I like the Friday DL rule

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 7:42 am

Just thought it needed to be said again.

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 10:03 am

I like it too. It's nice not having to wait an entire week if one of your players hits the DL on Tuesday or Wednesday.

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:11 am

well i say it again i hate the rule. it puts working people at a disadvantage. plus i dont think that some teams should be allowed to change team mid week while others cant, that is flat out wrong in my opinion.

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:42 am

its a great rule , especially if someone goes down on a mon or tues.I lost Rondell White ON a monday, that would suck to go 7 days before taking out the dead wood . Was able to put HINSKE in for him friday and got 4 runs and some hits for my bavg.The rule is meant to help everybody.If someone goes on the dl on a friday and you cant get home , that would suck , but still one day .The mon thru thursday there is no excuses to get someone in.

Red Sox Nation · Post by **Red Sox Nation** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:50 am

Originally posted by eddiejag:

its a great rule , especially if someone goes down on a mon or tues.I lost Rondell White ON a monday, that would suck to go 7 days before taking out the dead wood . Was able to put HINSKE in for him friday and got 4 runs and some hits for my bavg.The rule is meant to help everybody.If someone goes on the dl on a friday and you cant get home , that would suck , but still one day .The mon thru thursday there is no excuses to get someone in. Agreed! This is a great rule

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:16 pm

Also, if you're working on Friday and one of your players goes on the DL that day and you don't get home in time to see this, you're only playing short handed for the weekend ONLY. At least you're not shorthanded for the entire week.

UCLA · Post by **UCLA** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:04 pm

I was a little disappointed last Friday with

NFBC not getting the DL next to Escobar's name.

MLB had Escobar on the DL at 2PM EST..twenty

minutes before first pitch...could not change

Escobar, because NFBC didn't have the DL tag by

Escobar's name....Didn't see it there at all Friday, I think it may have made it by Sa

turday

night....WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:04 am

Originally posted by UCLA:

I was a little disappointed last Friday with

NFBC not getting the DL next to Escobar's name.

MLB had Escobar on the DL at 2PM EST..twenty

minutes before first pitch...could not change

Escobar, because NFBC didn't have the DL tag by

Escobar's name....Didn't see it there at all Friday, I think it may have made it by Sa

turday

night....WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG? A player has to officially be on the MLB DL list by 12:01 a.m. each Friday to be eligible for our DL list. We don't want people checking their NFBC team info all day on Friday to see if a player is eligible or not. If they aren't listed as DL eligible on Friday morning when you wake up, they obviously weren't officially put on the MLB DL list by then. That's the rule.

We weren't slow on the gun there, Escobar wasn't officially on the DL list by our deadline.

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:33 am

Greg - any chance that at some point STATS can engineer a mechanism that would allow a REVERSE DL move - as an example, let's say a team has Fat Bart (Colon) on their squad on the DL and he is activated Thursday because the Angels decide he is ready to pitch on Friday. So his NFBC owner could then Activate Colon FROM the DL for the three day weekend period reserving one of his active pitchers.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:46 am

Originally posted by Captain Hook:

Greg - any chance that at some point STATS can engineer a mechanism that would allow a REVERSE DL move - as an example, let's say a team has Fat Bart (Colon) on their squad on the DL and he is activated Thursday because the Angels decide he is ready to pitch on Friday. So his NFBC owner could then Activate Colon FROM the DL for the three day weekend period reserving one of his active pitchers. STATS could definitely do that if I told them to. Personally, I just think as a manager it's your call to make that tough decision at the beginning of the week. If you activate him at the start of the week and he doesn't come off the DL, then you can put someone else in for the weekend. In your situation, you are hoping to add a pitcher early in the week in place of Colon and then also get Colon's first start. We could do that, but again I'm putting the scouting report on your shoulders the way it is now.

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:53 am

Greg I don't know how that helps with hitters - maybe Colon was a bad example. What about the teams with Ramon Hernandez who have/had no idea when he would be coming back and have been playing a backup catcher to catch some offensive crumbs. If he is actually activated to be back in the lineup by this Friday, they would certainly want to make that switch.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:12 am

The "reverse-DL" move as proposed by Capt Hook leaves way too much wiggle room for my tastes. Currently, we are allowed to select a player from a 7-man reserve roster to activate. Under Hook's proposal, we'd be allowed to replace any player (barring positional requirements) from a 23-man active roster to deactivate. As it currently stands, teams can manipulate their rosters to avoid the bad start of pitchers who are getting two starts in a particular week. This proposal would allow even more chicanery, and is too close to the next step towards daily moves: two transaction periods per week.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:14 am

furcal- a good example. personally i don't care either way- with furcal on monday it was a maybe. even if for certain he was coming off friday- it was 4 days of someone else or 3 days of him. with hooks example it would have been 4+3

BigHurt · Post by **BigHurt** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:57 am

I posted a question regarding daily lineup changeups on another thread. A common response was that daily lineup changes would eliminate the element of skill necessary in having to set your lineup for the entire week and essentially predict who will give you the most production over that 7 day period.

If this is the reasoning behind weekly lineup changes, allowing Friday DL changes seems okay because (in most cases) a manager cannot predict when one of his players will get hurt. This rule allows each manager an equal chance to respond to injuries and pick up a few points.

Allowing the reverse situation, activation of a previously DL'd player, seems contradictory. The date that a player will come off the DL is a set date known to the manager. Deciding whether that player will provide the most production after that date is the same as deciding which healthy players will provide the most production.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:43 am

Originally posted by Captain Hook:

Greg I don't know how that helps with hitters - maybe Colon was a bad example. What about the teams with Ramon Hernandez who have/had no idea when he would be coming back and have been playing a backup catcher to catch some offensive crumbs. If he is actually activated to be back in the lineup by this Friday, they would certainly want to make that switch. I hear ya, but again I think we have to leave some managing decisions to be made. I'm in another league that doesn't have the Friday DL rule and I read where Hernandez was probably going to come off on Friday. I just couldn't take the chance and decided to leave him on my reserve roster this week. It wasn't an easy decision. It's the same dilemma NFBC owners have to make with our current rule. The only saving grace is if you put Hernandez in your starting lineup and he was still on the DL by Friday, at least you could then take him out and get three games from your reserve catcher.

I know what you're saying, but right now I don't see the need for a reverse DL rule.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:56 pm

The friday DL rule is one I could live without.

It's never really been a fair rule. It's total luck if you are able to use it. Maybe in a smaller league with bigger benches it would make sense. But not here.

Sack · Post by **Sack** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:13 am

I like the idea behind the Friday DL rule, but waiting on MLB to post a player before you are allowed to take action doesn't work and that can be said for an MLB team as well. I own K Escobar, Furcal, and now Soriano. Lucky for me on different teams and this RULE has done nothing to help me. It seems clear that Soriano will miss the rest of the week but without a formal DL designation I need to wait till next Monday to replace him. Why should a Scott Podsednik owner in my league be allowed a three game advantage? A perfect example this week why this rule is simply not working.

Open the rosters on Friday to everybody - or make them ALL stay in place. The current format is not the best option.

[ April 18, 2007, 08:17 AM: Message edited by: Sack ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:45 am

Originally posted by Sack:

I like the idea behind the Friday DL rule, but waiting on MLB to post a player before you are allowed to take action doesn't work and that can be said for an MLB team as well. I own K Escobar, Furcal, and now Soriano. Lucky for me on different teams and this RULE has done nothing to help me. It seems clear that Soriano will miss the rest of the week but without a formal DL designation I need to wait till next Monday to replace him. Why should a Scott Podsednik owner in my league be allowed a three game advantage? A perfect example this week why this rule is simply not working.

Open the rosters on Friday to everybody - or make them ALL stay in place. The current format is not the best option. Ken, Soriano was hurt on Monday night and is actually day-to-day. I'm not sure why anyone should gain relief for someone who is day-to-day. Now if he had torn his hamstring and the Cubs put him on the DL Wednesday, this rule would allow you to put someone in for him on Friday and get three days of stats. The rule would work as intended in that scenario. It also is working for the Podsednik scenario you mentioned above.

Injuries are part of the game. The Friday rule is designed to take some of the sting out of that part of the game for players who are either placed on the DL after Monday starting deadlines are set or for players who get hurt badly enough early in the week to reach the DL. Unfortunately, it doesn't work perfectly in every injury situation.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:47 am

Usually when injuries are discussed it comes off as whining or a "woe is me" type post. But I think Sack's post carries merit.

It might benefit Soriano owners more to have him on the DL. To use Sack's example, not only do Podsednik owners get three productive days from the bench, they KNOW that he will have to be replaced next week. Soriano owners get no stats for the balance of the week and have to digest reports from Chicago this week to see if Soriano may help them next week.

I know we have done the dance about making more roster moves and baby steps are best. I propose for 2008 that we make positional (offensive) moves on Friday as well as Monday. The DL rule would still be applicable to pitchers as pitchers would not be eligible for Friday moves to avoid "streaming". Managers would not have to be glued to their computers for this change, since they were able to change players when the DL bug hit them in the past. This would impower Managers to set their rosters for each series and have more say on day-to-day injuries.

I know NFBC'ers will be on both sides of the fence, but I am willing to bet (No Lance, this isn't a bet) that the majority will be in favor of this change. Any thoughts or tinkering are greatly appreciated....

[ April 18, 2007, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: DOUGHBOYS ]

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:16 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

I propose for 2008 that we make positional (offensive) moves on Friday as well as Monday. The DL rule would still be applicable to pitchers as pitchers would not be eligible for Friday moves to avoid "streaming". Still too much roster tinkering here. With only 3 or 4 games per transaction period, you would be able to play lefty/righty matchups, historical averages, etc. with all of your offensive players. You would end up over-emphasizing the importance of reserve hitters.

I might be in the minority, but I'd pass on this proposal.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:23 am

[/qb][/QUOTE]Still too much roster tinkering here. With only 3 or 4 games per transaction period, you would be able to play lefty/righty matchups, historical averages, etc. with all of your offensive players. You would end up over-emphasizing the importance of reserve hitters.

[/QB][/quote]

Hopefully you are already doing lefty-righty matchups and historical matchups, only for two series instead of one. Over-emphasizing the importance of reserve hitters is totally lost on me. Isn't this a integral part of your team?

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:10 am

(1) L/R and historicals become critical rather than merely important. I don't want to do this twice a week -- it's too much work.

(2) Right now most teams are carrying 2-4 hitters on this bench. Put this rule in effect and you'll see teams start carrying 4-6 hitters on reserve. That weakens the available hitter free agent pool to an uncomfortable level.

Sack · Post by **Sack** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:25 am

Usually I take Greg's words on merit and leave it at that. Here, I can't. The Soriano/Podsednik example shows EXACTLY why the Friday D/L rule doesn't work as currently constructed. If Soriano plays before next week Greg, I'll by the first round in September.

He got hurt on Monday. The Cubs, realizing they were short handed called for help by recalling Pie. Most "early" reports state a D/L stint was possible but UNLESS the Cubs place him on the D/L all that own Soriano have our rosters locked and hands tied. The real kick will be when the Cubs place him on the D/L sometime Friday and then we are told "it is past the deadline". Can't happen? Owning Escobar last week I know for a fact it happened because I took a blank despite hearing Friday prior to the games that he was on the D/L. With this Friday D/L rule we GET two wrongs that certainly will never add up to a right.

Meantime, the Podsednik owners, or others injured prior to Friday that have the added complication of whether or not MLB hits this list with the name before OUR deadline get a reprieve. ( Same theme ) In leagues as HIGH STAKES as this we need a more uniform procedure and or rule. To much appears arbitrary in my eyes and the example cited above bears this out.

Understand I'm not faulting the NFBC for assisting any one owner as the rules could work both for or against me, but I've had issues with this Friday D/L rule from the start and it has taken less than three weeks to once again impact our game.

Just looking to better what is in my estimation the BEST fantasy product on the market.

[ April 18, 2007, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: Sack ]

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:34 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

(1) L/R and historicals become critical rather than merely important. I don't want to do this twice a week -- it's too much work.

(2) Right now most teams are carrying 2-4 hitters on this bench. Put this rule in effect and you'll see teams start carrying 4-6 hitters on reserve. That weakens the available hitter free agent pool to an uncomfortable level. 1- You would be doing this for 2-3 additional hitters, or in your case 4-6 and I'll feel sorry for your pitching staff.

2- It would be silly to overload on hitters given pitchers injury history. Overloading on hitters solely on this basis would be a mistake.

I agree to disagree with you, KOQ

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Wed Apr 18, 2007 6:45 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

(1) L/R and historicals become critical rather than merely important. I don't want to do this twice a week -- it's too much work.

(2) Right now most teams are carrying 2-4 hitters on this bench. Put this rule in effect and you'll see teams start carrying 4-6 hitters on reserve. That weakens the available hitter free agent pool to an uncomfortable level. I'm not sure doughboys idea would increase the amt of hitters on reserves. I for one wouldnt drop an El Duque type or a H.Baily just to carry an A.Miles because he may get 2 starts over A.Kennedy or a Langerhans to go along with Diaz just in case there are 2 RH's going over the weekend.

I however wouldnt tinker with the rule the way it is because of shelfish reasons I guess -

What Greg may be seeing and I know it's true on my part is that more and more people here are running numerous teams. There is a nice balance of low maintenance and lineup strategy that if tilted too much toward higher maintenance would be a drawback to running 4, 5, 6 or so teams. Knowing I'd have to give serious consideration on a thursday evening to how I need to juggle my offensive side of the roster would be a deterent to adding more teams in the future. Again, selfish reasons why I'm against it.

Q