Grady Sizemore Being Removed As Free Agent In 2 League

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue May 25, 2010 6:34 am

This is from Greg:

We don't like to make a practice of pulling free agents from any league's FAAB pool, but when we are uncertain about injuries we tend to lean on the side of caution. I've decided to do that this week in regards to Grady Sizemore. He will be pulled for now from the following two leagues in which he was cut this week:

Sizemore Grady Classic Atlantic City Weekend 1 - League 2

Sizemore Grady March 29 Online Double Play 9 pm League

I'm doing this because with an ADP of 24 he's a very high pick who is now available for the last 18 weeks of the regular season in just two leagues. His injury is also so unknown right now that there's talk about everything from him possibly playing today to having season-ending surgery. I know his stats for the last 1+ years are horrible, but he's still a second round pick who is only available in two of 182 leagues. Let's be smart on this one and let the owners cut the player they want to cut, but still keep the overall competitions on a level playing field for everyone.

We are pulling Sizemore out of the FAAB pool for now and will watch his situation the rest of the way. If he is cut in more leagues because more information is known about his injury, then we may reconsider our position on this, but for now his status is so unknown that we will err on the side of caution before getting more information. We hope everyone understands our reasoning on this.

[ May 25, 2010, 12:36 PM: Message edited by: Tom Kessenich ]

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Tue May 25, 2010 8:20 am

Tom, I think you're erring on the side of aggression, not caution. Grady is very comparable to the Victor Martinez ruling of 2 years ago - pulling him was a mistake as he proved to have very little value for the remainder of that season.

Current stats should weight far more heavily than long-ago history in these decisions.

Hells Satans · Post by **Hells Satans** » Tue May 25, 2010 8:22 am

As long as its fair for everyone (and this appears to be the right result), who cares. There's no downside to removing Sizemore from the FA pool for 2 leagues.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Tue May 25, 2010 10:27 am

Originally posted by Hells Satans:

As long as its fair for everyone (and this appears to be the right result), who cares. There's no downside to removing Sizemore from the FA pool for 2 leagues. Of course there's a downside. If I dump a player who others think have value part of the equation is that someone will tie up FAAB investing in him leaving them less FAAB to bid on other players that I may want.

Frozen Tundra · Post by **Frozen Tundra** » Tue May 25, 2010 11:19 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by Hells Satans:

As long as its fair for everyone (and this appears to be the right result), who cares. There's no downside to removing Sizemore from the FA pool for 2 leagues. Of course there's a downside. If I dump a player who others think have value part of the equation is that someone will tie up FAAB investing in him leaving them less FAAB to bid on other players that I may want. [/QUOTE]Great point which validates why Sizemore should not be restricted. I view Sizemore's value at this point exactly as some prospect's with upside who is about to be called up for example Stanton. Both are big question marks, but that should not prevent owners who take that risk from bidding on them, or should not refrain owners who don't believe in them, from benefiting from the bidding war.

Cornhusker · Post by **Cornhusker** » Tue May 25, 2010 11:24 am

Unless collusion is suspected he should not be pulled. Micromanaging fantasy leagues always ends badly. There is already enough controversy sorrounding some owners being able to pull Padilla in week one that we do not need another disaster here.

Unless there is collusion involved, let it play out.

Scott Boras · Post by **Scott Boras** » Tue May 25, 2010 1:56 pm

As I stated in another thread, I am not in either of these leagues so this does not affect me. That said, I completely agree with Duke's point about potential strategy. I have personally dropped big names who I have doubts about with the intention of draining my competition's FAAB. The fact that I've been wrong in my analysis is a different story... :rolleyes:

If I'm a suffering Sizemore owner, it might give me great joy to watch an unsuspecting leaguemate drop several hund on him. Misery loves company.

Hopefully the two teams who dropped Sizemore contacted the commissioner and knew this might happen. It would really suck to cut him only to see him pulled when you had other intentions. Sizemore just can't seem to stop $#%&ing teams over!

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 25, 2010 2:23 pm

Yeah, I understand all of these points and yes I've taken them into consideration. Yes, as KJ states it could take FAAB out of those leagues if they think Sizemore is better than he currently is, which is a strategy in itself. But the injury situation is so confusing on Sizemore that I want to wait a bit to see what his status is for sure. I'll micro-manage in this situation with a player whose ADP is 24 and this is only Week 8.

And no, neither owner contacted us to suggest this was a strategy they were playing. I trust they just were sick and tired of Sizemore, but every owner knows that each cut can be evaluated by the NFBC and any player can be pulled out of the free agent pool. I hope we don't have to do it again, but we'll see.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Tue May 25, 2010 2:25 pm

I also agree with KJ on this.

A player should only be pulled if collusion is suspected or a complete disregard for the contest is shown (having a terrible season and throwing Hanley or Halladay into FAAB just to screw with the overall).

If a player is dropped for legit reasons, he should be available to be picked up for others. Where do you stop? I've seen where players are questioning the Dotel drop. An interesting drop to be sure, but one that would make his FAAB availability voidable? No chance.

I remember last year, some questioned whether a recently dropped Stephen Drew should be pulled from the pool. He wasn't. Someone bid all his FAAB and rostered him. How'd that work out?

Was Grady dropped for illegitimate reasons? No.

Was there collusion involved? No.

Was the drop one that would irreparably & unfairly impact the overall competition? No.

Therefore, should he be pulled from the pool? No.

By the way, in another competition I am in, Brian Roberts was pulled from the pool. Doesn't that seem ridiculous?

Then again, I don't think there is a clear cut right and wrong here, but my personal opinion is if there is no clear cut violation of the criteria I listed above, then the player should be made available.

Glenn

[ May 25, 2010, 08:33 PM: Message edited by: Glenneration X ]

Money · Post by **Money** » Tue May 25, 2010 2:47 pm

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

I also agree with KJ on this.

A player should only be pulled if collusion is suspected or a complete disregard for the contest is shown (having a terrible season and throwing Hanley or Halladay into FAAB just to screw with the overall).

If a player is dropped for legit reasons, he should be available to be picked up for others. Where do you stop? I've seen where players are questioning the Dotel drop. An interesting drop to be sure, but one that would make his FAAB availability voidable? No chance.

I remember last year, some questioned whether a recently dropped Stephen Drew should be pulled from the pool. He wasn't. Someone bid all his FAAB and rostered him. How'd that work out?

Was Grady dropped for illegitimate reasons? No.

Was there collusion involved? No.

Was the drop one that would irreparably & unfairly impact the overall competition? No.

Therefore, should he be pulled from the pool? No.

By the way, in another competition I am in, Brian Roberts was pulled from the pool. Doesn't that seem ridiculous?

Then again, I don't think there is a clear cut right and wrong here, but my personal opinion is if there is no clear cut violation of the criteria I listed above, then the player should be made available.

Glenn Well Stated ...

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Tue May 25, 2010 2:56 pm

Was the drop one that would irreparably & unfairly impact the overall competition? No. I don't think this is the proper question that needs to be asked.

I personally prefer

Was the drop one that COULD POTENTIALLY irreparably & unfairly impact the overall competition?

And I am not sure the answer is no. I am also not sure the answer is yes, either.

I'm in the MAYBE crowd.

And I think an answer of maybe justifies his being pulled.

With that said, I believe there is an inconsistency with minor league players drafted as one of the original-30 then dropped and sent down being left in the pool in those leagues. In both cases, the inequity is not within that specific league but as relates to the overall.

But that is a debate to be picked up again after the season.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Tue May 25, 2010 3:02 pm

So I am not totally sitting on the fence, I don't believe Sizemore will indeed make a significant, contest changing impact, but while I would disagree with someone that said he could, I feel the opinion is justified.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Tue May 25, 2010 3:11 pm

Todd, the problem with what you're trying to do is that you're trying to achieve the impossible. You're trying to put 28 individual leagues, each with 15 individual owners, all who have differing opinions & individual ratings for players, on equal footing. It just can't happen and all you need to do is look at the FAAB results for any given week to prove this out.

We've all seen players picked up for triple digits in one league and single digits in another.

We've all seen players picked up in one league for big money while dropped in others.

In fact, all you have to do is look at either this Sizemore or the related Dotel thread to see how many differing opinions there are on any player and how they can range to both ends of the extreme.

Again, if a player is dropped for legitimate reasons, there is no inkling of collusion or malice involved, and the player is not a "no-brainer should never be dropped type player", he should remain in the pool. Neither Sizemore nor Dotel even remotely apply in my opinion.

Glenn

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Tue May 25, 2010 3:22 pm

No, I am not trying to put them all on equal footing. I agree, there are natural inequities borne out of the dynamics of running an overall competition composed of a bunch of individual leagues.

But I have no issue with the commissioners trying to avoid an unnecessary inequity.

This sort of reminds me of those that say "all trades should be allowed so long as there is no collusion."

Would they really let a Willie Bloomquist for Hanley Ramirez deal go through?

Probably not.

Everyone has a tolerance level.

If Jacoby Ellsbury was dropped, there would be a demand that he be lifted from the pool. If Alex Cora is dropped, there is no peep.

Different people have different tolerances for Grady Sizemore.

So again, my personal expectation of Sizemore is not something that will impact the overall.

But I believe a differing opinion is justified.

[ May 25, 2010, 09:26 PM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Tue May 25, 2010 3:23 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

Everyone has a tolerance level.

If Jacony Ellsbury was dropped, there would be a demand that he be lifted from the pool. If Alex Cora is dropped, there is no peep.

Different people have different tolerances for Grady Sizemore. This goes to my point that if the player dropped is not a "no-brainer should never be dropped type player", he should remain in the pool.

Ellbury is that type of player. Obviously due to the vast differences of opinions on them, neither Sizemore nor Dotel qualify as a "no-brainer".

We all know who these "no-brainers" are. These are the players where the rule should apply, not those that "could be" or "once were" that type of player like Sizemore or are just a "potential" one-category impact player like Dotel.

Again, the line has to be drawn somewhere, and as someone who believes in limited government control (guess who I'm not voting for in 2012), I believe that standard should be set high.

Glenn

[ May 25, 2010, 09:34 PM: Message edited by: Glenneration X ]

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Tue May 25, 2010 3:57 pm

I think the missing ingredient here is performance. Grady hasn't performed like a guy that can't be dropped in two years. He's just a name, and a guy who's just a name shouldn't be pulled from the waiver pool. His draft round was a speculation that he'd bounce back, and he hasn't shown any sign of doing so - so you can throw that out as an indicator.

To be 100% clear, I could care less whether he is or is not in those league's waiver pools, my concern is policy regarding when/why a player is pulled. Grady would go nowhere near the 2nd-3rd round if a draft were held today - and that should be the lithmus test (along with suspicion of collusion)- not where he was drafted two months ago.

IMO Dotel would be drafted ahead of Grady today and will get a much higher FAAB bid --- not that I'm advocating Dotel being pulled, I just think that shows inconsistency in how the rule is trying to be applied.

It's also telling that many of the comments saying he shouldn't have been pulled are coming from guys who are near the top of the leader board and theoretically have the most to lose if he isn't pulled.

[ May 25, 2010, 10:06 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 25, 2010 4:06 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

I think the missing ingredient here is performance. Grady hasn't performed like a guy that can't be dropped in two years. He's just a name, and a guy who's just a name shouldn't be pulled from the waiver pool. His draft round was a speculation that he'd bounce back, and he hasn't shown any sign of doing so.

To be 100% clear, I could care less whether he is or is not in those league's waiver pools, my concern is policy regarding when/why a player is pulled. Grady would go nowhere near the 2nd-3rd round if a draft were held today - and that should be the lithmus test (along with suspicion of collusion)- not where he was drafted two months ago.

I find it interesting that many of the comments saying he shouldn't have been pulled are coming from guys who are near the top of the leader board and theoretically have the most to lose if he isn't pulled. Yeah, valid points, but an ADP of 24 just eight weeks ago does weigh on my decision, as does being cut in just one league (main event). Again, let's learn a little more about his injury status this week and then go from there. I don't like that he's cut in just one league with more info coming on his injury. If I learn more and he's cut in multiple leagues next week, I can make a better decision. But for now, I don't have a problem waiting to learn more about his injury status and the leagues involved won't be irrepairably damaged by us waiting another week either.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Tue May 25, 2010 4:10 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

It's interesting that many of the comments saying he shouldn't have been pulled are coming from guys who are near the top of the leader board and theoretically have the most to lose if he isn't pulled. That's because anything setting a precedent or creating a policy should not be looked at from the viewpoint of how it affects your team at the moment, but from the viewpoint of how it affects all teams in all leagues for the life of the contest.

All those who care about the contest they play in I'm sure would agree.

Glenn

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Tue May 25, 2010 4:36 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

I think the missing ingredient here is performance. Grady hasn't performed like a guy that can't be dropped in two years. He's just a name, and a guy who's just a name shouldn't be pulled from the waiver pool. His draft round was a speculation that he'd bounce back, and he hasn't shown any sign of doing so - so you can throw that out as an indicator.

To be 100% clear, I could care less whether he is or is not in those league's waiver pools, my concern is policy regarding when/why a player is pulled. Grady would go nowhere near the 2nd-3rd round if a draft were held today - and that should be the lithmus test (along with suspicion of collusion)- not where he was drafted two months ago.

IMO Dotel would be drafted ahead of Grady today and will get a much higher FAAB bid --- not that I'm advocating Dotel being pulled, I just think that shows inconsistency in how the rule is trying to be applied.

It's also telling that many of the comments saying he shouldn't have been pulled are coming from guys who are near the top of the leader board and theoretically have the most to lose if he isn't pulled. 100% agree.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Tue May 25, 2010 4:40 pm

Sorry, don't want to go back and quote the specific comments and also don't want to belabor this any more..

Glenn -- if I want to dump speed, which is as valid a strategy as dumping saves, then I should be able to release Ellsbury.

And I don't agree we all know who these no brainers should be - it is subjective, not objective.

KJ - my analysis of Sizemore is similar to yours. Putting myself in a game operator's shoes, I think the removal can be justified is all. Though the injury for me would likely sway it towards leaving him in.

My take is we are approaching this from a player's perspective and how we each think he will do and not the perspective of the game operator who has to look at it more from a potential perspective.

Though the "what round would he be drafted in if the season started today" angle is intriguing.

[ May 25, 2010, 10:44 PM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

ESPN8 THE OCHO · Post by **ESPN8 THE OCHO** » Tue May 25, 2010 6:22 pm

WOW! This is terrible. He should absolutely be available. First I don't like the injury status line. OK Sizemore will be available if he is gonna miss time. Rediculous. He was dropped. Period. He should be available. He is not Pujols, or Longoria. He is a player who hasn't had a good month in 2 years.

On top of that it leads to incredible inconsistancies(sp?) If we are playing this game where we pick and choose what players are fair to be available we must examine the minor league player rule. Many minor leaguers are available in leagues where other teams need to wait until a call. If those guys are dropped(Jennings, Stanton, Montero, Hellickson, etc) than they should be scooped up too because it gives a decided unfair advantage to those leagues.

Also I see drops in leagues every week where I wish I was in that league to put a bid on a player. Players that would help a lot more than Grady. Would it be unjust to submit a list of players I think are too good to be dropped and you scoop them up.

I am of the opinion that all drops and minor leaguers should be available. If you would like to keep minor leaguers unavailable until a call you must scoop them up when dropped or make every player drafted available in every league. If we are talking about fairness and competitive balance.

To choose who should not be dropped midseason is unjust(unless you suspect collusion) but if you want to list players who should not be dropped you need to provide a no drop list before the season.

I think everyone here believes he should be available and I think the right thing is he should be avaiable. I hope that happens.

Oaktown · Post by **Oaktown** » Tue May 25, 2010 8:40 pm

I am in the Online league that he was dropped in...definitely takes some interest out of FAAB, I was thinking about what number to toss in as a low ball and also hoping someone would blow their FAAB on him.

waiverwire · Post by **waiverwire** » Tue May 25, 2010 10:47 pm

Given all the disagreement on this, for future NFBC season, wouldn't it make sense to change the rule to something that eliminates the need for Greg to make a subjective call on these situations? For example, change it to "Any dropped player who is owned in greater than 99% of all leagues will be removed from the free agent pool. If ownership of the player drops to below 99% in a future week, the player will be added back into the free agent pool the following week."

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Wed May 26, 2010 12:47 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

I think the missing ingredient here is performance. Grady hasn't performed like a guy that can't be dropped in two years. He's just a name, and a guy who's just a name shouldn't be pulled from the waiver pool. His draft round was a speculation that he'd bounce back, and he hasn't shown any sign of doing so - so you can throw that out as an indicator.

To be 100% clear, I could care less whether he is or is not in those league's waiver pools, my concern is policy regarding when/why a player is pulled. Grady would go nowhere near the 2nd-3rd round if a draft were held today - and that should be the lithmus test (along with suspicion of collusion)- not where he was drafted two months ago.

IMO Dotel would be drafted ahead of Grady today and will get a much higher FAAB bid --- not that I'm advocating Dotel being pulled, I just think that shows inconsistency in how the rule is trying to be applied.

It's also telling that many of the comments saying he shouldn't have been pulled are coming from guys who are near the top of the leader board and theoretically have the most to lose if he isn't pulled. I also agree spot on with KJ.I remember a few years back Bonds was cut who was hurt but because of his name they pulled him and didnt agree,he did nothing they missed that one.

Dub · Post by **Dub** » Wed May 26, 2010 2:10 am

Originally posted by waiverwire:

Given all the disagreement on this, for future NFBC season, wouldn't it make sense to change the rule to something that eliminates the need for Greg to make a subjective call on these situations? For example, change it to "Any dropped player who is owned in greater than 99% of all leagues will be removed from the free agent pool. If ownership of the player drops to below 99% in a future week, the player will be added back into the free agent pool the following week." ...or just have a specific X number- "player no cut" rule that is clearly distinguished and updated as the season moves along.

By no cut I mean the team can drop the player, but the player is removed from the pool.

For example:

1- Pujols

2- HRamirez,

3- Broxton

4- etc

5- etc

Its takes out SOME of the subjectiveness an adds an element of strategy.

Just an idea.