Let's revisit Friday lineup changes for P

[King of Queens]

I believe the last time we had this discussion, I proposed the following:

1) NFBC owners will have a window every Friday from 3am EDT (or whenever the standings are refreshed) until the first game played on Friday in which they may make pitcher swaps.

2) Any pitcher moving from the active roster to the reserve roster must not have any pitching stats accumulated during the Monday to Thursday period. Even one pitch thrown will disqualify the pitcher from being removed from the active roster.

I have no idea whether this can be programmed. Even it it can, many will have a problem with the small window in which a pitcher swap can be made.

The bottom line is that this is the ONLY solution that results in no manipulation/rules-circumvention AND no reliance on the timeliness of the MLB DL-designation.

[COZ]

I believe the last time we had this discussion, I proposed the following:

1) NFBC owners will have a window every Friday from 3am EDT (or whenever the standings are refreshed) until the first game played on Friday in which they may make pitcher swaps.

2) Any pitcher moving from the active roster to the reserve roster must not have any pitching stats accumulated during the Monday to Thursday period. Even one pitch thrown will disqualify the pitcher from being removed from the active roster.

I have no idea whether this can be programmed. Even it it can, many will have a problem with the small window in which a pitcher swap can be made.

The bottom line is that this is the ONLY solution that results in no manipulation/rules-circumvention AND no reliance on the timeliness of the MLB DL-designation.

BAM. The King has spoken. Clear and simple. I am 100% on board for this rule change as Glenn stated.

COZ

[Rainiers]

I believe the last time we had this discussion, I proposed the following:

1) NFBC owners will have a window every Friday from 3am EDT (or whenever the standings are refreshed) until the first game played on Friday in which they may make pitcher swaps.

2) Any pitcher moving from the active roster to the reserve roster must not have any pitching stats accumulated during the Monday to Thursday period. Even one pitch thrown will disqualify the pitcher from being removed from the active roster.

I have no idea whether this can be programmed. Even it it can, many will have a problem with the small window in which a pitcher swap can be made.

The bottom line is that this is the ONLY solution that results in no manipulation/rules-circumvention AND no reliance on the timeliness of the MLB DL-designation.

I could get on board with this. Only solution that would work in all ways that I have seen.

[lrr]

I believe the last time we had this discussion, I proposed the following:

1) NFBC owners will have a window every Friday from 3am EDT (or whenever the standings are refreshed) until the first game played on Friday in which they may make pitcher swaps.

2) Any pitcher moving from the active roster to the reserve roster must not have any pitching stats accumulated during the Monday to Thursday period. Even one pitch thrown will disqualify the pitcher from being removed from the active roster.

I have no idea whether this can be programmed. Even it it can, many will have a problem with the small window in which a pitcher swap can be made.

The bottom line is that this is the ONLY solution that results in no manipulation/rules-circumvention AND no reliance on the timeliness of the MLB DL-designation.

As I understand this, it allows a DL pitcher (in your active lineup) who has been on the DL for weeks, to be switched out for a two start pitcher who had a bad first matchup. Just wanted to put that on the table. With that said, I like the rule.

[King of Queens]

As I understand this, it allows a DL pitcher (in your active lineup) who has been on the DL for weeks, to be switched out for a two start pitcher who had a bad first matchup. Just wanted to put that on the table. With that said, I like the rule.

That's correct. You could add an additional restriction that players who start the week with the "DL" next to their names cannot be moved from the active roster on Friday. This might be an additional programming hurdle to overcome, but the bigger problem is that it adds a timing element. What if the designation was applied at 6pm on Monday? 9pm? I don't think there's a good solution for it.

In any event, it would still prevent teams from starting Wada or Garcia this week, then moving them to reserve on Monday night and getting a second starter in there who is pitching Friday or Saturday (thus creating a 2-start week from a 1-start pitcher).

Keep in mind that this change would also allow you to replace starts lost due to weather cancellations, minor injuries, family matters, etc. -- none of which would receive a DL designation. I believe that's the true intent of having a rule like this in the first place.

[Navel Lint]

As I understand this, it allows a DL pitcher (in your active lineup) who has been on the DL for weeks, to be switched out for a two start pitcher who had a bad first matchup. Just wanted to put that on the table. With that said, I like the rule.

That's correct. You could add an additional restriction that players who start the week with the "DL" next to their names cannot be moved from the active roster on Friday. This might be an additional programming hurdle to overcome, but the bigger problem is that it adds a timing element. What if the designation was applied at 6pm on Monday? 9pm? I don't think there's a good solution for it.

In any event, it would still prevent teams from starting Wada or Garcia this week, then moving them to reserve on Monday night and getting a second starter in there who is pitching Friday or Saturday (thus creating a 2-start week from a 1-start pitcher).

Keep in mind that this change would also allow you to replace starts lost due to weather cancellations, minor injuries, family matters, etc. -- none of which would receive a DL designation. I believe that's the true intent of having a rule like this in the first place.

So I have DL'd Garcia in my lineup scheduled to pitch on Thurs. His game is rained out. I hate his matchup on Friday, but I can't replace him.

I know that's what we currently have, but it's situations like this that have brought about a request for the change we are discussing.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

I like Glenn's idea with the addition of the stipulation that a guy that has already thrown a pitch this week cannot be inserted either, just like he cannot be taken out. His plan, plus this plan seemingly would solve all problems. It would not be perfect, as players would not have an option many times. My only Cosart team would be included in this bunch. I would not have a replacement. My bench pitchers already pitched. It would not allow somehow to play Verlander and then avoid Harang at Coors and put Harang in for the 2nd start either. However, it would allow someone with Cosart to put in a pitcher if they have someone available who has not pitched if they so choose.

Some will see the short time frame as a negative. The fact of the matter is you have all week from the time your guy gets hurt, or in some cases to change your mind about a guy that is scheduled to pitch over the weekend, to figure out what needs to be done. And then you would have plenty of time to get the move in on Friday. It is not like this is going to need to be done very often.

[Captain Hook]

it's situations like this that have brought about a request for the change we are discussing.

NO it is not

We are simply trying to be able to replace an active pitcher we have in our active lineup on Monday who goes on the DL after lineups lock for his team and then gets put on the DL.

This CAN be programmed but has not been offered which is why despite their best intentions the other suggested solutions open other questions/problems.

[Navel Lint]

it's situations like this that have brought about a request for the change we are discussing.

NO it is not

We are simply trying to be able to replace an active pitcher we have in our active lineup on Monday who goes on the DL after lineups lock for his team and then gets put on the DL.

This CAN be programmed but has not been offered which is why despite their best intentions the other suggested solutions open other questions/problems.

SORRY

I thought Greg answered this when he responded directly to your post earlier in this thread.

From Greg:: "Perry, the biggest problem with going with any setup that involves the DL is waiting for the league to officially say a player is on the DL. Rotowire and every other industry site can say on Wednesday night that a player is going on the DL, but the team may not file the paperwork until Thursday and the league won't officially put him on the DL until Friday and then all hell breaks loose on our boards because certain owners couldn't take that pitcher out of their starting lineup for the weekend games. There's no perfect setup here even when the software is ready for it. MLB's setup is too slow to make this function correctly"

It's Greg's response that has brought about all the alternative suggestions.

Of course, maybe I'm one of the people that is too stupid to 'follow' the the proposed rule changes, or I'm too intransigent to accept 'change'.
Yep that must be it.

[King of Queens]

with the addition of the stipulation that a guy that has already thrown a pitch this week cannot be inserted either, just like he cannot be taken out.

Hadn't thought of that -- having the restriction work in both directions would seem to eliminate all loopholes.

The short window (less than 12 hours on some Fridays) seems to be the biggest issue. Maybe there's a workaround for that one, too.

[lrr]

I like Glenn's idea with the addition of the stipulation that a guy that has already thrown a pitch this week cannot be inserted either, just like he cannot be taken out. His plan, plus this plan seemingly would solve all problems. It would not be perfect, as players would not have an option many times. My only Cosart team would be included in this bunch. I would not have a replacement. My bench pitchers already pitched. It would not allow somehow to play Verlander and then avoid Harang at Coors and put Harang in for the 2nd start either. However, it would allow someone with Cosart to put in a pitcher if they have someone available who has not pitched if they so choose.

Some will see the short time frame as a negative. The fact of the matter is you have all week from the time your guy gets hurt, or in some cases to change your mind about a guy that is scheduled to pitch over the weekend, to figure out what needs to be done. And then you would have plenty of time to get the move in on Friday. It is not like this is going to need to be done very often.

So I had Cosart in three leagues. In each I had two pitchers on the bench. In no league would I have a replacement for Cosart under this (insert only a pitcher who hadn't pitched) rule. Of those pitchers, most had one start on Wednesday or Thursday, or who already started and have a second start this weekend. You would have to be lucky and have a starter on your bench whose only start for the week was on Friday or Saturday. Is is worth the rule change. Sounds good but I don't know.

[Money]

Why not just forget the Friday stipulation and have pitchers lock when they throw their first pitch. So you set your lineup and you have until he throws a pitch to move him in or out regardless of the day. Anyone being moved into a roster position cannot have pitched up until that point as he would've been locked to the bench upon his first pitch.

[Captain Hook]

I like Glenn's idea with the addition of the stipulation that a guy that has already thrown a pitch this week cannot be inserted either, just like he cannot be taken out. His plan, plus this plan seemingly would solve all problems. It would not be perfect, as players would not have an option many times. My only Cosart team would be included in this bunch. I would not have a replacement. My bench pitchers already pitched. It would not allow somehow to play Verlander and then avoid Harang at Coors and put Harang in for the 2nd start either. However, it would allow someone with Cosart to put in a pitcher if they have someone available who has not pitched if they so choose.

Some will see the short time frame as a negative. The fact of the matter is you have all week from the time your guy gets hurt, or in some cases to change your mind about a guy that is scheduled to pitch over the weekend, to figure out what needs to be done. And then you would have plenty of time to get the move in on Friday. It is not like this is going to need to be done very often.

So I had Cosart in three leagues. In each I had two pitchers on the bench. In no league would I have a replacement for Cosart under this (insert only a pitcher who hadn't pitched) rule. Of those pitchers, most had one start on Wednesday or Thursday, or who already started and have a second start this weekend. You would have to be lucky and have a starter on your bench whose only start for the week was on Friday or Saturday. Is is worth the rule change. Sounds good but I don't know.

What about the DC leagues? I had Cosart in a lot of those leagues with lots of choices to replace him

And I have Cosart in three leagues with the seven man benches and had a pitcher I could/would have replaced him with in all three of those leagues.

[Captain Hook]

Perry, the biggest problem with going with any setup that involves the DL is waiting for the league to officially say a player is on the DL. Rotowire and every other industry site can say on Wednesday night that a player is going on the DL, but the team may not file the paperwork until Thursday and the league won't officially put him on the DL until Friday and then all hell breaks loose on our boards because certain owners couldn't take that pitcher out of their starting lineup for the weekend games. There's no perfect setup here even when the software is ready for it. MLB's setup is too slow to make this function correctly.

Greg the moves have to be predicated on the pitcher being officially on the DL - far too often the reporters/editors are wrong or the team changes their plan. BUT so what? Everyone is being treated fairly if we use MLB.com as the official source. If a pitcher goes on the DL on Friday after lineups lock it isn't covered by this change for Anybody. I just don't see the problem

We don't have DL changes for hitters; we just allow you to make weekend changes. But we can't do that for pitchers or it would become a streaming pitchers' contest. There's no perfect way to account for pitchers' injuries during the week, so for now I think the setup we have is the best setup for handling injuries. Heck, we might be the only season-long game that allows hitter moves on Fridays. I sure wish Tout Wars, LABR, FSTA and the other leagues allowed that much.

But TOUT and XFL both allow DL replacements and activations at any point during the week and I would much rather have that than just changing hitters on Fridays.

Lots of private leagues have midweek DL changes as well.

LABR is probably constricted by the provider they use - if they were using a different site I am pretty sure Steve would make the change to allow DL moves.

[Navel Lint]

Why not just forget the Friday stipulation and have pitchers lock when they throw their first pitch. So you set your lineup and you have until he throws a pitch to move him in or out regardless of the day. Anyone being moved into a roster position cannot have pitched up until that point as he would've been locked to the bench upon his first pitch.

Which once again brings in the scenario I presented earlier in this thread wherein someone could switch into their active lineup a relief pitcher from the bench DURING a game.
I presented the full situation early using D. Betances as an example, people can go back and read it if they wish.

Greg has been very clear through the years that he has no intention of turning the NFBC into a "Streamer" league.
"Streamer" certainly has different meanings to different people, but it's clear that the NFBC would never be confused with a streamer league under our current rules.

Over the years people have made many well meaning efforts to change the rules in an attempt to "better" the game without bringing "streaming" into the equation.
From what I've seen, every one of the rule changes brings about an unintended loophole; or a deficiency that is different from the one we currently have, but a deficiency none the less.
Some of these loopholes and deficiency's are very small, while others would be common place depending on the rule change that would be implemented.

I'm all for improving the game.
I'm just not sure that any of the proposals I've read doesn't just change the game from one set of randomly impacting rules that aggravate us into another set of randomly impacting rules that would aggravate us.

However, I'm willing to keep reading

[DOUGHBOYS]

From what I've seen, every one of the rule changes brings about an unintended loophole; or a deficiency that is different from the one we currently have, but a deficiency none the less.

Using Cosart as an example, his owners went from two starts to taking zeroes. That is a huge upset and frustration for his owners. These zeroes happen once or twice a week. Danny Duffy owners just lost his start.
We are powerless to do anything about this under the current system.
This is a bad result. A deficiency.
I believe some of the 'loopholes' or deficiencies pointed out by you or others pale to what we have now.
There is NO system that will be fullproof in every way.
Including, and maybe even, especially, the one we have now.

[COZ]

Russell, this whole Betances example would never happen because line-ups would always lock once games start. Even daily leagues don't allow changes once games start and line-ups lock at gametime. So basically, changes could only be made prior to gametime, then they lock. But, once games are completed, if a player has not thrown a pitch AFTER the games have finished, you could make the changes as discussed by King.

COZ

[Navel Lint]

From what I've seen, every one of the rule changes brings about an unintended loophole; or a deficiency that is different from the one we currently have, but a deficiency none the less.

Using Cosart as an example, his owners went from two starts to taking zeroes. That is a huge upset and frustration for his owners. These zeroes happen once or twice a week. Danny Duffy owners just lost his start.
We are powerless to do anything about this under the current system.
This is a bad result. A deficiency.
I believe some of the 'loopholes' or deficiencies pointed out by you or others pale to what we have now.
There is NO system that will be fullproof in every way.
Including, and maybe even, especially, the one we have now.

I understand what you are saying.

I also will stand by the entirety of my previous post, which I believe points out that some of my "deficiency's" with the proposed rule changes are very small.

I have never said the current system is perfect, it's not.
As you point out. NFBC owners are negatively effected by the current rule every week. Randomly, but every week.

Now lets go to some of the proposed rule changes, all of which I think you would agree also have some form of failing. These failings may be very small and would happen very rarely.
Do we want a rule that "randomly" effects all owners every week, or do we want a rule that randomly singles out one owner once or twice a season?

[Navel Lint]

Russell, this whole Betances example would never happen because line-ups would always lock once games start. Even daily leagues don't allow changes once games start and line-ups lock at gametime. So basically, changes could only be made prior to gametime, then they lock. But, once games are completed, if a player has not thrown a pitch AFTER the games have finished, you could make the changes as discussed by King.

COZ

Who says they would be locked? There has been a proposal, the one I originally answered with my Betances move, that would allow all pitchers to be unlocked until the moment they pitch.


But yes, if we use the lock at game time rule, I've already answered this one as well.

So in order to avoid the scenario I suggested with Betances, we lock pitchers at game time (or as some have proposed, lock all pitchers with the FIRST game of each day).

I have two starters with scheduled Thursday starts
The first one is in my active lineup and has a 6p start.
The second pitcher is on my bench with a 9p start.
Pitcher one gets locked at 6p, but it's raining, his game gets postponed at 8p without ever starting. He goes from a good matchup on Thurs to a horrible one on Friday. I want to switch him out for my benched pitcher, but I cant because he's locked.


People will complain about that.....

As Dan and others, including myself have pointed out, the odds of this scenario happening are relatively small compared to the supposedly weekly DLing of a guy like Cosart. But how would you feel if you were one of the only two guys it happens too this year?

**Edited slightly for clarity**

[COZ]

Russell, I think you're overthinking this. You cannot make a roster move for a pitcher once his game for that day begins even if he has not thrown a pitch yet. If a pitch is thrown in that game by that pitcher, the pitcher is locked in for the week. Period. If no pitch is thrown by him, he can be swapped out, but not while games are in progress. You could do it the next day for a future game after the games for the evening are completed.

I think there are two issues here...First, who is ELIGIBLE to be benched/started? Second, IF ELIGIBLE (i.e. that individual pitcher has not thrown a pitch), WHEN can that move be made? Any pitcher who has not thrown a pitch is ELIGIBLE to be benched/started. BUT, you can only make this move after games have been completed for the day, not during the game. No moves would be allowed in the middle of that player's game once started. So in your scenario below, no the 6 PM starter would not be allowed to be benched while in a rain delay if the game started. But you could bench him the next day, IF he has not thrown a pitch, i.e. he is eligible to be benched.

COZ

[Gekko]

STATS can't even get the "Date Activated" data to show up on the FAAB and people think they will be able to program something related to pitxhers or first pitxh thrown during the week??? LOL

[TParsons]

STATS can't even get the "Date Activated" data to show up on the FAAB and people think they will be able to program something related to pitxhers or first pitxh thrown during the week??? LOL

Spot on, Gekko!

All of these things sound good in theory, but do you guys really think that STATS has the ability and, likely more important, the willingness to commit the resources to program this the way it needs to be done so that there are no loopholes? The only real options are to keep it the way it is, or have pitching changes for all pitchers on Fridays.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

Russell, this whole Betances example would never happen because line-ups would always lock once games start. Even daily leagues don't allow changes once games start and line-ups lock at gametime. So basically, changes could only be made prior to gametime, then they lock. But, once games are completed, if a player has not thrown a pitch AFTER the games have finished, you could make the changes as discussed by King.

COZ

Yep. No need for that to confuse any logic behind anything getting accomplished. Obviously no rule change is going to require anyone to constantly monitor games while they are being played to see if someone should be swapped in or out real time.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

STATS can't even get the "Date Activated" data to show up on the FAAB and people think they will be able to program something related to pitxhers or first pitxh thrown during the week??? LOL

Good point. They force us to waste all kinds of time to make sure people are in utility if they play last of our starters. It is like releasing nuclear launch codes getting this very simple technology taken care of, even though somehow they did it in football. In the meantime, I waste about half hour every Monday and Friday due to this garbage, and lost 25k between Joe and I last year because of it. Hard to believe this simple thing cannot be fixed.

[Navel Lint]

This thread is about a "Pitcher-Swap" rule. I call it "Pitcher-Swap" for lack of a better term.
However, it hasn't been about one specific rule, there have been multiple variations proposed.

The thread opened up with Perry suggesting we talk about the "DL Designation Pitcher-Swap" rule.
Almost immediately Greg shot this proposal down with his only post on the thread.

Since Greg's only post, there have been several attempts to modify the pitcher-swap rule.
All of these rules have been met with a potential "problem" coming from me or others.
Each new "problem" has been met with a new rule variation which has been met by a new problem.
Most of these so-called "problems" are probably small or unlikely to happen, yet they have been viable enough that people have tried to create new Pitcher-Swap rule variations to account for them.

It seems clear to me now that we've reached a point in the thread where the same comments are being made, but just in different words.
It also seems clear to me that without one single variation of the rule to debate, the conversation will continue to go around in circles and the idea will eventually die.

So I propose this......

I trust that Dan has read every post in this thread.
I know him to be as honest and fair as anyone can know another person through a message board.
I suggest that Dan, using all that he has read here and leaning on his knowledge of the NFBC create ONE "Pitcher-Swap" rule that we can look at.
I believe that he could come up with the best possible compromise encompassing all that has been written here and factoring in the system that we currently have. I would leave the worry about IT's ability to act on the rule out of the equation for now.
In the end it may, or it may not turn out to be a 'pitcher-swap" rule that we like or can use, but at least then we would have one clear rule change to aim toward.

Dan?