NFBC Message Boards

We had an error with FAAB yesterday and we want to clear it up now.

Last week STATS made an adjustment to FAAB that allowed unsigned free agents to be bid on. We did not have unsigned free agents in the pool in Weeks 2 & 3 and we made that correction last week. Unfortunately, something was also done that unlocked the 7 am Sunday barrier for new free agents and three free agents were added about four hours after the deadline. Nobody was added after their games started and all were in the pool for 10+ hours, but it was still after 7 am.

The three players added on Sunday were:
Dan Vogelbach (45 leagues)
Kennys Vargas (2 leagues)
Jim Adducci (0 leagues)

We are letting these bids go through. Multiple owners bid on these players and thus it would create more harm to roll it back than to let it go. It would affect hundreds of other bids in dozens of leagues.

We have corrected this 7 am free agent lock and any minor-leaguer added to an MLB roster after that deadline will be eligible for pickup in the following week's pool. Sorry for this confusion and good luck going forward.

Hopefully these players don't amount to anything, but it's f'ing frustrating when the rules of a contest are not followed. Without knowing these players were added after 7am, I even bid on one of the players and had the high bid.

So if this happened again for whatever reason, the commish office will look to see how many owners are impacted and then decide if bids stand or need to be reversed?

"We are letting these bids go through. Multiple owners bid on these players and thus it would create more harm to roll it back than to let it go. It would affect hundreds of other bids in dozens of leagues."

I've got to admit, I'm a bit surprised by this ruling. It's a departure from the precedents set previously whenever I've seen this come up (admittedly not often) prior years playing the NFBC.

I'm surprised too.
I thought the fair thing to do would be to reverse them and wait for next week when every player would know they were available.
Like said, I hope none have a major impact.

Dan "Leader of the Band" Vogelbach -- shades of Jack Cust!

How can I player with a name pronounced Vogel-Bosch get past me?

DOUGHBOYS wrote:I'm surprised too.
I thought the fair thing to do would be to reverse them and wait for next week when every player would know they were available.
Like said, I hope none have a major impact.

I agree that would have been the fair thing to do. Especially considering there may have been some who set their FAAB early, saw the Vogelbach announcement Sunday, but didn't go back to adjust their FAAB because they didn't think he'd be available because they knew the rule.

Even more problematic in my mind, is that precedent has been set previously for cases that followed this same exact scenario. Now what's the precedent, the one we knew of previously, or the one set today? Or is it a case by case dependent upon how enthusiastic & quick to react the current IT is at any specific time.

Sorry to bring my concerns to the table. Just think a potential can of worms is being opened here, one that could be easily avoided.

Glenneration X wrote:

DOUGHBOYS wrote:I'm surprised too.
I thought the fair thing to do would be to reverse them and wait for next week when every player would know they were available.
Like said, I hope none have a major impact.

I agree that would have been the fair thing to do. Especially considering there may have been some who set their FAAB early, saw the Vogelbach announcement Sunday, but didn't go back to adjust their FAAB because they didn't think he'd be available because they knew the rule.

Even more problematic in my mind, is that precedent has been set previously for cases that followed this same exact scenario. Now what's the precedent, the one we knew of previously, or the one set today? Or is it a case by case dependent upon how enthusiastic & quick to react the current IT is at any specific time.

Sorry to bring my concerns to the table. Just think a potential can of worms is being opened here, one that could be easily avoided.

Fair concerns, but I don't believe this has ever happened on a "dozens-of-leagues" scale before. Previous incidents that I can recall involved a single bid in an AL-only league, or a MiLB call-up that was somehow available in a single league.

Do you remember another case where so many leagues were impacted by a faulty FAAB-filter?

Greg Ambrosius wrote:We did not have unsigned free agents in the pool in Weeks 2 & 3 and we made that correction last week.

Could you please clarify this statement?
In week 2 I started a thread asking about unsigned free agents (to which you did not comment even once) where I was scolded for thinking that unsigned free agents were supposed to be available.

The section I've quoted seems to imply they should have been available but were not and then you corrected that. Maybe I'm not reading it correctly.

King of Queens wrote:

Glenneration X wrote:

DOUGHBOYS wrote:I'm surprised too.
I thought the fair thing to do would be to reverse them and wait for next week when every player would know they were available.
Like said, I hope none have a major impact.

I agree that would have been the fair thing to do. Especially considering there may have been some who set their FAAB early, saw the Vogelbach announcement Sunday, but didn't go back to adjust their FAAB because they didn't think he'd be available because they knew the rule.

Even more problematic in my mind, is that precedent has been set previously for cases that followed this same exact scenario. Now what's the precedent, the one we knew of previously, or the one set today? Or is it a case by case dependent upon how enthusiastic & quick to react the current IT is at any specific time.

Sorry to bring my concerns to the table. Just think a potential can of worms is being opened here, one that could be easily avoided.

Fair concerns, but I don't believe this has ever happened on a "dozens-of-leagues" scale before. Previous incidents that I can recall involved a single bid in an AL-only league, or a MiLB call-up that was somehow available in a single league.

Do you remember another case where so many leagues were impacted by a faulty FAAB-filter?

No problem Bud. Here's a link where multiple leagues were impacted....
http://nfbcforums.stats.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5563

I also believe this link to be to the instance where the precedent was set. As you can see, I was personally affected in that case and thought at the time that the players bid on and won should stand. However, I was ruled against and accepted the ruling. Once that precedent was set however, it's been the established interpretation of the rule since.

I think it problematic to not follow established precedent, as well as the clear written rule.

I have a methodical approach. I go through the free agent list on Saturday night meticulously. And enter my initial bids. On Sunday I fine tune the lists and redo the bids I did not notice Vogelbach added on Sunday and I need backup first basemen in two leagues. In one of those leagues he went for eight dollars which i would have outbid. i know the rules and did not search for additional players on Sunday. IMHO greg made the wrong decision. There was plenty of time to rerun the FAAB. So much for my approach.

last year, on April 11, 2016, there was the first FAAB for cutline. The lists for free agents were supposed to be closed on Sunday April 10. On Sunday, Mazara was called up and Mallex Smith was called up on Monday. I noticed they were in the free agent pool on Monday and it took me hours to add them to my threads. Since I noticed they were wrongly on the free agent list, I notified Greg. There was no notice to anyone, but those bids were disallowed. The reason given was the rules are the rules. The difference of course is that no one received those players but the rules are the rules!

Glenneration X wrote:
No problem Bud. Here's a link where multiple leagues were impacted....
http://nfbcforums.stats.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5563

I also believe this link to be to the instance where the precedent was set. As you can see, I was personally affected in that case and thought at the time that the players bid on and won should stand. However, I was ruled against and accepted the ruling. Once that precedent was set however, it's been the established interpretation of the rule since.

I think it problematic to not follow established precedent, as well as the clear written rule.

2010? Wasn't that the Fanball year? Wiped clean from the memory banks!

King of Queens wrote:

Glenneration X wrote:
No problem Bud. Here's a link where multiple leagues were impacted....
http://nfbcforums.stats.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5563

I also believe this link to be to the instance where the precedent was set. As you can see, I was personally affected in that case and thought at the time that the players bid on and won should stand. However, I was ruled against and accepted the ruling. Once that precedent was set however, it's been the established interpretation of the rule since.

I think it problematic to not follow established precedent, as well as the clear written rule.

2010? Wasn't that the Fanball year? Wiped clean from the memory banks!

Not 2010 man! Take away that year and I drop below Massotto in the rankings!

Well now at least Bryan's no longer the only Nfbc Vogel screwup lol

Quahogs wrote:

King of Queens wrote:

Glenneration X wrote:
No problem Bud. Here's a link where multiple leagues were impacted....
http://nfbcforums.stats.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5563

I also believe this link to be to the instance where the precedent was set. As you can see, I was personally affected in that case and thought at the time that the players bid on and won should stand. However, I was ruled against and accepted the ruling. Once that precedent was set however, it's been the established interpretation of the rule since.

I think it problematic to not follow established precedent, as well as the clear written rule.

2010? Wasn't that the Fanball year? Wiped clean from the memory banks!

Not 2010 man! Take away that year and I drop below Massotto in the rankings!

Well now at least Bryan's no longer the only Nfbc Vogel screwup lol

View Standings for: 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2009 NFBC | 2008 NFBC | 2007 NFBC | 2006 NFBC | 2005 NFBC | 2004 NFBC

wtf did i do to you Juprinka!!? man. rough.

Greg Ambrosius wrote:it would create more harm to roll it back than to let it go.

Isn't this a matter of opinion? I'm in the camp that it creates more harm to not honor the rulebook. Think you guys made the wrong call on this one.

marknym wrote: I'm in the camp that it creates more harm to not honor the rulebook.

i agree. being inconvenient is never a good reason to bypass the rules. without enforcement of rules, what do you have left?

i know there are owners hoping vogelbitch hits 3 HR this week; however there are also owners/people hoping he goes 0-16 this week.

King of Queens wrote:Previous incidents that I can recall involved a single bid in an AL-only league

wil venable i believe

I am disappointed with this.

According to rules: "The player pool is deemed closed of new free agents each Sunday at 7 AM ET before the FAAB bidding deadline and a player must have played at least 1 MLB game to be added to the pool at that time. "

Vogelbach was called up Sunday afternoon, AFTER the 7am cutoff time. He had not played in a MLB game this season prior to the Sunday 7am cutoff time either.

Personally, I did my FA bids approximately noon west-coast time. I knew he had been called up, I searched for him because I needed a 1B in a few leagues. He was not on the player list at that time. I re-read the rules, saw the above rule and figured I'd have to wait another week.

Somewhere over the next 7 hours he became available in the pool to be bid on.

It's disappointing that a player became available for bidding shortly before the deadline when he wasn't eligible to be bid on based on the rules and he hadn't been in the available player pool earlier that day

Gekko wrote:

marknym wrote: I'm in the camp that it creates more harm to not honor the rulebook.

i agree. being inconvenient is never a good reason to bypass the rules. without enforcement of rules, what do you have left?

i know there are owners hoping vogelbitch hits 3 HR this week; however there are also owners/people hoping he goes 0-16 this week.

Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is fantasy baseball. There are rules.

Has the whole world gone crazy? Am I the only one around here who gives a shit about the rules? Mark it zero!

-W. Sobchak

lrr wrote:I have a methodical approach. I go through the free agent list on Saturday night meticulously. And enter my initial bids. On Sunday I fine tune the lists and redo the bids I did not notice Vogelbach added on Sunday and I need backup first basemen in two leagues. In one of those leagues he went for eight dollars which i would have outbid. i know the rules and did not search for additional players on Sunday. IMHO greg made the wrong decision. There was plenty of time to rerun the FAAB. So much for my approach.

last year, on April 11, 2016, there was the first FAAB for cutline. The lists for free agents were supposed to be closed on Sunday April 10. On Sunday, Mazara was called up and Mallex Smith was called up on Monday. I noticed they were in the free agent pool on Monday and it took me hours to add them to my threads. Since I noticed they were wrongly on the free agent list, I notified Greg. There was no notice to anyone, but those bids were disallowed. The reason given was the rules are the rules. The difference of course is that no one received those players but the rules are the rules!

While I agree with KOQ's assessment that 2010 and therefore Juprinka's now questionably legitimate championship should all be thrown out , this post above by Irr pretty much says it all. He who followed the rules is penalized, while those who didn't or weren't aware of them are rewarded.

what happened to billywaz?

Quahogs wrote: Not 2010 man! Take away that year and I drop below Massotto in the rankings!

PS... the only way anyone drops below Massotto in the rankings is if 2010 and every other year is taken away.
Well, at least he'd be tied. Baby steps.

edelman24 wrote:what happened to billywaz?

Glenn's post was 8 pages of solid debate... Here's how Greg ruled at the time in 2010:

Greg Ambrosius wrote:I'm not even reading the debate here but any player added to the free agent pool illegally is an illegal pickup. I do not know when EYJ was added to the pool but I am trying to find out now and will have to clean up the mess if there is one league by league. That's my job these days. And yes I need to do this immediately, which is why I need the IT department to help me soon. It's definitely not the fault of the owners, but rules are in place for a reason and no player is allowed to be added after 7 am ET on Sunday. I will post here as soon as I know what happened here on Fanball's part, and how many leagues are affected. Sorry to all affected, but stay tuned.

So in other words, we are now changing precedent this year based on convenience. But per 2010 Greg, he's probably "not even reading this debate." At minimum, he avoided it when his inconsistent ruling could have been corrected.

Seems to me G&T have no leverage with STATS this year and are afraid to ask IT for anything. I hope it will be better going forward.