Position Eligibility Update

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 12:18 am

I am going to update this post again because guys are asking about player eligibility and I don't want any confusion on this matter. Remember, 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)

Clint Barmes, shortstop (12 games)

Garrett Atkins, third base (19 games)

Joe Thurston, second base (3 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.

Veterans who only qualify at utility this year include (beside the obvious DHs):

Ben Grieve

Jeremy Giambi

Daryle Ward

Bubba Trammell

They will only qualify in the outfield in 2004 after they play 20 games there this year.

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

Top Dawg · Post by **Top Dawg** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 12:33 am

Greg - Nice job with this list. Might be a good place to remind people about Kaz here too.

Pete

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 2:15 am

I believe Daryle Ward is 1B-eligible for the draft. 13 games at 1B, 11 games at OF.

For the rest, we're on the same page.

Top Dawg · Post by **Top Dawg** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 2:27 am

K of Q - I think the "most games played last season" rule Greg is talking about is only for rookies that were called up last year. Ward's been around too long so he should be utility only this year until he plays 20 games at a position(IMO).

Pete

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:13 am

Re-read Greg's post regarding Utility players.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:30 am

I just need to say that I think it's insane that major leaguers like Ben Grieve can't get positional eligiblity while rookies can. Grieve is as obviously an OF as Ben Mauer is a catcher. Heck, under the current rules if Grieve had been in the minors last year when he only played a handful of games and got injured he'd get OF eligiblity under the 'most games played' rule or the 'probable position in the majors' rule. But since he wasn't in the minors he gets only DH?

He was injured last year with a blood clot and had a rib removed... he's not a traditional DH. But he's penalized while rooks are rewarded?

I'll abide by any rules that are clear, but the logic of this escapes me. Daryle Ward played 11 at one position and 10 at another... clearly not 20 games at any single position. Therefore, he's got NO position at all? Again... illogical. He played 21 non-DH games last year and ZERO games at DH. So, his position this year? DH, of course!

Alright, I'll get off my rant and get another cup of coffee. It just chafes that I have to re-examine all the players so I 'really' know where they play. It's not good enough to know Grieve is an OF for the Brewers, etc.

I'll be ready on draft day - just had to whine for another minute or two.

Have a good Wednesday everyone,

Dave

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:40 am

Actually, Dyv, Daryle Ward SHOULD be a DH.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:42 am

Damn it, I mean he SHOULD be a 1B!

I guess my two-star rating is well deserved...

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 3:50 am

The rule is:

(A) A player is eligible to be drafted at any posi tion in which he played 20 games last year.

(B) If he didn't play 20 games at any position, he qualifies at the position(s) he appeared in the most.

(C) DH is a position for these purposes.

So Relaford qualifies at 3 positions, because he played more than 20 games at 2B, SS and 3B. Dyv, are you saying he should only be a 2B, becuase that's where he's playing this year?

By the way, this rule has existed since at least 1984 when Waggoner and his cronies "invented" this time-soaking game.

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:37 am

Dude if you are considering drafting Ward in a 15-team mixed league you have serious problems.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:49 am

Originally posted by nnoy:

Dude if you are considering drafting Ward in a 15-team mixed league you have serious problems. Dude, there are both NL and AL auction leagues which have 12 and 13 teams focused on one league and Daryle Ward will be a starter.

Feel free to apologize for not understanding what we're talking about

Dave

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:51 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

Damn it, I mean he SHOULD be a 1B!

I guess my two-star rating is well deserved... KQ, Daryle only had 13 games at 1b last year... you need 20 games at a position to qualify, so he'll be a DH.

The rules with the 'most games at a position', etc. only apply to minor leaguers.

So, if Daryle Ward had played those 13 games at 1b last year for the Toledo Mudhens then he'd get 1b elgibility. But, sadly, he was in the majors and is only a DH now.

Dyv

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:58 am

Touché’, point well taken. Although Ward will be lucky to be a $1 guy in a NL league, I guess someone may draft him. Maybe by the all-star break he will have appeared in 20 games and be eligible for a position.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 4:58 am

Forgive me this blaspheme, but Waggoner wasn't the only one to have created rotisserie baseball and I don't recognize him as my Lord

I've talked to at least 3 different people who were playing fantasy baseball versions 20 years ago and even heard of one who has been playing since the late 60's. Still, unlike our United States founding fathers who put an incredible amount of thought into drafting the countries' constitution... I don't know how much effort Waggoner et al put into their deliberations.

One thing I know for sure, is that amendments are part of growth. If the 'founding fathers' didn't account properly for expansion and/or injuries and/or flexibility then it's not my fault and I'm not going to use their flawed logic as a crutch.

How about a new proposed rule for major leaguers:

How about each player gets position eligibility once their games played at a position equals 20, but you count LAST YEAR's games PLUS this year's games to determine that 20. i.e. Daryle Ward has a running 13 games towards 1b already this year. If he knocks of 7 more, he moves from DH to also having 1b.

Solves the problem of overtly harming a player and yet recognizes the fact that we don't want to give someone credit for a position they barely played.

Amendment #1 is hereby proposed

Dave

I will likely have limited access to review posts in the next 5-6 hours, so I apologize if someone asks questions and I don't get back right away.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:03 am

Originally posted by nnoy:

Touché?, point well taken. Although Ward will be lucky to be a $1 guy in a NL league, I guess someone may draft him. Maybe by the all-star break he will have appeared in 20 games and be eligible for a position. There are 13 NL teams in the auction with only NL players eligible... 13x5 OF slots = 65 needed OF just to field a starting roster. That's not counting Util spots or giving credit to the fact that Daryle as 1b or 1b/3b would be very helpful.

You'd hope each team would want to have at least 1 or 2 bench players to fill in for injured players and you'll find you QUICKLY run out of OF.

He may be a $1 player, but if I were in the NL auction I'd love to have him for a buck!

I know in the mixed leagues this bickering over whether or not a third tier player gets an extra position isn't a big deal - but by the time we get to these conversations DURING the season when confronted with a live case it's going to get ugly and messy because emotions will come into it on one side or another. It's far better to go through the mental exercise now and have a basis for decisions so that if your team or mine is in this discussion in July we can have something to base our decisions upon.

That and I'm an argumentative jackass

Take it easy,

Dave

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:35 am

Dyv, are you certain about that only-13-games-at-one-position-and-thus-he's-a-DH rule? I believe the rule is, if a player did not play 20 games at any position (including DH), you use the most games played as his position (also including DH). Thus, if Daryle Ward had played 13 games at 1B and 13 games at OF in 2003, he'd be eligible to be drafted at both 1B and OF.

I'm pretty certain I'm right, but rather than argue, I think we need some Commish clarification here. Mr. Ambrosius?

BB of the Leaderboard · Post by **BB of the Leaderboard** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:36 am

Originally posted by Dyv:

by the time we get to these conversations DURING the season when confronted with a live case it's going to get ugly and messy . . .

And what's wrong with a few pitfalls for the unwary and uninformed?

BB of the Leaderboard · Post by **BB of the Leaderboard** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 5:52 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

I believe the rule is, if a player did not play 20 games at any position (including DH), you use the most games played as his position (also including DH). Thus, if Daryle Ward had played 13 games at 1B and 13 games at OF in 2003, he'd be eligible to be drafted at both 1B and OF.

I'm pretty certain I'm right, but rather than argue, I think we need some Commish clarification here. Mr. Ambrosius? See Greg's note about 5 up in this same string:

Veterans who only qualify at utility this year include (beside the obvious DHs):

Ben Grieve

Jeremy Giambi

Daryle Ward

Bubba Trammell

They will only qualify in the outfield in 2004 after they play 20 games there this year.

B(Better write that down so I'm not unwary or uninformed)B

[ March 10, 2004, 11:53 AM: Message edited by: BB of the Leaderboard ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:13 am

Originally posted by Dyv:

Amendment #1 is hereby proposed I don't like it. Consider it rejected.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:24 am

Ben Grieve, OF:10 DH:37

Jeremy Giambi, OF:11 DH:30

Daryle Ward, 1B:13 OF:11

Bubba Trammell, OF:3 DH:15

Grieve and Giambi are DHs because they only played 20 games at DH, while Trammell is a DH because he played the most games at that position.

It would be ridiculous for the 20-game played rule to only apply to minor leaguers. If Jeter hadn't played another game after separating his shoulder last year, by that interpretation, he'd only qualify at DH--despite only playing SS!

Greg, please, eat your lunch and let us know the deal here!!

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:32 am

If Daryle Ward only knew how much we all care about what positions he played last year………..

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:41 am

Daryle Ward appeared in 52 games last year, pinch-hitting in 29 of them. He played 13 games at first base and 11 in the outfield. He is utility only, which is exactly what his role was last year. This is a no-brainer as he was on a major-league roster and filled his role as a pinch-hitter, which is where you can use him to start the 2004 season.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:48 am

Ramon Castro, C:18 DH:1 -- he's a DH, right? I think he spent most of the year with the Marlins.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:48 am

Thank goodness I was in meetings all morning and didn't have to see this thread right away. Ward is a no-brainer, as I said above.

As for Grieve, yes he had a rib injury last year and that was too bad. But he played 55 games before going on the DL for the season and collected 165 at-bats. He was a DH for 36 games and was a right fielder for 10. How can there be any dispute on this one? He was a DH last year and unfortunately that's where he qualifies this year. Listen, I grabbed him for $8 in LABR because a player qualifies at a new position once he plays 5 games in 2004. I like him as an outfielder, but unfortunately I could only place him at DH on Draft Day, which to me made him a bargain.

If there is any dispute, maybe it should be the 20 games played in this season to qualify at a new position. Next year, maybe we should lower that to 10 (not 5). I'd be willing to take input on that. But in the Grieve case, Dyv, he's a DH on Draft Day and that's final.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:52 am

I have no problem with Grieve, Greg, but I have to take exception to your ruling on players who did not play 20 games at any position. The rule as you are applying it to minor leaguers should apply to ALL players who missed the 20-game mark. As my earlier Ramon Castro example shows, you open up a can of worms as far as who is a DH and who is not.