2011 NFBC Proposed Rules Changes

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:47 am

I have taken a lot of feedback from owners and looked over our NFBC rules closely and come to the conclusion that we can better our contest with a few slight changes. Unless I'm missing another area of concern, these are the changes I'm putting in place now:

1. We will change the wording of available free agents to be picked up in the NFBC to state that undrafted minor-leaguers must have played at least 1 MLB game to be added to the free agent pool. Something like this:

12. Free Agents

Any player who is not on a team roster within your league and is on a major league roster or once was on an NFBC team in your league is considered a free agent for that league. Even players on the MLB disabled list are eligible to be picked up during the FAAB bidding process. 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. Participants should note that MLB unsigned veteran free agents at the time of Draft Day are eligible to be picked up or bid on in the NFBC Classic.

2. We will improve the set lineup time on Friday's similar to what we have on Monday's. That means only early game rosters will be locked and all other rosters will be open until 6:55 pm ET, the likely scheduled start of Friday night games. Here's an example:

11. Lineup Submission

The weekly deadline for setting your NFBC starting lineup is 6:55 PM ET on Monday. Players who are on teams participating in games with a scheduled start time prior to the Monday deadline at 6:55 PM ET, will be locked 5 minutes before the scheduled start time for their game. No changes involving players on these teams with early games will be allowed after this deadline for their game regardless of whether or not their game actually starts as scheduled.

Team owners also are allowed to remove a pitcher (or pitchers) who is officially on the DL from their starting lineup and replace him with a pitcher from their reserve roster on Fridays. Those decisions will have to be made by 5 minutes before the scheduled start time of the first game of the day if those pitchers are involved in an early game or by 6:55 pm ET for all teams involved in night games. Pitchers must officially be on Major League Baseball's DL list according to Fanball and the NFBC by 12:01 AM ET on Friday for this move (or moves) to take effect for the weekend games.

Once again in 2011, NFBC team owners are allowed to switch out any hitter (or hitters) from their starting lineup and replace him with a hitter from their reserve roster on Fridays. The deadline for doing that is 5 minutes before the start of an early Friday game or at 6:55 pm ET for all players involved in night games. Players who are on teams participating in games with a scheduled start time prior to the 6:55 PM ET deadline will be locked 5 minutes before the scheduled start time for their game. No changes involving players on those teams with early games will be allowed after this deadline for their game regardless of whether or not their game actually starts as scheduled.

3. Increase the IP minimum to 900 for all events. I understand the change this will make in the NFBC, but the evidence is very strong that most owners have no trouble attaining 900 IP.

4. I do not have an answer to the Friday DL loophole some folks have asked me to close up involving pitchers. I need to work on the wording there.

Am I missing anything else? Let me know and thanks again for the good feedback.

[ September 24, 2010, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: Greg Ambrosius ]

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 8:35 am

Good Stuff Greg, thanks for the move to 900. Makes the pitching ratio innings more statistically comparable, and therefore better.

I am also glad that the change for early starts is being improved (I had buck on the bench a few weeks ago and couldn't swing him in in time due to being a work and he went on to have a monster weekend)

I wasn't sure I understood the difference (if any) on the free agent availability?

Red Sox Nation · Post by **Red Sox Nation** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 8:37 am

Looks good Greg. I think all of these changes will be for the better.

On a separate note how about another thread for IT/website changes/improvements for next year? I'd love to see the site up an running 100% on opening day rather than building as we move along.

Thanks

Jason

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:14 am

Originally posted by Red Sox Nation:

Looks good Greg. I think all of these changes will be for the better.

On a separate note how about another thread for IT/website changes/improvements for next year? I'd love to see the site up an running 100% on opening day rather than building as we move along.

Thanks

Jason Jason, I don't think it's anyone's goal to be less than 100% on Opening Day and adding as we go along. I think we all know what happened at the start of last year and some folks carried that thought to scare folks away from our football game. Football has been as smooth as can be to start out and we expect 2011 NFBC to be the same way. I am extremely confident about our back-end software for 2011 NFBC and we are in good hands with Jeff and John and their team in St. Louis.

Sure, I can start a thread on things we would like to add to the web site. Some folks have asked for sortable categories in Live Scoring. I'll start a separate thread shortly so that we can keep things organized on here and not hijack different threads. Thanks.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:18 am

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

I wasn't sure I understood the difference (if any) on the free agent availability? Chris, in past years a player was added to the free agent pool once he was officially added by MLB. So some people read about callups on Saturday and wanted him in our free agent pools on Sunday morning. Unfortunately, MLB doesn't work as quickly as the Internet and that caused some folks to blame us or STATS or just us again, when in fact this player wasn't officially added to the team's MLB roster yet.

So we'll make it very easy for everyone. A player must first play 1 game in the majors after his callup to be added to the NFBC's free agent pool. This is a very simple programming change for us and very welcome by our programmers. Now each night after games are done, the free agent pool is updated with new additions of players who appeared in an MLB game the night before. For pitchers, unfortunately, it might delay their addition to the NFBC free agent pool, but at least ALL OF US now have a very clear definition of when and how minor-leaguers are added to the NFBC free agent pool.

Rainiers · Post by **Rainiers** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:34 am

Good job, as always...

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:46 am

Greg, what's your take on pitchers matching the hitters friday swap on friday for the last 2 weeks of the season? It's most likely too radical for 2011 but something to consider beyond that? Some can argue that a rule is in place for 24 weeks for a reason (anti-streaming of which I agree)but the last CRITICAL 2 weeks of season present unique challenges namely no DL use and set pitching rotations scuttled due to pennant races and inning caps. Two issues that are not known until the week is well underway. Thoughts?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:54 am

Originally posted by Quahogs:

Greg, what's your take on pitchers matching the hitters friday swap on friday for the last 2 weeks of the season? It's most likely too radical for 2011 but something to consider beyond that? Some can argue that a rule is in place for 24 weeks for a reason (anti-streaming of which I agree)but the last CRITICAL 2 weeks of season present unique challenges namely no DL use and set pitching rotations scuttled due to pennant races and inning caps. Two issues that are not known until the week is well underway. Thoughts? I don't have any problem with that suggestion. You could probably argue even the last three weeks or last four weeks? I just don't want streaming pitchers in the NFBC or all of our contests having our owners making twice-weekly moves for reasons we've talked about before. But I realize September can be a very crazy month and I tried to address it in the past. Maybe this is a less subjective way of doing it.

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:31 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I think we all know what happened at the start of last year and some folks carried that thought to scare folks away from our football game. your memory must be fading. it was more than just the start of the nfbc season. by "some folks" i hope you are referring to Fanball.

Red Sox Nation · Post by **Red Sox Nation** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:42 am

Originally posted by Quahogs:

Greg, what's your take on pitchers matching the hitters friday swap on friday for the last 2 weeks of the season? It's most likely too radical for 2011 but something to consider beyond that? Some can argue that a rule is in place for 24 weeks for a reason (anti-streaming of which I agree)but the last CRITICAL 2 weeks of season present unique challenges namely no DL use and set pitching rotations scuttled due to pennant races and inning caps. Two issues that are not known until the week is well underway. Thoughts? I really like this idea by Steve. These last couple weeks are so challenging. If your top SP happens to be on playoff teams or is young (shutdown) you may miss their final start in the most important week of the year. I like the idea of having the final two weeks to make swaps.

NorCalAtlFan · Post by **NorCalAtlFan** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:50 am

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I think we all know what happened at the start of last year and some folks carried that thought to scare folks away from our football game. your memory must be fading. it was more than just the start of the nfbc season. by "some folks" i hope you are referring to Fanball. [/QUOTE]Agreed. Poor form blaming the customers.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:55 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

4. I do not have an answer to the Friday DL loophole some folks have asked me to close up involving pitchers. I need to work on the wording there.

What if the rule was that if you started the week with a pitcher on the DL, then you could not switch him out. But if he started the week not on the DL but was placed there before the Friday deadline, you cold switch him out?

This assumes the loophole is the ability to avoid an early week start from a pitcher, but to activate him in time for his favorable weekend matchup.

The downside is if a DL pitcher that is supposed to be activated suffers a setback and is not activated. But this will occur very infrequently and is akin to a regular starter suddenly missing a start because of injury or rainout or whatever.

I'll trade off this infrequent occurrence for reducing the ability to game the system to get more favorable starts and avoid bad ones. To me, the rules have already morphed to remove a lot of the risk mitigation out of the game as is. Gaming the rules to further abate risk mitigation is a loophole I would personally like to see closed and unless I am missing something, this suggestion would do more good than harm.

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:49 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

4. I do not have an answer to the Friday DL loophole some folks have asked me to close up involving pitchers. I need to work on the wording there.

What if the rule was that if you started the week with a pitcher on the DL, then you could not switch him out. But if he started the week not on the DL but was placed there before the Friday deadline, you cold switch him out?

This assumes the loophole is the ability to avoid an early week start from a pitcher, but to activate him in time for his favorable weekend matchup.

The downside is if a DL pitcher that is supposed to be activated suffers a setback and is not activated. But this will occur very infrequently and is akin to a regular starter suddenly missing a start because of injury or rainout or whatever.

I'll trade off this infrequent occurrence for reducing the ability to game the system to get more favorable starts and avoid bad ones. To me, the rules have already morphed to remove a lot of the risk mitigation out of the game as is. Gaming the rules to further abate risk mitigation is a loophole I would personally like to see closed and unless I am missing something, this suggestion would do more good than harm. [/QUOTE]Perfect.

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:51 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Quahogs:

Greg, what's your take on pitchers matching the hitters friday swap on friday for the last 2 weeks of the season? It's most likely too radical for 2011 but something to consider beyond that? Some can argue that a rule is in place for 24 weeks for a reason (anti-streaming of which I agree)but the last CRITICAL 2 weeks of season present unique challenges namely no DL use and set pitching rotations scuttled due to pennant races and inning caps. Two issues that are not known until the week is well underway. Thoughts? I don't have any problem with that suggestion. You could probably argue even the last three weeks or last four weeks? I just don't want streaming pitchers in the NFBC or all of our contests having our owners making twice-weekly moves for reasons we've talked about before. But I realize September can be a very crazy month and I tried to address it in the past. Maybe this is a less subjective way of doing it. [/QUOTE]Great idea. However, I wouldn't want to see it stretched any further than the final 2 weeks.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 11:56 am

Originally posted by Quahogs:

Greg, what's your take on pitchers matching the hitters friday swap on friday for the last 2 weeks of the season? It's most likely too radical for 2011 but something to consider beyond that? Some can argue that a rule is in place for 24 weeks for a reason (anti-streaming of which I agree)but the last CRITICAL 2 weeks of season present unique challenges namely no DL use and set pitching rotations scuttled due to pennant races and inning caps. Two issues that are not known until the week is well underway. Thoughts? Like this idea, I'd make it effective for the first Friday after MLB roster expansion.

Sebadiah23 · Post by **Sebadiah23** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:03 pm

Love everything posted and Greg's post.

Please also add sorting by category to the live scoring . I'd pay a $100 per team extra for each team for that feature. I crave it like Lindsay Lohan craves cocaine.

-Craig

Sebadiah23 · Post by **Sebadiah23** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:10 pm

Twice a week changes pretty much ended up being the good and bad that many people including I expected it to be.

GOOD: Allows more strategic use of the bench, and essentially platooning various players all year depending on pitching match-ups, lefty-righty, etc. Did that all over the place all year. Helped half-avoid monday injuries that would have otherwise hurt more.

BAD: The extra time and effort twice a week to dissect my fringe players next 3-4 opponents on multiple 8+ teams was pretty unbearable. I ended up focusing on my teams doing well because of the work involved. Lead to a couple too many mistakes. Making me consider pairing down my teams considerably.

Sebadiah23 · Post by **Sebadiah23** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:17 pm

jim s. should be fine with the new rules because he can move onto high stakes tournament bridge.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 2:56 pm

Originally posted by NorCalAtlFan:

quote:Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I think we all know what happened at the start of last year and some folks carried that thought to scare folks away from our football game. your memory must be fading. it was more than just the start of the nfbc season. by "some folks" i hope you are referring to Fanball. [/QUOTE]Agreed. Poor form blaming the customers. [/QUOTE]Big Greg fan almost as big as Glenneration X but yeah come on. The NFBC earned people being scared of the software.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:40 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

4. I do not have an answer to the Friday DL loophole some folks have asked me to close up involving pitchers. I need to work on the wording there.

What if the rule was that if you started the week with a pitcher on the DL, then you could not switch him out. But if he started the week not on the DL but was placed there before the Friday deadline, you cold switch him out?

This assumes the loophole is the ability to avoid an early week start from a pitcher, but to activate him in time for his favorable weekend matchup.

The downside is if a DL pitcher that is supposed to be activated suffers a setback and is not activated. But this will occur very infrequently and is akin to a regular starter suddenly missing a start because of injury or rainout or whatever.

I'll trade off this infrequent occurrence for reducing the ability to game the system to get more favorable starts and avoid bad ones. To me, the rules have already morphed to remove a lot of the risk mitigation out of the game as is. Gaming the rules to further abate risk mitigation is a loophole I would personally like to see closed and unless I am missing something, this suggestion would do more good than harm. [/QUOTE]The infrequent occurance happened this year with Bedard. If we're looking for a way to close the loophole it should be done in a way that doesn't penalize a team that's done nothing wrong.

Glenn

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:41 pm

Originally posted by Quahogs:

Greg, what's your take on pitchers matching the hitters friday swap on friday for the last 2 weeks of the season? It's most likely too radical for 2011 but something to consider beyond that? Some can argue that a rule is in place for 24 weeks for a reason (anti-streaming of which I agree)but the last CRITICAL 2 weeks of season present unique challenges namely no DL use and set pitching rotations scuttled due to pennant races and inning caps. Two issues that are not known until the week is well underway. Thoughts? Great idea, wish we had this option this year.

Glenn

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:51 pm

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

The infrequent occurance happened this year with Bedard. If we're looking for a way to close the loophole it should be done in a way that doesn't penalize a team that's done nothing wrong.

Glenn And people that have a pitcher's start bumped w/o being placed on the DL did nothing wrong either. Starting Bedard, with his injury history is a risk one would assume with the rule.

I'm looking big picture. Which is better for the game?

1. Protecting the owner(s) of Bedard who took the risk of starting an injury prone pitcher coming off the DL

2. Eliminating the ability to have a pitcher reserved for an early week start and active him for a late week start.

[ September 24, 2010, 10:52 PM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:55 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by Glenneration X:

The infrequent occurance happened this year with Bedard. If we're looking for a way to close the loophole it should be done in a way that doesn't penalize a team that's done nothing wrong.

Glenn And people that have a pitcher's start bumped w/o being placed on the DL did nothing wrong either. Starting Bedard, with his injury history is a risk one would assume with the rule.

I'm looking big picture. Which is better for the game?

1. Protecting the owner(s) of Bedard who took the risk of starting an injury prone pitcher coming off the DL

2. Eliminating the ability to have a pitcher reserved for an early week start and active him for a late week start. [/QUOTE]Personally, I don't really understand why so many have such a problem with that "loophole". One involves strategy, the other luck. I'd rather reward the strategy than penalize the luck.

Glenn

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:12 pm

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

Personally, I don't really understand why so many have such a problem with that "loophole". One involves strategy, the other luck. I'd rather reward the strategy than penalize the luck.

Glenn My problem with it is admittedly personal preference. I prefer the strategy of evaluating how I feel a pitcher will do over the course of a season and then deciding how much that is worth and where I will draft him as opposed to sitting Clayton Richard for his Tuesday start in Coors and activating him for his Sunday home tilt against San Fran.

The former is the type of strategy I feel should be rewarded over the latter.

I personally think risk mitigation should be a larger part of the game and too many rules have been designed to limit that.

While I am not disputing that pitching management of that nature is not a strategy, to me it rewards a skill set that I do not feel should be rewarded as much as player evaluation and valuation.

Relatively speaking, how skillful do you have to be to cherry pick the favorable outings as compared to long term evaluation/valuation of the player? If you are eliminating the bad starts from pitchers, you are really not evaluating him as a whole. The skill I want rewarded to the greater extent is that of the draft prep. Being able to reserve a pitcher the entire week already mitigates a large chunk of risk. I'd prefer not to mitigate more.

Others mileage may vary.

[ September 24, 2010, 11:17 PM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:22 pm

For the sake of discussion, one way to close the loophole would be to disallow any DL pitcher to be active.

Not saying I favor this, but it would close the loophole and fix the Bedard issue.

However it introduces another issue. It was well publicized that Andy Pettitte would be activated in time to work last Sunday, which he did. He would not have been eligible to activate.

I think we have to look at the pluses and minuses of each and see which best fits our image of what is good for the game, which of course will differ, but that's what the forums are for.