Rule Changes For 2006 NFBC

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 7:16 am

Terry

Brilliant! Good catch. I wonder how many people would have caught on to that loophole.

Terry H · Post by **Terry H** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 8:28 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

2) We will limit Draft Day picks/bids to players on MLB 40-man rosters. The NFBC will provide a list of 40-man rosters to all owners before the draft and those lists will be the official lists for players to be selected on Draft Day. Again, it will avoid teams from selecting a full roster of players who never reach the majors.

This rule will also prevent the following players from being drafted:

1. free agents that haven't signed yet, like Uqueth Urbina 2004

2. players that have been recently released, similar to Alex Sanchez 2005

3. players that sign minor league contracts but are invited to spring training

4. prospects that are invited to spring training but aren't on the 40-man roster because they don't need to be protected from the Rule 5 Draft

We will provide that list to all NFBC owners prior to the draft, at least a week before the draft. And we will add unsigned free agents to that list of potential draftees, so examples that you cited in No. 1 and 2 would be included. You are correct, though, it may exclude some prospects not on 40-man rosters.

[ November 04, 2005, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: Greg Ambrosius ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:51 am

Originally posted by Terry Haney:

I noticed in the 2006 rules,included in rule 13:

However, owners are also allowed to remove a player (or players) who is officially on the DL from their starting lineup with one of their players from their reserve roster before each Friday's first game as long as the position eligibility works out. Players must officially be on the DL list according to STATS for this move (or moves) to take effect for the weekend games.

Does this mean that if I notice that I have a two-start pitcher whose first start is in Colorado and I'd like to avoid that start but use him in the second start, I just have to activate a pitcher on the DL at the beggining of the week and I'll be able to remove him prior to Friday's game and then activate my desired pitcher? Absolutely not. The only players you can remove under this rule is someone who officially goes on the DL or was on the DL and you didn't realize it.

[ November 04, 2005, 08:53 AM: Message edited by: Greg Ambrosius ]

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Nov 05, 2005 11:29 am

Greg, if you re-read Terry's post, I think Terry has found a nice loophole, but I would just let this go. It might happen 1-2 twice in a season, and FRANKLY, I made the mistake many times of sitting my pitchers against Colorado and missing great starts

The value of midweek DL moves outweighs this tiny loophole, IMHO

Spyhunter

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:02 am

Okay, yes I see what he's saying now. i guess the answer then is yes, you could do that. But you are right Spyhunter, the odds of having a DL pitcher on your roster and a two-start starting pitcher going against Colorado first in the week are high. Terry, you beat me again. This loophole would exist as you say and we'll just have to live with it for now. Good catch.

viper · Post by **viper** » Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:09 pm

That loophole could be filled if somehow the rule required the replaced player NOT to be on the DL for the Monday roster set but was then placed on the DL afterwords. This may be hard for Stats to program. In essense, only players moved to the DL from Monday thru Thursday could be replaced. This is what the rule is intended to accomodate.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:00 am

Originally posted by viper:

That loophole could be filled if somehow the rule required the replaced player NOT to be on the DL for the Monday roster set but was then placed on the DL afterwords. This may be hard for Stats to program. In essense, only players moved to the DL from Monday thru Thursday could be replaced. This is what the rule is intended to accomodate. Absolutely. I'll see if STATS can program it this way.

RotoSpin.com · Post by **RotoSpin.com** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 4:28 am

What if you honestly missed the news that your pitcher was DL'd Sunday night and then didn't read about it until, say, Thursday...

The Lollygaggers · Post by **The Lollygaggers** » Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:07 am

Or if you have a player on the DL who is reportedly going to be activated prior to the first game...but isn't. Seems like that's a legitimate mid-week transaction as well.

I understand the loophole argument, but I think it creates more problems trying to program around it.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:09 am

I don't see why its a problem. Its a strategy, doesnt need to be fixed.

Baum Threat · Post by **Baum Threat** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:30 am

Wow - I only made it thru the first 6 pages and then skipped to the end.

I will adjust to any rules out there but I did wonder something - what about the guy who comes OFF the DL on a Thursday?

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:40 am

Blech, if you miss they are on the DL Sunday, too bad! All this 'what if mistake was made' are ridiculous. This is supposed to the premier league. Only active players need sign up. If you make a mistake, so be it.

I like the DL ruling Greg, thanks for working on this with Stats. It reduces the luck effect which in my point of view is great

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:45 am

Originally posted by Baum Threat:

Wow - I only made it thru the first 6 pages and then skipped to the end.

I will adjust to any rules out there but I did wonder something - what about the guy who comes OFF the DL on a Thursday?

If you know that one of your players is coming off the DL on Thursday and you want him in your starting lineup, then do like you would now and put him in there to start the week. Easy enough.

duggan · Post by **duggan** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 9:27 am

first two changes are ok--against twice a week moves, some of us have lives outside of fantsy baseball, will double time need to put in each week!! thanks

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:40 am

Originally posted by duggan:

first two changes are ok--against twice a week moves, some of us have lives outside of fantsy baseball, will double time need to put in each week!! thanks There are no "twice a week moves" rule change. The ONLY way you can take anyone out of your starting lineup and replace him with someone from your reserve roster is if that starter goes on the DL during the week AND if you have someone on your reserve roster who qualifies at that position. You might have that happen once during the season, and if so, you'll get a few more stats than you would have before.

Let me repeat: THERE ARE NO TWICE A WEEK MOVES IN THE NFBC. This rule change was implemented to avoid those zeros from players who suddenly land on the DL on Monday or Tuesday or Wednesday. It also will make the reserve rosters a little more relevent.

It's a small change, but you need to understand the rule. I promise, Mike, you won't have to live at your computer for this rule change. Just keep your guys healthy!

BorderBrat · Post by **BorderBrat** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:24 am

I like all three rules changes. Allows yu to mange your team by each series. I don't think a few minutes twice a week is too much time to spend. We do this for fun, it's not a job!

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 3:30 pm

Greg, Are you sure you want these rule changes?

You've had to explain them over and over again to returning players. You broke the old rule of KISS.

It's going to get ugly as this goes on.

Nevadaman · Post by **Nevadaman** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:02 pm

The changes are relatively minor, welcome, AND simple. One would have to be brain dead not to understand them!

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 3:34 am

Originally posted by Walla Walla:

Greg, Are you sure you want these rule changes?

You've had to explain them over and over again to returning players. You broke the old rule of KISS.

It's going to get ugly as this goes on.

I'm COMPLETELY confident that this one rule change and the Kentucky Derby Style process will run smoothly and will add to the contest, not detract from it. I am still Keeping It Simple.

The only thing ugly around here is me and we'll leave it that way.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 2:49 pm

I still think it is funny that at this 'level' of play, people can't handle the truth of bidding for a pick spot, but I guess that is the way it goes. I know you are trying to take minor steps here Greg, so I understand your approach, even if I am not a fan. It is definitely better than nothing though!

Spy