Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Before the season, we're completely at STATS' mercy with their hodgepodge of 25-man/40-man/NRI/retired players. So why not end all of this by making any player drafted eligible to be signed?
And then add any that weren't drafted as they come up to the bigs.
Very simple. Very easy to understand. Very fair. Stats/MLB stuff out of the equation. [/QUOTE]There are two "issues" here:
(1) The universe of available players for March 30, 2008 consisted of players that would ordinarily not be available to NFBC participants.
(2) After March 30, 2008, minor leaguers are available to some leagues and not to others -- depending on whether they were drafted by teams in that league.
Are you saying that the universe of available players for March 30th should have only consisted of any player that any team in any NFBC main event league drafted? Might be a bit too limited.
Clayton Kershaw
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Clayton Kershaw
Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
On a different, but just as confusing topic, that again, no one but KoFQ can stay on top of..
UTIL position.
Again, I don't keep up with all the threads on this and come from more of a points game background, but why do guys with less than 20 games get marked as UTIL and not the standard roto practice of using the one position they played the most at? This is so damn confusing and what is being accomplished by making it more complex and against the standard? I think that Greg fancies Utility players as guys who play all over the place. Thus, if someone plays 14 games at SS, 12 games at 2B, 3 at Catcher, and pinch hits 30 times, they are a true Utility player. It's an interesting definition, and one that I've never seen used anywhere else, but what the hey...
FYI: my definition of "Utility" is a wildcard spot in your lineup that can be used by anyone. Utility is not a position. [/QUOTE]If we have a 10-game rule "in-season", why is there a 20-game rule before the season?
Mark the above at 2b and SS and move on with a 10-game rule. That accurately reflects what the guy did, and util does not.
I agree with your FYI. [/QUOTE]The problem with the 10-game rule is that position scarcity becomes almost null and void. I kind of like it the way it is.
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
On a different, but just as confusing topic, that again, no one but KoFQ can stay on top of..
UTIL position.
Again, I don't keep up with all the threads on this and come from more of a points game background, but why do guys with less than 20 games get marked as UTIL and not the standard roto practice of using the one position they played the most at? This is so damn confusing and what is being accomplished by making it more complex and against the standard? I think that Greg fancies Utility players as guys who play all over the place. Thus, if someone plays 14 games at SS, 12 games at 2B, 3 at Catcher, and pinch hits 30 times, they are a true Utility player. It's an interesting definition, and one that I've never seen used anywhere else, but what the hey...
FYI: my definition of "Utility" is a wildcard spot in your lineup that can be used by anyone. Utility is not a position. [/QUOTE]If we have a 10-game rule "in-season", why is there a 20-game rule before the season?
Mark the above at 2b and SS and move on with a 10-game rule. That accurately reflects what the guy did, and util does not.
I agree with your FYI. [/QUOTE]The problem with the 10-game rule is that position scarcity becomes almost null and void. I kind of like it the way it is.
Clayton Kershaw
Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Before the season, we're completely at STATS' mercy with their hodgepodge of 25-man/40-man/NRI/retired players. So why not end all of this by making any player drafted eligible to be signed?
And then add any that weren't drafted as they come up to the bigs.
Very simple. Very easy to understand. Very fair. Stats/MLB stuff out of the equation. [/QUOTE]There are two "issues" here:
(1) The universe of available players for March 30, 2008 consisted of players that would ordinarily not be available to NFBC participants.
(2) After March 30, 2008, minor leaguers are available to some leagues and not to others -- depending on whether they were drafted by teams in that league.
Are you saying that the universe of available players for March 30th should have only consisted of any player that any team in any NFBC main event league drafted? Might be a bit too limited. [/QUOTE]The only thing I know is that you are the only one in the universe that understands what is going on here.
Who besides you has time to figure out what the universe of available players is before or after March 30th?
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Before the season, we're completely at STATS' mercy with their hodgepodge of 25-man/40-man/NRI/retired players. So why not end all of this by making any player drafted eligible to be signed?
And then add any that weren't drafted as they come up to the bigs.
Very simple. Very easy to understand. Very fair. Stats/MLB stuff out of the equation. [/QUOTE]There are two "issues" here:
(1) The universe of available players for March 30, 2008 consisted of players that would ordinarily not be available to NFBC participants.
(2) After March 30, 2008, minor leaguers are available to some leagues and not to others -- depending on whether they were drafted by teams in that league.
Are you saying that the universe of available players for March 30th should have only consisted of any player that any team in any NFBC main event league drafted? Might be a bit too limited. [/QUOTE]The only thing I know is that you are the only one in the universe that understands what is going on here.
Who besides you has time to figure out what the universe of available players is before or after March 30th?
Clayton Kershaw
Originally posted by King of Queens:
The problem with the 10-game rule is that position scarcity becomes almost null and void. I kind of like it the way it is. OK, then just put them at the position they play the most...
The problem with the 10-game rule is that position scarcity becomes almost null and void. I kind of like it the way it is. OK, then just put them at the position they play the most...
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Clayton Kershaw
Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
The problem with the 10-game rule is that position scarcity becomes almost null and void. I kind of like it the way it is. OK, then just put them at the position they play the most... [/QUOTE]Sounds good to me. That's the way I've always played, too.
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
The problem with the 10-game rule is that position scarcity becomes almost null and void. I kind of like it the way it is. OK, then just put them at the position they play the most... [/QUOTE]Sounds good to me. That's the way I've always played, too.