didn't make the DL by Friday at 12:01 a.m. In a normal week, it's possible that Freel still wouldn't have been on the DL by then because he still played on Wednesday night and they found the hairline fracture on Thursday. Now, if we had the option as John Zaleski is suggesting of individually putting a player on the DL if his team has determined that he is out for the season, this might have been resolved. I think it's a worthy suggestion and one I'll discuss with STATS.

Personally, I'd like to have a rule in place that helps owners who have players suddenly land on the DL on Monday night or Tuesday. I hate those seven-day zeroes because MLB teams chose not to disclose the severity of an injury to the press. We as fantasy players get hurt when that happens. My DL rule allows for some relief. It doesn't create an unfair advantage for teams who have a lot of injured players, it just provides a little relief. I appreciate the suggestions by all on how to fix it.

I guess one option is to just kill the rule altogether as that's the simple out. Another option is to be stubborn and keep the rule as is. Or a third option is to get input from everyone thanks to you starting this thread and improve on the rule. I'll consider some more input and if you don't mind keep that third option open.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:30 am

Originally posted by UFS:

Let me add to make this more simple...

Have stats do it the way it's done now, but ALSO give you the option to "hand DL" a player when the need arises.

This way, only you or Tom need to check this Thursday night. Since we're considering this, can someone go over the way it works? The administrators will decide to dl certain players when they are more or less certain the players are dl bound but have not been placed on the official dl? Does this only apply to September or the whole season? What if a player is supposed to be out and makes a miraculous recovery? This will not impede his ability to accrue stats, I hope. One example I can think of was Carlos Silva who was supposed to be out for months last year before making an appearance a week after the injury.

[ September 24, 2006, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 10:26 am

I personally like the DL rule the way it currently exists. But is it really worth all the grief that it has caused to provide 3 days of relief? I wonder.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 11:44 am

Originally posted by viper:

I personally like the DL rule the way it currently exists. But is it really worth all the grief that it has caused to provide 3 days of relief? I wonder. Like the rule- do not like who and how it is decided. Put it in Tom or Greg's hand instead of technicalities as earlier suggested. You may not agree with all of there calls but it will be better.

I certainly would not blame them if this is a can of worms they do not want to deal with next year either.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 6:53 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by UFS:

Let me add to make this more simple...

Have stats do it the way it's done now, but ALSO give you the option to "hand DL" a player when the need arises.

This way, only you or Tom need to check this Thursday night. Since we're considering this, can someone go over the way it works? The administrators will decide to dl certain players when they are more or less certain the players are dl bound but have not been placed on the official dl? Does this only apply to September or the whole season? What if a player is supposed to be out and makes a miraculous recovery? This will not impede his ability to accrue stats, I hope. One example I can think of was Carlos Silva who was supposed to be out for months last year before making an appearance a week after the injury. [/QUOTE]AP report that says "two weeks or more".

Not "one to two weeks", not even "one to three weeks". The min has to be two weeks. That's the key.

In Sept, I can't remember any report where is said "out for the year" and the guy came back.

Not rotoimes, rotowire, or rotoworld. Another key is to NEVER let anyone talk you into info from a fantasy site. Some of them in their haste to be "first", will manufacture info that 90% of the time becomes fact 12-24 hours later.

If the rare case comes up, the DL status is removed. And it's very rare. Maybe once every 3-5 years.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:29 am

Originally posted by viper:

I personally like the DL rule the way it currently exists. But is it really worth all the grief that it has caused to provide 3 days of relief? I wonder. Yes it is worth the effort if it makes the contest better. Once we finalized the deadline for when players had to be on the DL list this year, there was no grief until we hit September. And the September injuries could have been dealt with if there had been a stipulation in the rules for that to happen.

I do not see a problem with the suggestion UFS made for September and during the season as long as I can work that out with STATS. Have no fear John, we'll listen to MLB reports and not fantasy sites before making these calls. The deadline will remain 12:01 a.m. each Friday and we'll have a little more flexibility when dealing with injuries during the week and in September. We won't move every injured player from Wednesday's or Thursday's games on DL just because they happened, but when it's obvious we'll make the right move. Good call on this one.

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 3:50 am

I like the 'mid-week' DL rule as long as you keep the deadline and not allow any late additions after 12:01 Friday morning. I think I'm in the majority when I say life is just too busy to review the team roster more than once a week. And forget the idea of mid-week transactions for the same reason.

The only negative I can think of is accidentally activating the wrong player. Then you're stuck. I'd like to see an idiot prompt that asks if you really want to activate player "so and so" before allowing the transaction.

I have a couple of thoughts regarding September rosters and the fact that the teams won't DL anyone. If Stats has any way to do this, perhaps you could allow a "one-time" non-DL transaction per team in September. I'd be in favor of that.

Or, though this doesn't address the DL issue, I'd like to see an extra active roster spot allowed for all teams beginning Sept 1st that could be any position, including pitcher.

Just please don't add anything in September that requires too much work, we all have football to think about.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:26 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I do not see a problem with the suggestion UFS made for September Please send the case of Coronas

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:27 pm

Originally posted by UFS:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I do not see a problem with the suggestion UFS made for September Please send the case of Coronas

[/QUOTE]We'll drink it together next March in Phoenix!

Now, any chance we can move those LABR teams up one more spot each and win the doubleheader?! Nice run anyways this year! We won't be denied next year.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 1:36 pm

Would there be any interest in making these Friday moves a finite number of discretionary moves? No DL requirements, just a set number of Friday activations/reservations over the course of the season.

Using Greg's numbers, 150 per 35 leagues works out to about 7.5 moves per team. Why not give each team 10 moves to use at their discretion on a Friday? I assume Stats can track this in a similar fashion as FAAB.

Change of positions would not count, only a player on reserve brought to active. Two players on the same Friday counts as two moves.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:38 pm

Originally posted by coops:

I like the 'mid-week' DL rule as long as you keep the deadline and not allow any late additions after 12:01 Friday morning. I think I'm in the majority when I say life is just too busy to review the team roster more than once a week. And forget the idea of mid-week transactions for the same reason.

The only negative I can think of is accidentally activating the wrong player. Then you're stuck. I'd like to see an idiot prompt that asks if you really want to activate player "so and so" before allowing the transaction.

I have a couple of thoughts regarding September rosters and the fact that the teams won't DL anyone. If Stats has any way to do this, perhaps you could allow a "one-time" non-DL transaction per team in September. I'd be in favor of that.

Or, though this doesn't address the DL issue, I'd like to see an extra active roster spot allowed for all teams beginning Sept 1st that could be any position, including pitcher.

Just please don't add anything in September that requires too much work, we all have football to think about. Coops, too hard to check more than once a week? I think most of us are checking too often and over thinking things, I know I am Anyway, I agree with you once a week normal moves but because daily moves creates 'streamers' who win purely by overloading their line ups....

Anyway, good to see that Greg doesn't appear to be moved to get rid of the world. I know I liked it a lot and would be really frustrated to go backwards.

Spy

P.S. Sack - why do you think I am posting about this? I am trying to distract myself from over thinking the $650 league

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:09 pm

Todd, I think it's actually 3.5 per team. After watching Major league baseball try to screw up fantasy baseball this year. I think a fantasy site knows more about the injuries than the dumb asses running baseball. Just my humble thoughts.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:55 am

The way I did the math was...

150 moves per Friday x 26 Fridays = 3900 total moves

3900 total moves / 35 leagues = 111 moves per league

111 / 15 teams = 7.4 moves per team

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:26 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

The way I did the math was...

150 moves per Friday x 26 Fridays = 3900 total moves

3900 total moves / 35 leagues = 111 moves per league

111 / 15 teams = 7.4 moves per team That 150 per Friday was before September. How many guys do you know of that went on the DL this month?

[ September 26, 2006, 07:27 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:46 pm

That 150 per Friday was before September. How many guys do you know of that went on the DL this month?

This has been discussed and is a contributing factor to tabling the suggestion of a set number of discretionary moves as we could still replace injured players in September even though most teams do not place players on the DL unless it is for insurance purposes or they use the 60 day DL to save a spot on the 40-man roster. If you save a Friday move or two for September, you are covered if you have a guy out for the year not officially placed on the DL.

The assumption is if MLB teams used the DL in the same manner as April-August, the 150 would be the average for September as well.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:33 pm

Todd, The numbers are all off. first if it was 35 leagues this year that includes auction leagues and sat leagues. So those numbers don't add up.

Second 150 still sounds way out of line. Well it does until you realize that moving one player to the DL is one move and replacing him is a second move. In some cases 3 or 4 moves could be made this year for one DL replacement. So there again the numbers don't fit your idea. Finally I'd like to know how many many DL replacements were made each Friday in the main event only. This has the largest pool of useable bench players. How many actually were useful?

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:12 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote: That 150 per Friday was before September. How many guys do you know of that went on the DL this month?

This has been discussed and is a contributing factor to tabling the suggestion of a set number of discretionary moves as we could still replace injured players in September even though most teams do not place players on the DL unless it is for insurance purposes or they use the 60 day DL to save a spot on the 40-man roster. If you save a Friday move or two for September, you are covered if you have a guy out for the year not officially placed on the DL.

The assumption is if MLB teams used the DL in the same manner as April-August, the 150 would be the average for September as well. [/QUOTE]I know what was discussed. I was merely noting that Greg's number came at the beginning of September and since you assume they apply to the entire year (26 weeks), they are skewed.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 4:18 am

Calculating the average moves per team to the 3rd decimal point is not the point. Finding a ballpark number of times the average team had the occasion to use the rule is the point.

1. It is apparent the rule is here to stay

2. Greg is in fact looking to improve the rule

3. Concern about timing with relation to MLB putting players on the DL has been discussed.

4. The fact come September, teams do not always place injured players on the DL has been discussed.

Having a set number of discretionary moves eliminates any concerns with numbers 3 and 4.

This idea adds another strategic element to the game in general, which might even affect our drafting. We could occasionally "stream" pitching. Or we could take advantage of a multi-positioned player and maximize games player per week. Maybe a guy has 6 games that week, with the weekend in Coors. You play a guy with games M-Th, then sit him for the Coors guy.

In addition, it introduces a FAAB-like strategic element: Do I save my moves for the end? Do I use up a move on replacing my 4th OF who hit the DL in May and maybe lose a chance to get an extra start when I am seeking wins and Ks in September?

"Doing the math" was just to get a ballpark number of moves to help suggest the set number. If I had to guess, my guess would have been on the average, 5-10 times a year each NFBC main event team would have chance to replace a DLed player. Based on the numbers Greg supplied and doing a reasonable assumption for September, the result corroborated my anecdotal estimate of 5-10, so setting the number around 12 makes sense.

Personally, I'd rather discuss the concept of discretionary moves than question Greg's numbers or come up with a way to make September numbers NASA accurate.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:51 pm

OK Todd, Your concept Sucks.