Page 1 of 1
Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 12:31 pm
by converge241
Afternoon,
Sometimes there is a positional difference between the live drafts going on now and what is listed in the email notification alerting of picks
Just to be sure, the site/draft room is the final word correct?
One example if needed is Jesus Montero - in the drafts as Util, on the email as C. I think Michael Young is another - no 2B in draft but says 2B in the emails.
Thanks!
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 1:15 pm
by Tom Kessenich
Yes, the draft room eligibility is what you would use.
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:20 pm
by converge241
Thanks Tom (and Greg who I emailed as well and responded). I was defaulting to that but just a tad worried when I saw some of those recap emails. Alls well that ends well!
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 9:33 pm
by Captain Hook
Tom Kessenich wrote:Yes, the draft room eligibility is what you would use.
Tom - this can NOT be right - for some reason your draft room lists Michael Young at 2B....when he only qualifies at 1B and 3B - a fact I have pointed out in several threads
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:51 am
by converge241
In my Draft Room Young does NOT have 2B (but he shows up in the recap email as 2B). It was another example that caused me to ask. Not to ask a dumb question but are you sure you are seeing it in the draft room itself?
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 10:29 am
by Captain Hook
converge241 wrote:In my Draft Room Young does NOT have 2B (but he shows up in the recap email as 2B). It was another example that caused me to ask. Not to ask a dumb question but are you sure you are seeing it in the draft room itself?
No, I haven't been in a draft room but with all these reports on drafts showing him as 2B and questions about it it looks like that is the case. IF he is listed in the draft room correctly that is what counts .....but then Why does he show as 2B in the reports?
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:03 am
by ToddZ
Everyone is properly labeled in the draft room.
As someone who has done a lot of work with player coding, I can see how this could happen if somehow two different databases are used, with the common denominator being the player's name.
But, the bottom line is the players are properly positioned within the draft room.
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:04 am
by Greg Ambrosius
Captain Hook wrote:Tom Kessenich wrote:Yes, the draft room eligibility is what you would use.
Tom - this can NOT be right - for some reason your draft room lists Michael Young at 2B....when he only qualifies at 1B and 3B - a fact I have pointed out in several threads
Perry, he's NOT listed at 2b in the draft room. I had our IT department check on it yesterday after you posted this and he is listed correctly in the draft room. We'll get the email sends correct, but the draft room is linked correctly to position eligibility.
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:07 am
by NorCalAtlFan
he does show up as 2b on the Draft Board though. and jesus montero shows up as C on the Board. it's for aesthetics, I get that, but that may confuse some people in SD's/Sats
Re: Eligibility Variance Question
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:39 am
by Greg Ambrosius
NorCalAtlFan wrote:he does show up as 2b on the Draft Board though. and jesus montero shows up as C on the Board. it's for aesthetics, I get that, but that may confuse some people in SD's/Sats
Thanks for that. Like Todd said, something isn't connecting correctly and I've alerted IT. Thanks for this as well and I'll send that to get fixed. Jesus Montero is definitely UT only to start 2012.