Bonds

Don Mathis · Post by **Don Mathis** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 10:51 am

Is Bonds only eligible at U, since he only played 13 games, until he plays 10 at OF?

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 11:20 am

should still be OF - most games played

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 12:09 pm

I think the "most games" clause is for promoted minor league players and prospects but not for major league players. I sort of agree that Bonds should be a UTIL until he gets 10 games. Funny is that if he was out the entire season, then he would be an OF.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 12:45 pm

Originally posted by Don Mathis:

Is Bonds only eligible at U, since he only played 13 games, until he plays 10 at OF? It's a good question. We gave him eligibility at OF in our magazine because he did play the most games at OF after his callup from the DL. It would be unfair to qualify him at OF if he had missed the whole season, yet lose that eligibility because he returned from injury in late September to play injured. Let me look at the numbers further and talk to some other folks, but right now I'd say he still earns OF qualification.

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 12:48 pm

Correct you are - at least from quoting the rules-

"All players must have played 20 games in 2005 or 10 games during the 2006 season to qualify at a

position."

I wonder however if Greg would not make the logical override of this ruling and just put him on the list as an OF.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:07 pm

I really could not care either way- but wasn't the same situation applicable to Glaus last year, if I am correct on that might not be. How was it handled?

Originally posted by Captain Hook:

Correct you are - at least from quoting the rules-

"All players must have played 20 games in 2005 or 10 games during the 2006 season to qualify at a

position."

I wonder however if Greg would not make the logical override of this ruling and just put him on the list as an OF.

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 4:54 pm

Just bare in mind that if you make an exception for Bonds then you will have actually established a rule for ALL similar players. My guess is that there were a few less prominent players last year who were declared as UTIL because of the rules as I read them. Heck, if Bonds plays in 2006, by week three he will be an OF. Creating a rule for ALL players based on Bonds is a step that should be taken with care.

Glaus had less than 20 games at 3B in 2004 but also had a larger number at DH. He was only a UTIL until he got 10 games as I recall. Not quite the same but effectively the same.

[ January 09, 2006, 07:21 AM: Message edited by: viper ]

Don Mathis · Post by **Don Mathis** » Sun Jan 08, 2006 9:09 pm

When and where will we see the official positions as declared by the NFBC? Does anyone know a site to get minor league players games played at positions for last year?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:33 am

Originally posted by Don Mathis:

When and where will we see the official positions as declared by the NFBC? Does anyone know a site to get minor league players games played at positions for last year? We have all of them in our first magazine, which you'll get in the mail in the next 14 days. We don't have eligibility for ALL of the minor-leaguers, but for most of those we feel will be drafted. If there's a question about any minor-leaguer, contact me privately.

The Glaus example isn't close as he played at DH 39 times in 2004 and third base 19 times. DH was his position in 2004. That example is more like Prince Fielder's situation in 2005, where he was almost a full-time pinch-hitter, thus he qualifies only at Utility to start the year.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:38 am

Originally posted by viper:

Just bare in mind that if you make an exception for Bonds then you will have actually established a rule for ALL similar players. My guess is that there were a few less prominent players last year who were declared as UTIL because of the rules as I read them. Heck, if Bonds plays in 2006, by week three he will be an OF. Creating a rule for ALL players based on Bonds is a step that should be taken with care. Correct Mike, if there is another example like this. No DH in 2004 was questionable as I look at the list outside of Glaus, which was an easy decision. Travis Hafner, Frank Thomas, Erubiel Durazo, Brad Fullmer, Calvin Pickering, Tim Salmon and Jose Offerman all were basically fulltime DHs.

Bonds came off the DL to play 14 games in September and played 13 of them in the outfield, pinch-hitting once. He will qualify at outfield in 2006 according to the NFBC and I will make sure all owners know that before Draft Day.

Thanks for the question, Don.