Originally posted by SluggoJD:
FIELDING IS WHAT DETERMINES PLAYER POSITION.wrong. show me where it says that in the rules.
Originally posted by SluggoJD:
And you also know that Teahen, using your previous claims up above somewhere, shows as OF...and only OF.
Yet you play Teahen at 3B, even though he hasn't appeared there all year.
And you can't get out of this coffin you dug yourself into.
You cannot legitimately claim to have believed that Reynolds was 3B eligible, and at the same time play Teahen at 3B. i drafted teahan and he was only 3B elgible. since then i've seen that he plays only in the OF. in any event, i didn't pickup teahan via FAAB so you are trying to compare apples to oranges. next!
you can't be this ignorant in real life. can you? god help your family!!!
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 4317
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
-
AmericanDreams
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games.
"The name of the Lord is a strong tower; the just man runs to it and is safe." - Proverbs 18:10
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 4317
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:
Mark- I essentially argue for a living about 50% of the time. Not sure how I feel about your points on Cust but if I was negotiating with you originally I would be worried. The biggest favor you could do me is to get off point and call people names and make it personal. Give that a thought.
ok, no more names.
chest - do you remember the Ramon Castro eligibility ruling that greg made? that set precedent for his "pinch hitting" affection
Mark- I essentially argue for a living about 50% of the time. Not sure how I feel about your points on Cust but if I was negotiating with you originally I would be worried. The biggest favor you could do me is to get off point and call people names and make it personal. Give that a thought.
ok, no more names.
chest - do you remember the Ramon Castro eligibility ruling that greg made? that set precedent for his "pinch hitting" affection
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Kent is right.
I won't be posting in this thread any longer.
I've made my points, over and over.
I won't be posting in this thread any longer.
I've made my points, over and over.
-
Chest Rockwell
- Posts: 2400
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:
Mark- I essentially argue for a living about 50% of the time. Not sure how I feel about your points on Cust but if I was negotiating with you originally I would be worried. The biggest favor you could do me is to get off point and call people names and make it personal. Give that a thought.
ok, no more names.
chest - do you remember the Ramon Castro eligibility ruling that greg made? that set precedent for his "pinch hitting" affection [/QUOTE]Mark I am not going to get in to my thoughts on it mainly because Greg's mind is made up and it is a waste of time.
Now what is constructive is telling Greg I like you but the one dumb rule you have that your stubborn, corona loving, Zaleksi carrying, mustached ass needs to give in on is this pinch hit rule but in 2008.
quote:Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:
Mark- I essentially argue for a living about 50% of the time. Not sure how I feel about your points on Cust but if I was negotiating with you originally I would be worried. The biggest favor you could do me is to get off point and call people names and make it personal. Give that a thought.
ok, no more names.
chest - do you remember the Ramon Castro eligibility ruling that greg made? that set precedent for his "pinch hitting" affection [/QUOTE]Mark I am not going to get in to my thoughts on it mainly because Greg's mind is made up and it is a waste of time.
Now what is constructive is telling Greg I like you but the one dumb rule you have that your stubborn, corona loving, Zaleksi carrying, mustached ass needs to give in on is this pinch hit rule but in 2008.
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. Agreed, except that Class B players should get eligibility for any position they played 20 games in the 2006 minor league season.
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. Agreed, except that Class B players should get eligibility for any position they played 20 games in the 2006 minor league season.
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 3038
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. I also see that angle, American.
I just think that what applied to "Class A" would also apply to "Class B".
Why should "Class A" be punished?
It doesn't make sense...but it is written very poorly.
~Lance
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. I also see that angle, American.
I just think that what applied to "Class A" would also apply to "Class B".
Why should "Class A" be punished?
It doesn't make sense...but it is written very poorly.
~Lance
"The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once."
~Albert Einstein
~Albert Einstein
-
AmericanDreams
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. Agreed, except that Class B players should get eligibility for any position they played 20 games in the 2006 minor league season. [/QUOTE]Sorry, meant to type 20. I agree with you too; so why is everyone ignoring our point?
quote:Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. Agreed, except that Class B players should get eligibility for any position they played 20 games in the 2006 minor league season. [/QUOTE]Sorry, meant to type 20. I agree with you too; so why is everyone ignoring our point?
"The name of the Lord is a strong tower; the just man runs to it and is safe." - Proverbs 18:10
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 3038
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
I agree, Kent...I suck at the NFBC Main. (so far)
You are one hellova guy yourself!
I'd bet Mark is good as well...I respect fire in the belly.
I'm just trying to attack the logic involved.
I also see plenty of misdirection and self driven angles.
We'll see soon.
I like to see the activity on the boards!
~Lance
You are one hellova guy yourself!
I'd bet Mark is good as well...I respect fire in the belly.
I'm just trying to attack the logic involved.
I also see plenty of misdirection and self driven angles.
We'll see soon.
I like to see the activity on the boards!
~Lance
"The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once."
~Albert Einstein
~Albert Einstein
-
AmericanDreams
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. I also see that angle, American.
I just think that what applied to "Class A" would also apply to "Class B".
Why should "Class A" be punished?
It doesn't make sense...but it is written very poorly.
~Lance [/QUOTE]I don't know why class A should be treated different than class B. As a beginner, I had been more concerned with the "whats" than the "whys".
I just saw the wording was different and figured "why would they type it out twice if the rule was the same?" Like, they wouldn't have separated the two classes if there wasn't a reason for the separation.
quote:Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. I also see that angle, American.
I just think that what applied to "Class A" would also apply to "Class B".
Why should "Class A" be punished?
It doesn't make sense...but it is written very poorly.
~Lance [/QUOTE]I don't know why class A should be treated different than class B. As a beginner, I had been more concerned with the "whats" than the "whys".
I just saw the wording was different and figured "why would they type it out twice if the rule was the same?" Like, they wouldn't have separated the two classes if there wasn't a reason for the separation.
"The name of the Lord is a strong tower; the just man runs to it and is safe." - Proverbs 18:10
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 3038
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
"Now what is constructive is telling Greg I like you but the one dumb rule you have that your stubborn, corona loving, Zaleksi carrying, mustached ass needs to give in on is this pinch hit rule but in 2008."
I agree...ignore all pinch hitting and pinch running re: position eligibility...unless they take the field.
Designated Hitter is an American League position...pinch hitter is nothing.
Utility slot in our lienups is a "wildcard" spot...to be filled by any position...and DH players only qualify there.
There are plenty of OF, 1B, etc players used to pinch hit...that doesn't meake them a DH.
~Lance
I agree...ignore all pinch hitting and pinch running re: position eligibility...unless they take the field.
Designated Hitter is an American League position...pinch hitter is nothing.
Utility slot in our lienups is a "wildcard" spot...to be filled by any position...and DH players only qualify there.
There are plenty of OF, 1B, etc players used to pinch hit...that doesn't meake them a DH.
~Lance
"The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once."
~Albert Einstein
~Albert Einstein
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 3038
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. I also see that angle, American.
I just think that what applied to "Class A" would also apply to "Class B".
Why should "Class A" be punished?
It doesn't make sense...but it is written very poorly.
~Lance [/QUOTE]I don't know why class A should be treated different than class B. As a beginner, I had been more concerned with the "whats" than the "whys".
I just saw the wording was different and figured "why would they type it out twice if the rule was the same?" Like, they wouldn't have separated the two classes if there wasn't a reason for the separation. [/QUOTE]That's good logic.
If it was how you state...the very least correction to the rules would be changing the previous year to the current year re: minor league positions qualifying for "Class B" players.
To back track to the previous year due to a late or even 2nd day of the season call-up is simply poor selection of wording of the rules.
A minor league player who starts the season in the majors gets ONE position...
A minor league player called up on day 2 of the regular season qualifies at 3 spots...doesn't make any sense.
This needs changing.
~Lance
quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by AmericanDreams:
The central issue here is the rulebook. I'm just trying to explain how I read the rule before I made the move, and how I still read it.
It says that if a player is on the 2007 Opening Day Roster, then "he will qualify at the position he played the most at in the minors in 2006". Let's call these 'class A' players.
The next paragraph talks about what happens if a player doesn't make the 2007 Opening Day Roster. Let's call these 'class B' players. This is the class Reynolds is in. The rule here says these players "will earn position eligibility for 2007 based on his minor-league games played total in 2006".
I take this to mean that class A players only get eligibility where they played the most, and class B players get eligibility anywhere they played over 10 games. I also see that angle, American.
I just think that what applied to "Class A" would also apply to "Class B".
Why should "Class A" be punished?
It doesn't make sense...but it is written very poorly.
~Lance [/QUOTE]I don't know why class A should be treated different than class B. As a beginner, I had been more concerned with the "whats" than the "whys".
I just saw the wording was different and figured "why would they type it out twice if the rule was the same?" Like, they wouldn't have separated the two classes if there wasn't a reason for the separation. [/QUOTE]That's good logic.
If it was how you state...the very least correction to the rules would be changing the previous year to the current year re: minor league positions qualifying for "Class B" players.
To back track to the previous year due to a late or even 2nd day of the season call-up is simply poor selection of wording of the rules.
A minor league player who starts the season in the majors gets ONE position...
A minor league player called up on day 2 of the regular season qualifies at 3 spots...doesn't make any sense.
This needs changing.
~Lance
"The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once."
~Albert Einstein
~Albert Einstein
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 4317
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Reynolds, Mark 3B ARI
Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
i don't search by names. i search by using the utility function. cust had DH next to his name.I search hitters by UTIL also.
I just did a search by UTIL now.
There are no positions listed next to a players name like they are on the lineup page, just team affiliation.
i don't search by names. i search by using the utility function. cust had DH next to his name.I search hitters by UTIL also.
I just did a search by UTIL now.
There are no positions listed next to a players name like they are on the lineup page, just team affiliation.