Derrek Lee

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:04 pm

Originally posted by King of Queens:

If STATS updated their website on Friday afternoon prior to the first game played that day, by the rules, the move should stand. greg will have to address the rules question.

common sense says 12:01am friday is fair. i'm sure many folks don't have computer access during the day and would be penalized if DL status could be determined throughout friday.

[ April 23, 2006, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:10 pm

Originally posted by eddiejag:

I dont like the midnight rule, why not make it like on mondays , you get 5 minutes to game time on fri.It seems like stats is always behind , we all know LEE is out in plenty of time . All these guys should get their backup , if they have one.Bad enough to lose a nu one pick , LEE was hurt way before fri , whats the promblem. d.lee owners might want to direct some of their DL status anger at Cubs management, not Greg/STATS. Lee MUST be placed on the official MLB DL list BEFORE STATS can do anything.

[ April 23, 2006, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:40 pm

Any documented "lag-time" between MLB and STATS concerning DL?

Just wondering.

~Lance

The Sensei · Post by **The Sensei** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:06 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

even though the DL rule can be helpful to some folks, it looks like it's causing more harm than good. i'm not sure what's so hard to understand??? if a player is placed on the official MLB DL list by 12:01am Friday AND Stats has their database updated, then you can use the DL rule. if the player is placed on the official MLB DL list on Friday, sorry but you lose out.

Quick look at some leagues and d.lee’s status for the time period of Fri, Apr 21 - Sun, Apr 23

LV1 - Dirty Old Gym Shoes – D.Lee on bench

LV2 - RBIed For Her Pleasure – D.Lee in starting lineup

LV3 - Inspin.com - D.Lee in starting lineup

LV4 - We're Spartacus - D.Lee on bench

LV5 - Shot In The Dark - D.Lee in starting lineup

LV6 - Radar Contact - D.Lee in starting lineup

LV7 - Rule 5 Lawn Jockies - D.Lee in starting lineup

LV8 - Main Event Insulaters - D.Lee in starting lineup

LV9 - Sayin It Ain't So Joes - D.Lee in starting lineup

NY1 – Fandango – D.Lee on bench

Greg, will the folks that moved lee out of their starting line-ups need to “give back” the stats for the player they inserted? Also, can we get an official tally of the owners/teams that moved lee to the bench? I tried up until about 4 PM EST to get D.Lee on the bench and was unable to. This is the first time I've been on the boards since Thursday so first I'm hearing of the issue. If some teams were able to get him benched then we've got a problem.

[ April 24, 2006, 07:12 AM: Message edited by: The Sensei ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:48 am

Okay, I apologize for not providing a more thorough answer to this yesterday, but I will try to resolve all of this right now. First let me explain the reasoning behind the DL rule in the first place and then rationalize to myself why I want to keep this in place. This is therapy for myself, if you don't mind, and a little psychoanalysis before I make an important decision.

Here it goes:

1) Each year there are players who get put on the DL on Monday night or Tuesday after their teams said they were "day-to-day." This year we saw that with Ken Griffey Jr., and in Week 1 Nomar Garciaparra and Julio Lugo went on the DL after their team's first game. So I put a system in place where you could reserve an officially DL'd player on Friday if you had a reserve player that would make your lineup legal.

2) The goal was to help NFBC teams who suffered these frustrating injuries and get at least three games of production out of that position. It was designed to take one small element of luck out of the equation. It also was designed to make your reserve rosters stronger and maybe make people carry MLB reserves who had multiple position qualifications rather than store a Triple-A player who would get called up in August. So the goal was to make each team's reserve roster stronger and maybe make the free agent market better later in the year.

3) The technology is certainly there for twice a week moves and thus I knew we could handle this. However, I knew that the "officially DL'd players" would cause some concern as web sites always state a player is going on the DL before he actually does. But we HAD to make this work only with DL'd players or it would open the floodgates to any moves on Friday. STATS gets their DL lists directly from MLB, so that's the source we use for this.

4) The 12:01 a.m. Friday deadline was put in so that NFBC owners didn't have to check all day Friday to see if a player was officially put on the DL or not. If he was on the DL first thing Friday morning, then you could make your move. If he wasn't, then you didn't have to bother any longer. I did not put that time in the rules and thus when we had a very unique happening like the Derrek Lee situation this has caused confusion. I need to be much more specific with this rule and I will rewrite that today.

5) I always felt this was a plus for NFBC owners and not a negative. But I've learned that the concern isn't so much making an extra move on Friday or knowing that you have a DL player, it's knowing whether you can make the move or not. Guys were frustrated last week when they weren't sure if Luis Matos or Derrek Lee were officially on the DL. So the frustration was in having to check often to find out if they could even make a move with this new rule. I understand the double frustration of an injury and then a system that seemed to not allow you what it was designed to allow you.

In the Matos case, the Orioles didn't officially put him on the DL until Friday. The Derrek Lee move was doubly confusing for all of us because of what the Cubs did.

According to STATS: "The Cubs put Lee on the DL on Thursday, but to be active Friday. So, technically he was placed on the DL prior to the 12:01 am Friday NFBC deadline. But, because they made him active on the DL for Friday, our system was placing the DL designation next to his name, but not actually marking him as on the DL since we don't mark players on the DL on Friday's which was then corrected Friday so teams could place him on the bench. So, again, another odd situation we never planned for since I didn't even know MLB teams would place players on the DL for future days."

The futuristic DL transaction was not something we planned for and thus according to the rules Lee's owners who reserved him acted accordingly. I will talk with STATS today and make sure that going forward all eligible DL players are ONLY eligible after 12:01 a.m. Friday. I will also specify that in the rules so that everyone knows that first thing Friday morning if a player isn't listed as DL on your team page he won't show up as DL later that day. If he does, you still won't be able to move him.

Again, the deadline is set early on Friday because I don't want owners working all day on Friday to check their rosters for these final moves. We all have other lives to take care of. The rule was always intended for the early week injuries or DL moves, not for the Wednesday night injuries. If those injuries lead to quick transactions, so be it. If not, then you'll have to live with the bad injury of the week.

I still think this rule has some benefits to the NFBC and I'll update the rule, put all of this in written form and e-mail it out to every NFBC owner. I'll make doubly sure that we communicate this rule better and let everyone know it can be a benefit to everyone. Did it work and help owners who had Garciaparra, Lugo and Griffey? I think so.

But if we have future hiccups, I'll reconsider this rule immediately. There's too much on the line to have any negatives involved with the contest.

I look forward to your feedback, good or bad. It was my decision to use this rule and I'll take the heat if it's not working out.

The Sensei · Post by **The Sensei** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:06 am

Greg,

Thanks for the detailed explanation but that doesn't change the fact that some of us COULDN'T reserve Lee. I tried to reserve him several times on Friday and couldn't because he didn't have the DL designation.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:14 am

But if we have future hiccups, I'll reconsider this rule immediately. There's too much on the line to have any negatives involved with the contest.

That statement scares the hell out of me, you draft under a certain set of rules. In this case it is minor but some folks I know felt Figgins was a tad more valuable because this rule was in place for example. You cannot change rules midstream. Fix the problem and communicate better and the problem is solved. One thing that has become evident is a lot of people do not check these boards and more info needs to go out in the newsletter and emails. We as participants also need to be better informed- besides the 12:01 thing everything has been there you just have to look for it and in the worst case ask a couple of questions.

The consensus of people I talk to are that things are not going nearly as smoothly this year as in the prior 2 years. I know I personally would struggle to give the same glowing recommendations that I gave a few months ago. Businesses have slumps just like players do- fix the slump and all will be forgotten about soon enough, changing the rules seems on the surface like it could be a more prudent decision- I personally think it is a short sighted one and will harm the contest even more than a snafu here or there.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:35 am

Just as an FYI: There were 316 moves made on Friday, which means 158 DL'd players were benched. Most of the moves involved Bartolo Colon, David Newhan, Ken Griffey and Jeremy Hermida, but a few were on Sean Casey and Ryan Doumit, players who were DL'd before Monday's games and the owners didn't originally put them on the DL.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:44 am

Rule 13 for all NFBC Leagues has been amended to the following and will be e-mailed to all NFBC owners today:

13. Setting Starting Lineups: NFBC owners are allowed to change their starting lineups five minutes before the first game each Monday and that lineup remains intact for the rest of the week. 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. STATS will update the DL listings at 12:01 a.m. CST, each Friday and that will be the final update before Friday's games. If a player is not officially on the DL before then, he will not be allowed to be reserved even if a DL shows up next to his name during Friday. The official cutoff for this is 12:01 a.m. CST and no exceptions will be made.

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:53 am

For the 4th or 5th time i would like to voice my displesure with these Friday transactions. For those of that work and have lives besides fantasy baseball and do not want to or dont have the time or 24 hour access to internet to make these. It takes away my enjoyment of the contests. The only way i would ever be in favor of fri tranactions is we could be able to change our roster any way we see fit before the games are played, thus creating 2 stat periods each week. this would kept the playing field level for all participates, otherwise i would hope we would do away with the fri transactions

The Sensei · Post by **The Sensei** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:53 am

When did the people who were able to bench Lee make their moves? As I said, I tried to change him out up until mid-afternoon on Friday and he still didn't have the DL designation at that time (at least on my team). I stopped trying at that point figuring he wasn't put on the DL by STATS and just let it go, but now it seems people WERE able to get him out.

If STATS gave him the DL anytime after mid-afternoon then I guess I must have missed it but if others were able to switch him out at any time before mid-afternoon on Friday then there's a problem because I was unable to.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 3:57 am

Originally posted by The Sensei:

When did the people who were able to bench Lee make their moves? As I said, I tried to change him out up until mid-afternoon on Friday and he still didn't have the DL designation at that time (at least on my team). I stopped trying at that point figuring he wasn't put on the DL by STATS and just let it go, but now it seems people WERE able to get him out.

If STATS gave him the DL anytime after mid-afternoon then I guess I must have missed it but if others were able to switch him out at any time before mid-afternoon on Friday then there's a problem because I was unable to. Chris, I'm looking into this. I believe it was after lunch and I'll post when I get the answer. I was returning from Costa Rica that day and wish I could return to the rain forest right now!

Parnelli · Post by **Parnelli** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:47 am

Greg, Thank for the detailed explannation.

I have been in the NFBC for 3 years, So I have appriciated all the hard work you and Tom put in trying to satisfy all NFBC members.This must be very difficult.

I have even had rullings go the way i did not want them to go(no preseason waiver for SAT Mar 28....Leaving me with only 3 healthy OF) but a little understanding and the abilty to move on goes a long way. I have got that team up to 3rd after a bad start....lol

The NFBC is still the best place to play Fantasy Baseball and will only get better and better.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:53 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

According to STATS: "The Cubs put Lee on the DL on Thursday, but to be active Friday. So, technically he was placed on the DL prior to the 12:01 am Friday NFBC deadline. But, because they made him active on the DL for Friday, our system was placing the DL designation next to his name, but not actually marking him as on the DL since we don't mark players on the DL on Friday's which was then corrected Friday so teams could place him on the bench. So, again, another odd situation we never planned for since I didn't even know MLB teams would place players on the DL for future days."

The futuristic DL transaction was not something we planned for and thus according to the rules Lee's owners who reserved him acted accordingly. I will talk with STATS today and make sure that going forward all eligible DL players are ONLY eligible after 12:01 a.m. Friday. futuristic DL transaction? that's a first for me. even if it was (says STATS...mlb.com says d.lee was DL'd on Friday 4/21), how will a "futuristic DL transaction" be handled going forward? if this same exact situation comes up this week with let's say j.thome, will he be allowed to be switched out on Friday?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:03 am

Originally posted by The Sensei:

When did the people who were able to bench Lee make their moves? As I said, I tried to change him out up until mid-afternoon on Friday and he still didn't have the DL designation at that time (at least on my team). I stopped trying at that point figuring he wasn't put on the DL by STATS and just let it go, but now it seems people WERE able to get him out.

If STATS gave him the DL anytime after mid-afternoon then I guess I must have missed it but if others were able to switch him out at any time before mid-afternoon on Friday then there's a problem because I was unable to. i feel bad for you and the other folks that kept d.lee in their lineups.

IMO - i thought the rule was 12:01am was the "freezing point". if that WAS the case, d.lee shoulda never been made available to switch during Friday afternoon. if we was, the owners that switched him out should have him re-instated. that way it's FAIR to ALL the d.lee owners, not just the ones that were sitting by a computer from 5pm-7pm on Friday.

The Sensei · Post by **The Sensei** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:18 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by The Sensei:

When did the people who were able to bench Lee make their moves? As I said, I tried to change him out up until mid-afternoon on Friday and he still didn't have the DL designation at that time (at least on my team). I stopped trying at that point figuring he wasn't put on the DL by STATS and just let it go, but now it seems people WERE able to get him out.

If STATS gave him the DL anytime after mid-afternoon then I guess I must have missed it but if others were able to switch him out at any time before mid-afternoon on Friday then there's a problem because I was unable to. i feel bad for you and the other folks that kept d.lee in their lineups.

IMO - i thought the rule was 12:01am was the "freezing point". if that WAS the case, d.lee shoulda never been made available to switch during Friday afternoon. if we was, the owners that switched him out should have him re-instated. that way it's FAIR to ALL the d.lee owners, not just the ones that were sitting by a computer from 5pm-7pm on Friday. [/QUOTE]That's exactly what I thought too but I was just checking to make sure. At no time did I truly expect him to all of a sudden show up as DL. I thought the cutoff was 12:01 also (meaning if he didn't have the DL designation on my team before 12:01 he wasn't going to get it) and because it was a unique situation was just double-checking.

I admit I didn't read rule 13 (if I had I guess I'd have found a way to double-check again before 7 PM) but I had someplace to be on Friday afternoon so just checked as long as I could.

I agree with your solution. It would be too difficult to go back to the affected teams and say "what move would you have made?"

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:44 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

According to STATS: "The Cubs put Lee on the DL on Thursday, but to be active Friday. So, technically he was placed on the DL prior to the 12:01 am Friday NFBC deadline. But, because they made him active on the DL for Friday, our system was placing the DL designation next to his name, but not actually marking him as on the DL since we don't mark players on the DL on Friday's which was then corrected Friday so teams could place him on the bench. So, again, another odd situation we never planned for since I didn't even know MLB teams would place players on the DL for future days."

The futuristic DL transaction was not something we planned for and thus according to the rules Lee's owners who reserved him acted accordingly. I will talk with STATS today and make sure that going forward all eligible DL players are ONLY eligible after 12:01 a.m. Friday. futuristic DL transaction? that's a first for me. even if it was (says STATS...mlb.com says d.lee was DL'd on Friday 4/21), how will a "futuristic DL transaction" be handled going forward? if this same exact situation comes up this week with let's say j.thome, will he be allowed to be switched out on Friday? [/QUOTE]NO he would not.

mdz129 · Post by **mdz129** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 6:27 am

I just HOPE-- none of the league or overall prizes are determined by a D Lee substitution or non substitution. I own D Lee, but had no one qualified to replace him-- I'm sure others did.

Terry H · Post by **Terry H** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:29 am

So how would the exact same situation be handled this week?

Is it fair if some teams were allowed to move him to reserve and others were not?

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:35 am

Isn't that part of managing your team to have bench players to cover as many positions as possible? It is not anyones fault that you did not have a back up 1B is it?

mdz129 · Post by **mdz129** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:02 am

I am not concerned about my inability to move a sub in for D Lee-- that was my shortfall-- but the other individuals should have had an opportunity to make substitutions as of 12:01 am Friday morning and not at some point during Friday. Since Stats or the NFBC did not make a uniform availablity for Friday morning as stated in a rule clarification email(greg's) then all moves should be nullified. IMHO

SluggoJD · Post by **SluggoJD** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:10 am

Does this apply to auction leagues as well? And what's the bottom line here for folks like me who were unable to replace Lee on Friday?

In my case, the move I would have made is rather obvious - move Sweeney to 1B, and put Edmonds in at U. Edmonds was benched because of his sore arm, but he was back prior to Friday.

Edmonds sort of sucked Fri-Sun going 2-11, 1 HR, 2 RBIs I believe...but that is the move I would have made, and like I said before, it's rather obvious by looking at my team.

John

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:21 am

Originally posted by SluggoJD:

In my case, the move I would have made is rather obvious - move Sweeney to 1B, and put Edmonds in at U...that is the move I would have made, and like I said before, it's rather obvious by looking at my team.This would be an illegal move--you can't shuffle players around to "make it fit." In fact, there were only three possible scenarios that could have happened with Derrek Lee:

(1) If Lee was at 1B, you could have replaced him with a 1B-eligible player from your reserve squad

(2) If Lee was at CI, you could have replaced him with a 1B- or 3B-eligible player from your reserve squad

(3) If Lee was at UT, you could have replaced him with any offensive player from your reserve squad.

From your previous post, I take it that scenario (1) applies to you. That being the case, you could not have moved Edmonds in for Lee.

Hope this helps you and others...

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:41 am

Originally posted by SluggoJD:

what's the bottom line here for folks like me who were unable to replace Lee on Friday?unfortunatley it looks like a kick to the jimmie.

obviously greg can't give you who you woulda played AFTER the fact.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:48 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

NO he would not. if feedback is still ok...

if the same situation comes up this week, you said the switch wouldn't be allowed.

why not reinstate d.lee on the few line-ups that switched him last week and make ALL d.lee owners feel like they weren't hoodwinked?