Player Eligibility

[Greg Ambrosius]

Any player who played at least 20 games at a position last year is included within our Position Eligibility list. But for minor-leaguers who didn't play at least 20 games at a position in 2003, they would initially qualify at the position they played the most games at last year. Here is a list of guys who could be drafted in the NFBC and where they would qualify:



Aaron Miles, second base (3 games in 2003)

Freddy Sanchez, third base (7 at 3B, 6 at SS, 3 at 2B)

Bobby Crosby, shortstop (9 games)

Bobby Hill, second base (3 games)

Rickie Weeks, second base (4 games)

Johnny Estrada, catcher (14 games)

Gerald Laird, catcher (16 games)



Players who didn't play at all in the majors and who could be drafted this year include: Joe Mauer at catcher (you can draft him) and Adam LaRoche at first base.



Hope this helps and feel free to post a question on any player I may have missed.

[Dyv]

Hey Greg, why do you have a 20 game rule if someone can qualify for a position with only 3 games played?



It strikes me that these people should be utility-eligible only until they have their 20 games in SOMEWHERE to qualify for more positions.



You can have whatever rules ya like - but it strikes me as flawed to allow some people a handful of games and demand others have 20 to qualify for a 2nd position.



Thanks for your thoughts,



Dave

[BB of the Leaderboard]

Originally posted by Dyv:

You can have whatever rules ya like - but it strikes me as flawed to allow some people a handful of games and demand others have 20 to qualify for a 2nd position.Hey Dyv,



Those are the qualification rules laid down by the founding fathers in the original 1984 "Rotisserie League Baseball" by Glenn Waggoner and Dan Okrent. Are you some kind of iconoclast or what?



B(Still working on getting enough posts to shed that "junior" label)B

[Greg Ambrosius]

I would agree with what BB said. Every league I've been in has done it this way and I also think it's the fairest way to deal with September callups who obviously didn't get enough games played last year to qualify at any position. Under your scenario, Kaz Matsui, Bobby Crosby and Joe Mauer would only qualify at utility this year until they played 20 games at a position and that seems unfair since all three will likely open the season as starters at tough positions.



If I was setting a precedent with this rule, I would reconsider it. But I think it's pretty standard in Rotisserie Baseball and thus feel it's worth staying this way. Some leagues have 10 games played at a position to qualify there and even 5 games played, but that's for another discussion.

[Dyv]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I would agree with what BB said. Every league I've been in has done it this way and I also think it's the fairest way to deal with September callups who obviously didn't get enough games played last year to qualify at any position. Under your scenario, Kaz Matsui, Bobby Crosby and Joe Mauer would only qualify at utility this year until they played 20 games at a position and that seems unfair since all three will likely open the season as starters at tough positions.



If I was setting a precedent with this rule, I would reconsider it. But I think it's pretty standard in Rotisserie Baseball and thus feel it's worth staying this way. Some leagues have 10 games played at a position to qualify there and even 5 games played, but that's for another discussion. Eghad, I've been exposed as a radical!



Seriously - I understand allowing certain players to have a position. Clearly they PLAY somewhere! What I chafe at is the thought that if some player puts in 19 games at 1b, but 120 at OF then I can only use him at OF whereas someone pulls in 3 games at 2b and he's good to go. There's just something inherently flawed with that...



In last year's WCOFB they enforced the 20 game rule strictly, so that new players ONLY qualified at UTIL until they earned another position. I'm not saying right or wrong - just making an observation as you two fundamentalists didn't seem to have any basis for something different



I'm going to go back to playing with my legos and let you old-timers be wise. I know what I'm good at and I can make a wicked spaceship.



Ok, well - I'll get out the legos if you'll allow me to pose one question:



Let's say a minor league hotshot utility man is on my radar screen. I like his abilities, I want to take a flier... and as I review his stats last year he played 5 games at OF, 5 games at 1b, 5 games at SS, 2 games at 2b and he pitched 5 times. The remaining games he was DH. What position does he qualify for?



Dyv



p.s. If a tree falls in the forest but nobody is there to hear it....

[BB of the Leaderboard]

Originally posted by Dyv:

Let's say a minor league hotshot utility man is on my radar screen. I like his abilities, I want to take a flier... and as I review his stats last year he played 5 games at OF, 5 games at 1b, 5 games at SS, 2 games at 2b and he pitched 5 times. The remaining games he was DH. What position does he qualify for?



DyvMy answer would be that in this rather unique case it would depend on how many "remaining games he was DH." If it was more than 5, then that (or UT) is his position until he qualifies somewhere else. Otherwise, he would qualify at OF, 1B, SS, and P. Of course as long as you had him plugged in a P slot he would not accumulate any hitting stats or the opposite if in a hitter's slot. Fortunately for Greg, no such player appears likely to burst upon the national stage this season so he can safely answer the question most any way he likes.



B(If there is no one around to tell whether or not the falling tree makes a noise, does it matter whether it does or not?)B

[Greg Ambrosius]

The answer is: There isn't such a player like that as I just went through all of the minor-leaguers who had partial games played in 2003. But in your scenario, you're right he would cause problems and maybe I'd have to make a special ruling as it wouldn't be fair for that player to suddenly qualify at four positions.



As for that other ruling, yes I saw that last year and that's not the way I would have gone had I been involved. But as you all know, I wasn't involved and here we are.

[Dyv]

Ok, here's my final last question (for now, lol)



It seems like the general tone of the rule is to attempt to get everyone to qualify at a position.



Why wouldn't we give Josh Phelps 1b eligiblity then? He's got 8 games at 1b from 2003 and no other possible position. Others you listed have as few as 3 games and no other possible position outside of DH.



Is it just 'different' because he IS a full time DH? I can live with that, but I'm a rebel and want to challenge so I understand.



Thanks,



Dave

[Greg Ambrosius]

Okay, here's my final answer (for now):



Josh Phelps proved last year that he was a DH in the majors, not a first baseman. The minor-leaguers we talked about proved last year that they qualified at their positions as they played most of the year there in the minors. It's when they came up to the majors that you have to qualify them somewhere. Thus, the Founding Fathers felt it made sense to use the most games played at after their callup to qualify them there. It makes perfect sense.



If a guy like Josh Phelps spends the whole year in the majors and can't play at least 20 games at one position, why should he deserve to qualify anywhere but utility? But a guy like Bobby Crosby played 110+ games at shortstop in the minors and then a handful in the majors, so he should qualify at shortstop to start the year and not at utility. Hope this makes sense now.

[Dyv]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Okay, here's my final answer (for now):



Josh Phelps proved last year that he was a DH in the majors, not a first baseman. The minor-leaguers we talked about proved last year that they qualified at their positions as they played most of the year there in the minors. It's when they came up to the majors that you have to qualify them somewhere. Thus, the Founding Fathers felt it made sense to use the most games played at after their callup to qualify them there. It makes perfect sense.



If a guy like Josh Phelps spends the whole year in the majors and can't play at least 20 games at one position, why should he deserve to qualify anywhere but utility? But a guy like Bobby Crosby played 110+ games at shortstop in the minors and then a handful in the majors, so he should qualify at shortstop to start the year and not at utility. Hope this makes sense now. It does, the nagging thought at the back of my empty head goes something like 'Well, at least Josh Phelps played more games at a major league position last year than Crosby did' - but I do understand your point. I just don't know the founding father's rules or intent.



Thanks for taking the time to work through it with me. I can see what you're saying and now understand it.



Dave

[Top Dawg]

OK - Fast forward to 2004.... Player "X" gets called up from AAA after the season starts. Where does he qualify to play "immediately? His AAA position, the position he gets called to fill (if different) or utility until he plays 20 games in 2004?



Thanks in advance,



Pete

[Greg Ambrosius]

Good question. It would be where he played the most in the minors. It's no different than how we're placing Joe Mauer or Adam LaRoche this year, two guys who didn't play a single game in the majors last year. They qualify at catcher and first base, respectively, because that's where they played all of last year. So if B.J. Upton plays at shortstop all year in the minors and gets called up to the majors to play second base, he would have to qualify at shortstop initially and only at second base after he plays 20 games there. It's interesting, but we have to keep it consistent during the season as well as the off-season.

[cfolson]

To be completely consistent with the draft, all players should be eligible only at their draft eligible position(s), unless they qualify based on major league playing time in 2004. Thus, where Upton plays in the minors this year shouldn't make an difference at all.



[ February 24, 2004, 10:36 AM: Message edited by: Clark Olson ]

[Gordon Gekko]

Can I draft 29 pitchers, and then use the WW to alter my lineup before the season starts?



[ February 24, 2004, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

[Greg Ambrosius]

I won't disagree with you Clark on the consistency, but let's analyze Upton's situation. He did not play any games in the majors in 2003, but if you draft him and he starts the year in the minors his slate is now clean. You can put him on your reserve roster and when he gets called up to the majors his position eligibility will be determined at that point. If you draft him and he starts in the majors, he will definitely qualify at shortstop all year long and would qualify at any other position after he plays 20 games there. Every minor-leaguer will be judged using the same criteria.

[baseballweenie]

Bring GG's question back from the brink of humor, and it actually hits on something that I was wondering about...



It's obvious that lineup changes will be allowed during the period between the end of Draft Day (notice the caps, Greg) and Opening Day.



But, will we be able to drop Slug #1 from our roster and replace him with Slug #2 from the WW during the same period?



Or, are we "stuck" with our original squad until the first WW period?

[Greg Ambrosius]

The first waiver wire pickup is Sunday, April 3 and you'll be able to set your new lineup on Monday, April 4. So if Slug #1 isn't on any roster of teams playing in Japan or the Sunday opener, you'll be fine. The short answer is "yes" you have time before the first full week of competition to pick up free agents.

[baseballweenie]

I'm sorry to do this to you, Greg. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



But, would those transactions, prior to the first full week of baseball, be "free"? Or, would they count against our FAAB?

[Gordon Gekko]

Originally posted by BaseballWeenies:

I'm sorry to do this to you, Greg. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



But, would those transactions, prior to the first full week of baseball, be "free"? Or, would they count against our FAAB? Nothing is free! You should have learned that in elementary school.

[Greg Ambrosius]

They will certainly count towards your FAAB.

[baseballweenie]

OK, thanks.

[Dyv]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I won't disagree with you Clark on the consistency, but let's analyze Upton's situation. He did not play any games in the majors in 2003, but if you draft him and he starts the year in the minors his slate is now clean. You can put him on your reserve roster and when he gets called up to the majors his position eligibility will be determined at that point. If you draft him and he starts in the majors, he will definitely qualify at shortstop all year long and would qualify at any other position after he plays 20 games there. Every minor-leaguer will be judged using the same criteria. Oh my, what will determine his position eligibility at the point when he makes the majors? I hate to get so technical, but if it isn't explicit how these things are going to be determined then it's going to be a potential mess later.



Player A is a SS in the minors, gets called up to possibly play 2b in the majors, but actually plays the first 2 games at DH.



What's his 'initial eligibility' going to be?



Greg, if these things are simply going to be YOUR judgement then I can live with that... I believe you'll be incredibly active and able to answer questions on short order. The thing is if I pick up a player on Sunday in the waivers, want to put him in my lineup on Monday thinking he's a 2b and you rule that he's really a SS then that opens up a potential can of worms.



(And before we get too deep into the 'Dave you keep bringing up ridiculous situations' post - let's keep in mind that some of us are doing AL or NL auctions and these minor leaguers popping up to play for 2 weeks MAY VERY WELL be important roster players)



Thanks,



Dyv

[Gordon Gekko]

Actually that was a nice post Dyv. I'll be interested in seeing the answer. For the benefit of all owners, I'd suggest Greg list a post of a dozen or so quick examples of the eligibility rule and how it works. It could clear up some of the confusion.



As for you example with Upton. If I draft him on my team thinking he'd be a SS, I hope that he wouldn't lose that eligibilty if he started the year in the minors playing 3b and then was brought up to the majors to play 2nd base.



[ February 24, 2004, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

[Greg Ambrosius]

You guys are trying to drive me to an early grave, right? No wonder Lenny aged 10 years during the first year of the WCOFF.



I really don't need 12 examples to explain this, even though we all may not agree with the rule. If you draft Upton thinking he's a shortstop, then hopefully he makes the majors on Opening Day and qualifies at shortstop. Once he starts the year in the minors, his qualification is determined by the most games he plays in the minors. It's very possible that will be shortstop as you don't see too many teams switching guys to new positions hoping he then gets called up to the majors to play a completely different position.



If he plays 55 games at shortstop and opens his first game in the majors at DH like Dave is proposing, he would qualify at shortstop. That's where he played 2004 at, even though it was in the minors. We need a qualifier and the minor leagues is that qualifier for somebody who didn't play in the majors before.



You don't have to completely agree with the rule, but it's the rule we're all playing under and thus if you draft minor-leaguers hoping they'll come up at mid-season and contribute -- whether that's the NFBC or the Auction Leagues -- you'll now be perfectly clear how they will qualify at a position. It will be where they played the most games in the minors in 2004, according to STATS, Inc., if they didn't originally start the year in the majors.



Now if you don't mind, I must break up a fight between my 4-year-old and 2-year-old!!! That one should be easier.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Let me just add to that explanation. What I was talking about there is someone who didn't play in the majors at all in 2003. For a prospect who did play at least one game in the majors last year, like Bobby Crosby or Freddy Sanchez, their position eligibility is already determined for 2004. Crosby now qualifies at SS and Sanchez at 3B because that's where they played the most games in the majors last year. Should they start the year in the minors and then get called up, they retain their eligibility at those positions for 2004. That has been clear from the get-go. For Sanchez to qualify at second base in 2004, he must play 20 games there first. Joe Mauer also qualifies at catcher right now and if he opens the season on the Twins' Opening Day roster and DHs in the opener, it doesn't matter. He qualifies at catcher because that's where he played the most games in 2003 without playing a game in the majors.



Check the position eligibility lists and we'll have those in your draft kits during registration and I'll update those players who get called up during the year to make sure everyone is on the same page. That includes me and STATS, Inc., as well.