Suggestions For 2010 Player Eligibility Rules

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:05 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

Greg, I agree with the changes you've made and the above items from Mark (except for maybe the STATS error, that is problematic either way).

Also, I'll suggest adding the following to the end of rule b:

"If a player's most games played at a position is less than 20 and tied among more than one position, the commishioner will assign eligibility at one position only".

Players shouldn't be awarded multiple positions because of a statistical anomoly. Agreed

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:24 am

I guess I am wondering why if a player is determined to be 2B or SS eligible why he is not MI eligible, do they not go together like hand and glove? Obviously the same for 1B/3B and CI. Or am I misunderstanding?

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:27 am

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

I guess this was the first time I had this problem, but in week 26 I had Garrett Jones in my lineup. He played at 12:30. I know he should be locked in my lineup, but I should have been able to move him to outfield and put someone else at UT. I think we have that option in football where you can move a player out the flex position after he is locked. If you logged in through the NFFC site and THEN accessed your teams you would have been able to make the switch (like you can in football)

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:28 am

Originally posted by Plymouth:

I guess I am wondering why if a player is determined to be 2B or SS eligible why he is not MI eligible, do they not go together like hand and glove? Obviously the same for 1B/3B and CI. Or am I misunderstanding? suppose during the 2010 season, a non-CI elgibile player accumlates 6 games at 1B and 4 games at 3B. some owners wanted him to be CI eligible.

[ October 06, 2009, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: Gekko ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:43 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

Greg, I agree with the changes you've made and the above items from Mark (except for maybe the STATS error, that is problematic either way).

Also, I'll suggest adding the following to the end of rule b:

"If a player's most games played at a position is less than 20 and tied among more than one position, the commishioner will assign eligibility at one position only".

Players shouldn't be awarded multiple positions because of a statistical anomoly. Correct. Good catch on both sides. I'll add this.

Schwks · Post by **Schwks** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:46 am

I was wondering about that during the season...the issue if a guy accumulates 10 games between 2b-ss or 3b-1b, but not 10 at either. Is there any consideration being given to making that player eligible for ci or mi?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:46 am

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Plymouth:

I guess I am wondering why if a player is determined to be 2B or SS eligible why he is not MI eligible, do they not go together like hand and glove? Obviously the same for 1B/3B and CI. Or am I misunderstanding? suppose during the 2010 season, a non-CI elgibile player accumlates 6 games at 1B and 4 games at 3B. some owners wanted him to be CI eligible. [/QUOTE]Correct, CI and MI are not positions on their own and thus you can't add up two of the positions to come up with 10 games played there. Honestly, I don't think this needs to be added in the rules but I did receive 1 or 2 of those questions this year.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:49 am

Originally posted by Schwks:

I was wondering about that during the season...the issue if a guy accumulates 10 games between 2b-ss or 3b-1b, but not 10 at either. Is there any consideration being given to making that player eligible for ci or mi? No. They are not positions.

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 5:09 pm

I am not talking about adding games played say at 2B and SS together to get MI eligibility. I am asking if someone who is deemed 2B eligible by only playing 6 games, is he also MI eligible?

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:20 pm

Originally posted by Plymouth:

I am not talking about adding games played say at 2B and SS together to get MI eligibility. I am asking if someone who is deemed 2B eligible by only playing 6 games, is he also MI eligible? Yes, if he is 2b eligible he is MI eligible.