Rules Changes For 2008?

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:29 am

Greg,

1. I think that you know what I would vote for: More Innings pitched - there by making the comparisons for the WHIP and ERA more fair and accurate. I find it a little inconsistent that the NFBC requires 20 games for position elgibility, yet allows players to start a lineup that averages 66 innnings per slot.

2. Personally, I like the Sunday Free Agent rule. If you wanted to move to 10pm/7pm PST I think that is a good compromise.

3. Keep all the Injury rules and the midweek switching. Injuries are brutal enough, losing a weeks stats is just horrible.

4. Allow FAAB draft position bidding in a high stakes League. Test the concept of the most fair way to draft that the serpentine structure will allow.

Spy

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:52 am

I'm for 800 innings.

I like a later time change for free agent pickups.

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 5:26 pm

I'd be all for a later deadline on Sunday. Between family obligations, and an occasional Sunday of work, more often than not I have to put bids in Saturday night, or Sunday morning and hope to hell nothing happens during Sunday that would make me want to change a bid or drop. 10PM EST would be a welcomed change.

A vote here for 800 innings also.

Terry H · Post by **Terry H** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:08 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

good thread greg.

any chance of having the multiple monday lineup locks? I've asked STATS if we can allow two sets of lineup moves on the 6-7 Mondays where teams play an early afternoon game. If they can allow you to activate those players and still give you time to set the rest of your lineup before the first Monday night game, I'm all for it. It's up to STATS to see if we can do that or not. We obviously do that for the NFFC, so it would be good to do this for the NFBC. I've asked them and will act accordingly upon their response for 2008. It's a good suggestion. [/QUOTE]Would this carry over to Tuesday for teams that don't have a Monday game?

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:27 am

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

I'm for 800 innings.

Also agree on 800 minimum IP.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:14 am

Originally posted by Terry Haney:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

good thread greg.

any chance of having the multiple monday lineup locks? I've asked STATS if we can allow two sets of lineup moves on the 6-7 Mondays where teams play an early afternoon game. If they can allow you to activate those players and still give you time to set the rest of your lineup before the first Monday night game, I'm all for it. It's up to STATS to see if we can do that or not. We obviously do that for the NFFC, so it would be good to do this for the NFBC. I've asked them and will act accordingly upon their response for 2008. It's a good suggestion. [/QUOTE]Would this carry over to Tuesday for teams that don't have a Monday game? [/QUOTE]Nope. Everyone else would have to be set before the first Monday night game.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:14 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

I'm for 800 innings.

Also agree on 800 minimum IP. [/QUOTE]We'll see. I'm not there yet.

SluggoJD · Post by **SluggoJD** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 1:51 pm

A change we must make...

The whole purpose of the Friday DL rule was to allow a person who suffers an unexpected injury between Monday and Friday early, to make a change so they did not suffer all week.

However, many teams have abused this rule IMO, by intentionally playing a person already on the DL, and then swapping him out for Friday with another player.

My proposal is simple, and applies to pitchers:

Teams MUST try to field a complete and viable team each week with their 30-man teams. Teams are not allowed to intentionally start a pitcher who is on the DL, and not expected to come off the DL that week based on injury news updates, and then turn around and remove that pitcher for another pitcher from their bench who could have played that week.

Greg, I'm sure you could word this better, and I'm sure you understand what I mean.

John

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:11 pm

there is strategy involved with every rule, honestly I don't know why a few of you are against more strategy choices ... makes for a better contest

Terry H · Post by **Terry H** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:22 pm

In 2004 teams had 29 players on their rosters. In 2005 it was raised to 30. I felt that I noticed a considerable drop off in the quality of the free agent pool by doing this. Would you consider going back to the 29 player roster?

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:32 pm

Originally posted by SluggoJD:

A change we must make...

The whole purpose of the Friday DL rule was to allow a person who suffers an unexpected injury between Monday and Friday early, to make a change so they did not suffer all week.

However, many teams have abused this rule IMO, by intentionally playing a person already on the DL, and then swapping him out for Friday with another player.

My proposal is simple, and applies to pitchers:

Teams MUST try to field a complete and viable team each week with their 30-man teams. Teams are not allowed to intentionally start a pitcher who is on the DL, and not expected to come off the DL that week based on injury news updates, and then turn around and remove that pitcher for another pitcher from their bench who could have played that week.

Greg, I'm sure you could word this better, and I'm sure you understand what I mean.

John The easy solution:

Have STATS lock any roster spot for the entire week (Monday to Sunday) if the player is on the DL as of the Monday deadline.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:33 pm

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

there is strategy involved with every rule, honestly I don't know why a few of you are against more strategy choices ... makes for a better contest IMO, exploiting loopholes in the rules does not make for a better contest

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 3:46 pm

Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

there is strategy involved with every rule, honestly I don't know why a few of you are against more strategy choices ... makes for a better contest IMO, exploiting loopholes in the rules does not make for a better contest [/QUOTE]I don't see it as a loophole, such a strategy comes with a cost - you've got to use a roster spot to keep a DL'd pitcher on staff. Additionally, it isn't much different than what MLB teams do with injured starters - waiting to activate them until the day of their first start such that they can maintain an extra roster spot.

As for roster size, 30 is plenty big enough.

[ September 20, 2007, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:21 pm

Originally posted by Terry Haney:

In 2004 teams had 29 players on their rosters. In 2005 it was raised to 30. I felt that I noticed a considerable drop off in the quality of the free agent pool by doing this. Would you consider going back to the 29 player roster? Wow, some folks want more players, others want less. I think 30 has proven to be the right number. It's the number I'm sticking with in 2008.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:23 pm

Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:The easy solution:

Have STATS lock any roster spot for the entire week (Monday to Sunday) if the player is on the DL as of the Monday deadline. [/QB][/QUOTE]That is the solution. I did talk with STATS about this during the season when you talked to me about this and I know it wasn't something we could change now. I can ask again to see if that's possible for 2008. Right now, the DL designation comes off once an MLB team activates him and I trust it's a programming thing with STATS. I'll ask.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 4:59 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:The easy solution:

Have STATS lock any roster spot for the entire week (Monday to Sunday) if the player is on the DL as of the Monday deadline. [/QUOTE]That is the solution. I did talk with STATS about this during the season when you talked to me about this and I know it wasn't something we could change now. I can ask again to see if that's possible for 2008. Right now, the DL designation comes off once an MLB team activates him and I trust it's a programming thing with STATS. I'll ask. [/QB][/QUOTE]Thank you. It would be great if we could prevent this sort of chicanery in the future.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 6:07 pm

Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:

quote:The easy solution:

Have STATS lock any roster spot for the entire week (Monday to Sunday) if the player is on the DL as of the Monday deadline. [/QUOTE]That is the solution. I did talk with STATS about this during the season when you talked to me about this and I know it wasn't something we could change now. I can ask again to see if that's possible for 2008. Right now, the DL designation comes off once an MLB team activates him and I trust it's a programming thing with STATS. I'll ask. [/QUOTE]Thank you. It would be great if we could prevent this sort of chicanery in the future. [/QB][/QUOTE]now you're against chicanery too!! you're losing your edge KOQ!

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 10:28 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

I'm for 800 innings.

Also agree on 800 minimum IP. [/QUOTE]We'll see. I'm not there yet. [/QUOTE]Greg, if this helps at all - the average team in baseball throws ~1400-1500 innings in a season. Setting at 800 would barely be 1/2 that amount.

As for the DL rule, I have been upset with manipulation of this very good rule for some time. Making anyone who starts a DL player for the week FROZEN in place would be appropriate. This would allow people to start players who are expected to come off the DL, and also it would stop people from starting DL players to get favorable match ups.

Spy

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:24 pm

I'm still not a fan of the Friday DL switches. I'll just list some of the reasons I don't think it should exist.

1. It's a game with weekly changes. There should be no exceptions.

2. It gives an advantage to the team that sustains an injury that requires a DL stint over the team that has a player maybe twists an ankle on Wednesday and is going to miss 4 or 5 games but doesn't need a DL stint. Both teams know their player is lost for the weekend, yet one gets to replace him while the other doesn't.

3. Monday/Tuesday injuries are bad luck. Your ace starter getting lit up by the worst offense in MLB is bad luck. Luck is a big part of this game as much as we don't like to admit it.

4. At the very least, the "loophole" needs to be closed. The rule wasn't made to let your 2 step stater "skip" the 1st start of the week and be active for the 2nd. I'm not condemning anyone who used it that way, I actually applaud them for thinking of it, but it's not in the spirit of the rule and it's not what the rule was intended for, and amendments need to be put in place to not allow this type of mid week transaction to take place. Only players DL'ed Monday-Thursday of that week should be allowed to be benched.

5. Greg has done a great job with the September lists. It's got to be a HUGE amount of work, and as great as his decisions have been, it's inevitable that sooner or later, one is going to go wrong. I don't think Greg should be put in the position of deciding who is done for the the year and who might not. If there's no DL, there's no Friday switches.

I'm sure the Friday DL switches aren't going away. I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority being against it, but I figure this would be the place to at least voice my opinion.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:37 pm

If you were taking a poll...I'd vote for NO mid-week moves.

For every reason a team with an injury wishes to slant the bias in the "Help Me" direction...there are MORE that feel "Deal with it!"...and go to war next Monday!

The way the rules are set up FAVORS those with early week injuries.

The old rules (NO MID-WEEK ROSTER CHANGE) made them EAT the injury...all's fair and good.

The new rule has them crying for justice!

BULLSHIT!

Injuries should NOT be factored OUT of the game.

~Lance

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:18 am

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

If you were taking a poll...I'd vote for NO mid-week moves.

For every reason a team with an injury wishes to slant the bias in the "Help Me" direction...there are MORE that feel "Deal with it!"...and go to war next Monday!

The way the rules are set up FAVORS those with early week injuries.

The old rules (NO MID-WEEK ROSTER CHANGE) made them EAT the injury...all's fair and good.

The new rule has them crying for justice!

BULLSHIT!

Injuries should NOT be factored OUT of the game.

~Lance Lance,

How exactly does this rule favor 'early week injuries'??? Think about it:

1. If a team has a mon/tues injury they lose the player through Thursday or about 1/2 the week

2. If a team has a late injury, they have HAD the player through the first half of the week and only lose the player's stats till Till Sunday

Some other positive impacts of the rule: makes people carry a more balanced roster of 7 players so that you have the extra back up, more like real baseball. Which in my book is a good thing.

Having mid week injury changes keeps the season from being overly impacted by injuries. Injuries are already brutal enough. For example, this year I had quite a few early - Matsui, Wang, etc... and they ended up taking up my bench which made me have to drop my prospects who were promptly snatched up and then used to club me later in the season.

I personally think the point of fantasy baseball is to show who could pick and field the best team of players, not who can manipulate the rules best (using the WHIP/ERA or starting DLed Players).

Spy

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 7:08 am

It helps teams who have players get injured compete.

Rather than eating a week of stats...they get to swap in another player.

Baseball is a LONG season...you can eat a week of stats. That's baseball. You SHOULD have your success be impacted negatively by injuries.

Otherwise make it so ANY DL'd player (once the official DL is by his name) can be swapped out the very next day...regardless of what day of the week it is.

If you are trying to help those with injuries survive...do it like that.

Otherwise it's a gimmick that only helps those who get DL'd under perfect circumstances...and screws the rest.

~Lance

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 8:13 am

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

It helps teams who have players get injured compete.

Rather than eating a week of stats...they get to swap in another player.

Baseball is a LONG season...you can eat a week of stats. That's baseball. You SHOULD have your success be impacted negatively by injuries.

Otherwise make it so ANY DL'd player (once the official DL is by his name) can be swapped out the very next day...regardless of what day of the week it is.

If you are trying to help those with injuries survive...do it like that.

Otherwise it's a gimmick that only helps those who get DL'd under perfect circumstances...and screws the rest.

~Lance I agree totally. injuries can devastate a team. Just having a player go on the DL and sit on your bench is bad enough but on top of that to hurt your team by unluckily getting hurt at the start of week can really give opponents a big advantage. It adds up.

I think the league should grow in the direction of rewarding skill, and a healthy bench with mid week pickups for disabled players does just that.

[ September 22, 2007, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Crazy Like a Fox ]

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Sat Sep 22, 2007 1:59 pm

Here's my main objection. Player A breaks his leg on Wednesday, and imediatly goes on the DL. That owner gets to move a new player in and accumulate stats over the weekend.

Player B tweeks a hamstring on Wednesday. The team reports it's a stian, and player B should only miss 5 to 7 days. Owner of player B is stuck with no stats because his guy isn't hurt as bad as player A? That alone makes the rule wrong.

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Sun Sep 23, 2007 4:46 am

Originally posted by RichV:

Here's my main objection. Player A breaks his leg on Wednesday, and imediatly goes on the DL. That owner gets to move a new player in and accumulate stats over the weekend.

Player B tweeks a hamstring on Wednesday. The team reports it's a stian, and player B should only miss 5 to 7 days. Owner of player B is stuck with no stats because his guy isn't hurt as bad as player A? That alone makes the rule wrong. And that is why we should go to daily line-up changes, since that will not happen, we should stick with the ability to change out a DL'd player on Fridays. We should however; address the September injury situation up front and make sure we use what ever rule we come up with is implemented as of September 1. I am concerned however about the rule being too arbitrary and if so, it could raise questions about the integrity of the game. The squeaky wheel frequently gets the grease and a non poster to the message boards might feel that they did not get a fair shake and word of mouth is so critical in something like this. The NFBC has always been top drawer with its integrity but it is critical that it continues to do so. Remember, perception is reality and if the perception is that everything is not above board, then it will signal the beginning of the end.

[ September 23, 2007, 10:54 AM: Message edited by: Plymouth ]