2007 Rule Change #3

RODGER · Post by **RODGER** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:27 am

The website informs us of the following:

3. A more flexible DL list: The NFBC will again allow Friday lineup changes to any player who is in your starting lineup and is officially on MLB's DL list by Friday at 12:01 a.m. The new rule allows for NFBC officials to be flexible with that DL list: Players must officially be on Major League Baseball's DL list according to STATS and the NFBC by 12:01 a.m. on Friday for this move (or moves) to take effect for the weekend games. The NFBC will also add players who are disabled to a DL list during the month of September when MLB teams don't normally use an official DL list.

Is the only real change compared to last year the SEPTEMBER EFFECT, or is there more to it?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:40 am

It's not only making September changes more flexible, but it also could be attributed to the Derrek Lee injury where he broke his wrist during a game on Wednesday night, but didn't officially go on the Cubs' DL list until Friday afternoon. In a case like that, we could make Lee eligible to be disabled on Thursday afternoon. It's a call that will be up to Tom and I to make.

RODGER · Post by **RODGER** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 9:06 am

Okay... so basically, the part that reads 'Players must officially be on Major League Baseball's DL list' is no longer written in stone and is subject to exceptions in rare, special and obvious circumstances determined by you.

viper · Post by **viper** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:08 am

As much as I agree with complaints by Derrick Lee owners that it was not fair that the Cubs waited until Friday to DL him, I believe you open a huge can of worm by making unilateral decisons. For every Derrek Lee, there are likely several lesser players who someone has active that you won't know about.

Making decisons is September when the DL lists are essentially meaningless is OK but until then I'm not sure. You are opening yourself up for justifiable complaints.

[ January 31, 2007, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: viper ]

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:21 am

Originally posted by viper:

You are opening yourself up for justifiable complaints. What else is new? Greg's been dealing with complaints since the beginning!

[ January 31, 2007, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: King of Queens ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:00 am

Originally posted by RODGER:

Okay... so basically, the part that reads 'Players must officially be on Major League Baseball's DL list' is no longer written in stone and is subject to exceptions in rare, special and obvious circumstances determined by you. Correct.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:02 am

Originally posted by viper:

As much as I agree with complaints by Derrick Lee owners that it was not fair that the Cubs waited until Friday to DL him, I believe you open a huge can of worm by making unilateral decisons. For every Derrek Lee, there are likely several lesser players who someone has active that you won't know about.

Making decisons is September when the DL lists are essentially meaningless is OK but until then I'm not sure. You are opening yourself up for justifiable complaints. You are correct, but as long as we are consistent all year long it's no different than anything else we do with the NFBC. Certainly no different than deciding which players can be thrown out of each league's free agent pool for the rest of the year. This can be done judiciously and correctly by allowing only the most obvious moves like a broken wrist. We hope to not use this often, but again in obvious cases I'll step in to make the rule work as it was intended.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:07 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by viper:

As much as I agree with complaints by Derrick Lee owners that it was not fair that the Cubs waited until Friday to DL him, I believe you open a huge can of worm by making unilateral decisons. For every Derrek Lee, there are likely several lesser players who someone has active that you won't know about.

Making decisons is September when the DL lists are essentially meaningless is OK but until then I'm not sure. You are opening yourself up for justifiable complaints. You are correct, but as long as we are consistent all year long it's no different than anything else we do with the NFBC. Certainly no different than deciding which players can be thrown out of each league's free agent pool for the rest of the year. This can be done judiciously and correctly by allowing only the most obvious moves like a broken wrist. We hope to not use this often, but again in obvious cases I'll step in to make the rule work as it was intended. [/QUOTE]Like anything else, Greg, be prepared for a lot of complaining no matter what decision you make or don't make.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 12:01 pm

Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by viper:

As much as I agree with complaints by Derrick Lee owners that it was not fair that the Cubs waited until Friday to DL him, I believe you open a huge can of worm by making unilateral decisons. For every Derrek Lee, there are likely several lesser players who someone has active that you won't know about.

Making decisons is September when the DL lists are essentially meaningless is OK but until then I'm not sure. You are opening yourself up for justifiable complaints. You are correct, but as long as we are consistent all year long it's no different than anything else we do with the NFBC. Certainly no different than deciding which players can be thrown out of each league's free agent pool for the rest of the year. This can be done judiciously and correctly by allowing only the most obvious moves like a broken wrist. We hope to not use this often, but again in obvious cases I'll step in to make the rule work as it was intended. [/QUOTE]Like anything else, Greg, be prepared for a lot of complaining no matter what decision you make or don't make. [/QUOTE]That's a given and I trust we won't add players unless it's obvious to me and everyone else why we're doing it. Or I won't do it at all and just let everyone continue to complain about why MLB teams wait so long to officially put players on the DL. The rule change ALLOWS me the chance to add one if it's obvious. To me, the Derrek Lee broken wrist on Wednesday night was obvious. The September injured players who didn't officially go on the DL were obvious to me. After that, I can't think of many other instances that this would have been used in 2006.

Hangtown · Post by **Hangtown** » Wed Jan 31, 2007 2:12 pm

Food for thought:

9/5/06 Msg board post:

I guess no one is looking at drops?

Complaints do happen...