Tie Breaker-Do the stats count?? Can we set rosters??

[Greg Ambrosius]

Greg,

We understand your position. But many of us are commenting on this new lineup submission for the game tonight. What in the rules supports that specifically? Also, if the game were on a Thursday, would there be this new lineup submission? Thanks.

Correct, new starting lineups can be set for today's final game as it's a new scoring period. It's no different than how we've run a tie-breaker game in the past. If there had been a Thursday tie-breaker game, yes, new lineups could have been set because that scoring period was set to end on a Wednesday. A new scoring period would have had to have been created for that extra game.

There are people on this thread upset that some owners might not set their starting lineups today using Rangers and Rays, and there are some people upset that people are starting Rangers and Rays. It's a new scoring period and people should put these players in their lineups. If we want to talk in the future about not allowing a new lineup set for a tie-breaker game, we can do that. But for now the rule allows everyone to plan for this tie-breaker game using players they want and nobody should be faulted for adding these players. It's part of our NFBC season. Some people may gain additional stats and some people may lose points based on o-fers or pitchers blowing up. We don't know how this is going to play out today, but it's another regular season game in Major League Baseball. And as we all know, there could have easily been two tie-breaker games this week had all three AL teams tied, so we need to keep that in mind for the future as well.

[sek729]

Doesn't a non-contender starting/benching players that negatively affect a single person in the prize payouts possibly constitute collusion?!

[Money]

Greg,

We understand your position. But many of us are commenting on this new lineup submission for the game tonight. What in the rules supports that specifically? Also, if the game were on a Thursday, would there be this new lineup submission? Thanks.

Correct, new starting lineups can be set for today's final game as it's a new scoring period. It's no different than how we've run a tie-breaker game in the past. If there had been a Thursday tie-breaker game, yes, new lineups could have been set because that scoring period was set to end on a Wednesday. A new scoring period would have had to have been created for that extra game.

There are people on this thread upset that some owners might not set their starting lineups today using Rangers and Rays, and there are some people upset that people are starting Rangers and Rays. It's a new scoring period and people should put these players in their lineups. If we want to talk in the future about not allowing a new lineup set for a tie-breaker game, we can do that. But for now the rule allows everyone to plan for this tie-breaker game using players they want and nobody should be faulted for adding these players. It's part of our NFBC season. Some people may gain additional stats and some people may lose points based on o-fers or pitchers blowing up. We don't know how this is going to play out today, but it's another regular season game in Major League Baseball. And as we all know, there could have easily been two tie-breaker games this week had all three AL teams tied, so we need to keep that in mind for the future as well.

Good point Greg. The number of games that could potentially be played is multiple in each league. The frustration that grows within the community would multiply with each additional game. I don't like it simply because there is no way of handicapping this prior to picking your team. The old dreaded "Luck" factor rears it's ugly head.

[Money]

LOL AT THIS.

Some guy in my league, who has no chance to change his position, just put in Nelson Cruz into his lineup! THE ONLY WAY HE CAN AFFECT THE PRIZE STRUCTURE IS BY KNOCKING ME OFF IN A CATEGORY!!!!!

THIS IS TOTAL BULLSHIT!!!!!!! Some stooge with no skin in the game, was allowed to change his lineup for this 163rd game that could very likely change the Top 2 positions.

This must be a DC league, correct. If not, this guy quit long ago still having Cruz on his bench. I don't have a problem with the team trying to accumulate every last point, but if you've sat on the sidelines for the last 3 months and now re-appear that's a different kind of frustration.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Doesn't a non-contender starting/benching players that negatively affect a single person in the prize payouts possibly constitute collusion?!

I understand your frustration, but why would that be collusion? The rules allow him to set his starting lineup using today's players. The bigger question is why he kept Nelson Cruz on his reserve roster for so long, but now that he has he can use him. All owners can set their starting lineups today as they see fit and hopefully everyone is. Again, maybe positive results occur for those teams or maybe they lose points based on BA, ERA, WHIP. We'll find out today.

[ToddZ]

In 2011 Dodgers and Nationals played 161 games
in 2009 Cubs and Pirates played 161 games
In 2008 Cubs, Astros, Athletics, Marlins, Orioles and Nationals all played 161 games

This season, team IP ranged from 1436 for the Rockies to 1495 for the D-backs. Some teams played more extra inning games. Some have games cut short, Those with exceptional home records bat 8 times in more games.

Uncontrolled, no-way-to-plan-for scheduling quirks happen. Game 163 should absolutely count.

[Gekko]

I understand the frustration (I can fall from 1st to 2nd in multiple leagues based on tonight’s game); however counting this game IS in the Rules so I’m fine with whatever happens.

[Cotton1]

Anyone in a position to lose today is frustrated that we have to deal with this. I have wrapped up one main event league title, so this didn't apply to me in one league, I have a slow draft league in-the-money finish that's done no matter what. The third league I am in is the issue. I am in second place(after a colossal 8 point collapse from sat nite to last nite) barely, and could come in second or 4th based on tonight's game.
I am willing to accept and fully recognize my draft day and faab mistakes that cost me first place, that's on me. The frustrating part is the pure luck factor of the way this played out. I have no TB or TEX hitters, there is absolutely nothing I can do but watch. No free agent pickups, no nothing. Complete luck of the draw as to what happens tonight. There's an 80+% chance nothing changes, but the lack of control is extremely frustrating. I do understand both sides in terms of whether to use or not to use the extra game, maybe next year if the luck falls my way I will feel differently. Maybe open up faab next year for the extra game and give guys like me a chance to affect?
On the positive side, the extreme closeness of the finish in our ME league is astounding. The Hunter Pence single in the last game of the year off Huston Street moved our 2-4th place standings 2 1/2 points! After 16,000 at bats for the two teams and thousand of innings pitched, it came down to that. Oh, and the game tonight ......

[Glenneration X]

I have a 2 1/2 point lead in the Ultimate Auction going into today. You'd think I'd be safe, but unfortunately the team that is right behind me in WHIP and ERA has Price going. Throw in a couple points on offense that are still up for grabs and there is an outside chance that this extra game could cost me $22,500.00.

Still, I have no problem with today counting. It's part of the rules and honestly I think it's a pretty cool variable that can come into play at season's end that needs to be accounted for in strategy.

We'll see how it plays out. I may feel differently tomorrow.

[headhunters]

There are 435 teams and maybe 300 players. 5-10 are on the boards complaining. That is not a majority. If dough and john p can convince greg to change the rules: myself, gecko and others will sign up and play by those rules. This year we all signed up and are playing by these rules. We live in a society that now tells people you don't have to read the rules. I am glad that this contest works the way a democratic society should- read the rules, play by them and if you don't like them- work to change them going forward not backward. Just my 2 cents.

[Money]

There are 435 teams and maybe 300 players. 5-10 are on the boards complaining. That is not a majority. If dough and john p can convince greg to change the rules: myself, gecko and others will sign up and play by those rules. This year we all signed up and are playing by these rules. We live in a society that now tells people you don't have to read the rules. I am glad that this contest works the way a democratic society should- read the rules, play by them and if you don't like them- work to change them going forward not backward. Just my 2 cents.

I don't think anyone is disputing the rules as they are written. Some are frustrated that an extra game counts. I hate the last week of the season, let alone the last game. I would have accepted my fate no matter the outcome as I knew the rules when I signed up. Rule change suggestions were asked for prior to the completion of this season. I lobbied for a change that was for next season, never thinking for a moment that the rules would change this year.

[headhunters]

money- sounds like per my last sentence we agree. good luck today. mike

[BK METS]

The last 3 times MLB had a 163rd game, 2007, 2008, and 2009, the games were played on Monday, Tuesday, and Tuesday. I suppose we would have to go back and see how it was handled in those years, but the point being brought up is a good one... I believe most of us realize that these stats have to count since it is part of the regular season stats and if Evan Longoria hits a HR, it goes towards his regular season numbers. The real question is and what the majority are arguing is, should this game be made part of the final week scoring period or should it be a new scoring period. I personally don't care either way. Its a rule and we all live with the consequences. What we need to clarify next year, this specific situation of being able to change your lineup for this one game. As others have said, if the season ended midweek, would we be able to change our lineup? The rule needs to be consistent moving forward and specified in the rules, since it is not clear and those who are barely leading their leagues, it seems we should, in future years, maybe reconsider starting a new scoring period. Every regular season game should count, there is no doubt that we need to keep that rule in tact, in my mind. But, it is a sensitive issue right now and clarity moving forward would be beneficial. The Nelson Cruz exception appears to be a once in a lifetime situation and not much you can do about that. Some like to keep up their lineups until the end and complaining that a guy who is out of it is continuing to keep up his lineup is not something that should be criticized. It is what many of us complain about all season, so it shouldn't be an issue now, with the current rule in place. The interesting thing is, many who are actually switching their lineups today, might be hurting themselves, rather than helping. Do you put in a guy who might bring down your batting average more than the points you might add in HRs/RBIs? And as far as the rule to include the tie breaker games as part of the full year of stats, it is as clear as can be, in the FIRST paragraph of the rules. Cant be any more cut and dry than that.

[ToddZ]

Deleted - erroneous info posted, sorry

[COZ]

It seems odd to me that this game has its own scoring period. To me...this game is an "add-on" and should be part of the last period. Clearly the rules indicate that this game counts but I don't see why this game should be considered as a new period and all of the teams are allowed to activate all of their Ray / Ranger players. I mean....you grind it out all year and now a Sam Fuld or a David Murphy might decide your fate because they are able to be activated for a play-in game? My vote would be to clarify the rules for upcoming years and any play-in games be a part of the last period.

Agree.

COZ

[MadCow Sez]

There is a separate forum to discuss rule change proposals for 2014. I fail to recall the venom on this topic until the teams were determined yesterday. I've been on both ends of this issue in past seasons. I agree with the esteemed Mr Zola's points. I never saw this level of outcry when teams that were out of the race declined to play a makeup game ending their seasons at 161 played. I'm confident that of enough people voice their desire for tie-breaker games to be excluded in the future, Greg would entertain the idea.

I personally make changes to my teams that are not in contention thru game 163 as I would rather fire all my guns than ever be accused of writing off a team. Beat me because I ran out of bullets to fire, don't slam me for not lying down at the end.

[Money]

The last 3 times MLB had a 163rd game, 2007, 2008, and 2009, the games were played on Monday, Tuesday, and Tuesday. I suppose we would have to go back and see how it was handled in those years, but the point being brought up is a good one... I believe most of us realize that these stats have to count since it is part of the regular season stats and if Evan Longoria hits a HR, it goes towards his regular season numbers. The real question is and what the majority are arguing is, should this game be made part of the final week scoring period or should it be a new scoring period. I personally don't care either way. Its a rule and we all live with the consequences. What we need to clarify next year, this specific situation of being able to change your lineup for this one game. As others have said, if the season ended midweek, would we be able to change our lineup? The rule needs to be consistent moving forward and specified in the rules, since it is not clear and those who are barely leading their leagues, it seems we should, in future years, maybe reconsider starting a new scoring period. Every regular season game should count, there is no doubt that we need to keep that rule in tact, in my mind. But, it is a sensitive issue right now and clarity moving forward would be beneficial. The Nelson Cruz exception appears to be a once in a lifetime situation and not much you can do about that. Some like to keep up their lineups until the end and complaining that a guy who is out of it is continuing to keep up his lineup is not something that should be criticized. It is what many of us complain about all season, so it shouldn't be an issue now, with the current rule in place. The interesting thing is, many who are actually switching their lineups today, might be hurting themselves, rather than helping. Do you put in a guy who might bring down your batting average more than the points you might add in HRs/RBIs? And as far as the rule to include the tie breaker games as part of the full year of stats, it is as clear as can be, in the FIRST paragraph of the rules. Cant be any more cut and dry than that.

I think this begs the question then, if you have a new scoring period should there not be an FAAB period prior to it?

I am almost positive that in 2011 I put Matt Moore into a lineup thinking he would get (if needed) the Thursday start. It was my understanding at the time that there was no reset because the game was on a Thursday. As it turned out that game wasn't needed. If anything the rules probably need some fine tuning to spell out when there is a reset of lineups for these additional games.

[BK METS]

The last 3 times MLB had a 163rd game, 2007, 2008, and 2009, the games were played on Monday, Tuesday, and Tuesday. I suppose we would have to go back and see how it was handled in those years, but the point being brought up is a good one... I believe most of us realize that these stats have to count since it is part of the regular season stats and if Evan Longoria hits a HR, it goes towards his regular season numbers. The real question is and what the majority are arguing is, should this game be made part of the final week scoring period or should it be a new scoring period. I personally don't care either way. Its a rule and we all live with the consequences. What we need to clarify next year, this specific situation of being able to change your lineup for this one game. As others have said, if the season ended midweek, would we be able to change our lineup? The rule needs to be consistent moving forward and specified in the rules, since it is not clear and those who are barely leading their leagues, it seems we should, in future years, maybe reconsider starting a new scoring period. Every regular season game should count, there is no doubt that we need to keep that rule in tact, in my mind. But, it is a sensitive issue right now and clarity moving forward would be beneficial. The Nelson Cruz exception appears to be a once in a lifetime situation and not much you can do about that. Some like to keep up their lineups until the end and complaining that a guy who is out of it is continuing to keep up his lineup is not something that should be criticized. It is what many of us complain about all season, so it shouldn't be an issue now, with the current rule in place. The interesting thing is, many who are actually switching their lineups today, might be hurting themselves, rather than helping. Do you put in a guy who might bring down your batting average more than the points you might add in HRs/RBIs? And as far as the rule to include the tie breaker games as part of the full year of stats, it is as clear as can be, in the FIRST paragraph of the rules. Cant be any more cut and dry than that.

I think this begs the question then, if you have a new scoring period should there not be an FAAB period prior to it?

I am almost positive that in 2011 I put Matt Moore into a lineup thinking he would get (if needed) the Thursday start. It was my understanding at the time that there was no reset because the game was on a Thursday. As it turned out that game wasn't needed. If anything the rules probably need some fine tuning to spell out when there is a reset of lineups for these additional games.

Actually the rules do specify that the last FAAB day is September 22nd.

[Money]

The last 3 times MLB had a 163rd game, 2007, 2008, and 2009, the games were played on Monday, Tuesday, and Tuesday. I suppose we would have to go back and see how it was handled in those years, but the point being brought up is a good one... I believe most of us realize that these stats have to count since it is part of the regular season stats and if Evan Longoria hits a HR, it goes towards his regular season numbers. The real question is and what the majority are arguing is, should this game be made part of the final week scoring period or should it be a new scoring period. I personally don't care either way. Its a rule and we all live with the consequences. What we need to clarify next year, this specific situation of being able to change your lineup for this one game. As others have said, if the season ended midweek, would we be able to change our lineup? The rule needs to be consistent moving forward and specified in the rules, since it is not clear and those who are barely leading their leagues, it seems we should, in future years, maybe reconsider starting a new scoring period. Every regular season game should count, there is no doubt that we need to keep that rule in tact, in my mind. But, it is a sensitive issue right now and clarity moving forward would be beneficial. The Nelson Cruz exception appears to be a once in a lifetime situation and not much you can do about that. Some like to keep up their lineups until the end and complaining that a guy who is out of it is continuing to keep up his lineup is not something that should be criticized. It is what many of us complain about all season, so it shouldn't be an issue now, with the current rule in place. The interesting thing is, many who are actually switching their lineups today, might be hurting themselves, rather than helping. Do you put in a guy who might bring down your batting average more than the points you might add in HRs/RBIs? And as far as the rule to include the tie breaker games as part of the full year of stats, it is as clear as can be, in the FIRST paragraph of the rules. Cant be any more cut and dry than that.

I think this begs the question then, if you have a new scoring period should there not be an FAAB period prior to it?

I am almost positive that in 2011 I put Matt Moore into a lineup thinking he would get (if needed) the Thursday start. It was my understanding at the time that there was no reset because the game was on a Thursday. As it turned out that game wasn't needed. If anything the rules probably need some fine tuning to spell out when there is a reset of lineups for these additional games.

Actually the rules do specify that the last FAAB day is September 22nd.

The fine tuning of the rules I was referring to was for lineup resets. I was not questioning this years last FAAB period. I was just asking if we should be asking a new question about FAAB in the future. We could end up with 3 or 4 of these games. Possibly an FAAB period needs to be added to include these final games. I don't even know how I feel about it right now. I do think a discussion is warranted on it though.

[chimpat]

My home league handles these playoffs the same way every year..... if there is a playoff, you're locked into the lineup you started the last week of the season. It simply rolls over. There are no pickups/bids that can affect this additional game. But this should absolutely be counted, it's still part of the regular season and MLB's stats will reflect that.

[Happenstance]

Having a new scoring period is 100% consistent with how the first period worked, where there was just one Sunday night game and everyone was allowed to set their lineup to account for just that game.

[Cotton1]

If it is a new scoring period then allow faab so the players that have no players involved at least have a chance

[EA Sports]

Don't understand the complaining on this issue, it has always been like this and always will be. I am 11th overall in the main and it pays top 11. I have no players tonight and have to fade Nathan, Moreland, and Yunel. Call it bad luck, but roto always counts the full season. All of us have certain moves that we could have done differently during the year that would have kept us from being in the position to lose position due to one game. Heck, a savvy owner with bench spots to spare could have added Indians, Rangers, and Rays to their roster last FAAB period in case this happens. With two wild cards this will happen almost every year.

Adding a FAAB period for the new week is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard.

My two cents, good luck tonight fellas!

Eric Albright

[headhunters]

geez eric- again a winner. of course that partner of yours can't be too happy seeing you call it your team

[EA Sports]

HAHAHA! Luckily he doesn't peruse the message boards. I have so many teams I forget sometimes.