Position Eligibility Update

[King of Queens]

Personally, I don't care what Greg decides, but there has to be an even application of the rules here. In an earlier post, Greg has already said that Johnny Estrada is a catcher. Estrada lost his rookie eligibilty in 2001, but he played less than 20 games at catcher last year. So what gives? We're looking at pinch hitting appearances--this is not readily attainable information. Even looking at a games played chart will not let you deduce how many pinch hitting games a plater had, as sometimes these guys play more than one position in the same game.



Again, it doesn't matter to me what happens. I am only asking for the draft-eligible positions for the list of players that I supplied several posts ago, and that this list is enforced at all 3 draft sites. Is that too much to ask, or do you guys think I'm being ridiculous here?

[Greg Ambrosius]

No, it's 20 games played for the NFBC and the Auction Leagues. Please correct me if the Auction League rules are stated differently because it should be 20 and 20.

[Greg Ambrosius]

All three cities will be run under the same rules. All three draft coordinators understand the rules. I can guarantee you everyone's roster requirements will be the same for all three cities.



As for Estrada, he played the entire 2003 minor-league season at catcher and when he got called up he played the most games at catcher. Same with Bobby Crosby. Ramon Castro, on the other hand, spent the whole year in the majors and wasn't valuable enough to even play 18 games at catcher. Thus he doesn't qualify at catcher.



The games played rule for minor-leaguers is in effect because for the most part that's where they played in 2003, albeit at a lower level. What we are determining for 2004 is where did these players play the most last year. And in the case of Castro and Daryle Ward, it was in utility roles.

[King of Queens]

First and foremost, thanks for your patience on this issue, Greg. Most people would have blown their tops by now--perhaps you are and are just being polite



I think the problem I am having is understanding what EXACTLY constitutes a utility player. Players such as Desi Relaford, Juan Castro and Billy Hall would certainly be classified as utility players by their teams, yet all of these players have positional eligibility:



Relaford: 2B/3B/OF

Castro: 2B/SS/3B

Hall: 2B/SS



See, here's where it gets confusing to me. Yesterday, you classified Hall as 2B/SS eligible--yet he only played 18 games at each of 2B and SS. So...



What makes Castro and Ward different?

[King of Queens]

Hall is a great example because he DID spend a significant portion of 2003 with the Brewers, yet is still eligible for 2B and SS.



So I guess I am still unsure of your reasoning.

[cfolson]

I just wanted to note that the rules listed on the NFBC site still say:



6. Position Eligibility: Players who played at least 20 games at any position in 2003 will qualify at that position for the entire 2004 NFBC season. Players who play 20 games at a new position in 2004 will be eligible at that position after he has played for the 20th time there this year.



There is no mention of using most games played if below 20 or minor league games if there are no major league games. This should be fixed if these rules are going to be used.

[cfolson]

Oops. Now I see the rule in a different section:



All players must have played 20 games in 2003 or 20 games in 2004 to qualify at a certain position. Minor-leaguers who did not play 20 games at any position in 2003 but who still played at least one game in the majors last year, will qualify at the position they played the most at in 2003. If a prospect didn't play at least one game in the majors last year and he makes the 2004 Opening Day roster, he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2003. Any minor-leaguer who didn't play any games in the majors in 2003 and who starts the 2004 season in the minors will earn position eligibility for 2004 based on his minor-league games played total in 2004 and he will earn other position eligibility after he plays 20 games at a different position in the majors.

[Gordon Gekko]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Ramon Castro, on the other hand, spent the whole year in the majors and wasn't valuable enough to even play 18 games at catcher. Thus he doesn't qualify at catcher. What we are determining for 2004 is where did these players play the most last year. And in the case of Castro and Daryle Ward, it was in utility roles. I understand what you are saying, but how is average Joe Consumer supposed to know this information? I have a feeling that at least one owner drafts Castro as a catcher. I hope it doesn't, but this issue could cause a lot of turmoil on draft day. Remember that some owners don't read the MB or any of the issues/solutions listed.

[King of Queens]

That brings up another interesting situation. When an owner calls out a player, will the draft facilitator have some sort of master list and announce the eligible positions? Also, in the case of Castro, if the owner had no idea he wasn't eligible at catcher, will that owner have a chance to make an additional pick?

[viper]

Could there be a listing of players - probably alphabetical would be best - which states their eligible positions? If this was available before the draft then everyone would be on the same page(s).

[a]

Greg, to make life easier for everyone, why not post an "official" position listing. This way, there is no question about eligibility. Whatever a guy is on the lsit, that's what he is. You can publish it, we'll crtic it. And then a day or 2 before the draft, a revised list will be the one and only list that we use for eligibility.

[Nevadaman]

Absolutely! I think this would eliminate any guesswork and misinterpretations.