Interpretation of Current Friday DL Rule

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon May 11, 2009 5:53 pm

WOW...could this be a possible cause of all the hubbub?

I see a possible competitor has the dual weekly setup already in place.

I sure won't be joining for that very reason.

http://www.wcofs.com/site/wcofb/rulesprizes

Posting as proof...not promotion.

They say competition is good for the players. I can't argue with that...but it will be an easy way to see which setup has the most popularity without changing here.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Mon May 11, 2009 6:03 pm

A letter to the editor in 'Video Game Monthly' 1973

By crackies, I can't believe it. Rumors of another video game? I am perfectly happy with "Pong". We don't need any more games, Pong is the end all of video games. Other ideas may come down the pike, we don't need them, Pong is the game. Even Pong at double speed ruins the integrity of the game. Where would I find time to play more than just Pong? I only want Pong.

Lance Turbes

Love you, Lance!

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon May 11, 2009 6:29 pm

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

A letter to the editor in 'Video Game Monthly' 1973

By crackies, I can't believe it. Rumors of another video game? I am perfectly happy with "Pong". We don't need any more games, Pong is the end all of video games. Other ideas may come down the pike, we don't need them, Pong is the game. Even Pong at double speed ruins the integrity of the game. Where would I find time to play more than just Pong? I only want Pong.

Lance Turbes

Love you, Lance!

Very good one! Love ya too, DOUGH!

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Mon May 11, 2009 11:18 pm

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

WOW...could this be a possible cause of all the hubbub?

I see a possible competitor has the dual weekly setup already in place.

I sure won't be joining for that very reason.

http://www.wcofs.com/site/wcofb/rulesprizes

Posting as proof...not promotion.

They say competition is good for the players. I can't argue with that...but it will be an easy way to see which setup has the most popularity without changing here. dual week lineup changes are the way of the future whether lance has time in his day or not! get ready!

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 12, 2009 3:58 am

Originally posted by Sack:

OK:

So I'm coming into the FAAB period and realize that stars like Dustin Pedroia, Chipper Jones, D Lee, and Carlos Delgado are questionable for the start of the week. None appear to be playing early in the week because of injuries, but will more than likely not be placed on the DL.

Let me go to the waiver wire and do some research. For example, this week is a great time to play this angle. Most MLB teams aren't playing until Tuesday which will afford me an edge. You see, I'll find a player that appears to ready to be ACTIVATED on Tuesday and pick him up as insurance against one of my above listed superstars not being ready to play till the weekend. Therefore, I can place this currently DL'd player in my lineup and gain his AB's for early in the week. Soon as the Monday 6:55pm deadline hits - I place the superstar back into the lineup for the weekend and hope he is ready without taking the risk of a blank for playing Pedroia, D Lee, Chipper, Delgado. I realize this weeks name is a bad example - but I believe Josh Hamilton fits my above example .... but there will be others and this will happen every week.

My question - is this the purpose of the Friday DL Rule?

Clearly not. Now, if you are taking the Loophole away for the pitchers why not go all the way? Doesn't matter to me that it can be done RARELY - it can be done. A smart player will look to maximize this loophole as the season goes forward and doubleheaders are added. Maximize the games in Coors field and Coors Field East - Yankee Stadium.

Another Loophole - I own Andrew Miller, currently listed on the DL. Picked him up this week and not exactly excited to throw him until I see him pitch. Heck, I may never use him. He has a Monday night rehab start scheduled. I also own a few other pitchers scheduled to start this weekend. Provided that the Marlins don't activate Andrew till after Friday ( he could pitch Saturday - so it "appears" safe he won't go earlier than that ) I can buy a few extra days to make my decision on whom to throw over the weekend. I can do this by placing Andrew in on Monday prior to the deadline with his DL designation. Granted, the DOUBLE start possibility has been taken away with the "NEW" watchdog rule but manipulating the Friday D/L Rule as currently in place allows me an edge not afforded to the other members of my league. They must make those weekend decisions PRIOR to the week starting all because they arent lucky enough (smart enough - GG/

) to have a $1 D/L pickup handy on there reserve list.

My Question - Is this the purpose of the Friday D/L rule?

Clearly not. These examples are posted not to anger Greg and/or Tom. Simply to point out that if they continue to use this rule, good players will find a way around the rule no matter how good intentioned they attempt to be. I don't like being at the whim of MLB teams decisions on who they do and do not place on the DL and having it linked to a timestamp. It could work for me or against me on any given week, that isn't the point. Bottom line is that I'd rather lose a player on a Monday and take a blank than being at the mercy of MLB teams and DL timestamps. I shouldn't lose ground in any league because one of the other 14 teams were lucky enough to take advantage of the Friday D/L rule. Factor this in to the Overall competition as well, because these moves can and will decide who wins and who loses no matter how small they appear to be.

Blow this rule up at years end.......please. Kenny, I know you mean well and your opinion of this DL rule has been duly noted. But in your example above, you are saying that a "good player" will give up one of his reserve spots to pick up a DL player via FAAB who is coming off the DL on Tuesday so that he can then decide whether to start his injured offensive player for the weekend?? That good player would take the weaker stats from this player coming off DL Tuesday through Thursday and then gain "an advantage" by knowing whether to start Delgado or someone else this weekend???

Okay, I raise the white flag. You guys win. You can come up with any scenario of how "good players" can manipulate any situation. I can't combat every scenario a poster wants to come up with. I highly doubt that anyone is leading the NFBC because of Sack's example, but I really am tired of fighting this one.

If the majority thinks that having injured players on their roster all week is a good thing, so be it. I'm surprised by some of the comments from some of our most progressive thinking players, but let's all just ride this ol' stupid rule out for this year and then at the end of the year I'll take a more formal poll and see what the masses think. I'll work with STATS and if we can't fix the system then we'll move back in time and act like it's 1980 again.

Thanks for the scenario Kenny. I hadn't thought of that one before involving hitters. It totally took my mind off two-start pitchers.

GOD Loves You · Post by **GOD Loves You** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:25 am

I would love to know who the worthwhile players are available in leagues and due to come of the DL this week or any other week that aren't rostered. I haven't done the research, but I would imagine every offensive player to have INSTANT AB's coming off the DL during the week is already rostered......and if a person would waste the $$$ and space for a Nomar Garciapara type for a few potential AB's, so be it.

I'm really blown away by the lack of support for a simple twice a week lineup submission. I enjoy the once a week setup, but if there is any 2nd lineup submissions during the week, it should be fullscale.....allow all players to be switched out. This would allow Greg to avoid all the headaches, give STATS a rest, and GIVE US MORE CONTROL. Like I said, I like the once a week setup, but I don't understand why owners do not want more control over their teams......and to be so adamant against more control really is confusing. For most of us, it's not whining, but rather a chance to have some flexibility. And for those complaining about the "streaming pitchers" I think John Z already put that to rest when he stated most pitchers slated to start on the weekend were probably 2 start pitchers and already in your lineup.

Eh, what am I saying, I think we should just have our teams autodrafted, placed into our lineup, and then we can watch the standings as Crazy responds to every single post involving him.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:38 am

how about we just set our lineups once for the entire season. would that make some of you happy?

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:47 am

Originally posted by GOD Loves You:

I would love to know who the worthwhile players are available in leagues and due to come of the DL this week or any other week that aren't rostered. I haven't done the research, but I would imagine every offensive player to have INSTANT AB's coming off the DL during the week is already rostered......and if a person would waste the $$$ and space for a Nomar Garciapara type for a few potential AB's, so be it.

I'm really blown away by the lack of support for a simple twice a week lineup submission. I enjoy the once a week setup, but if there is any 2nd lineup submissions during the week, it should be fullscale.....allow all players to be switched out. This would allow Greg to avoid all the headaches, give STATS a rest, and GIVE US MORE CONTROL. Like I said, I like the once a week setup, but I don't understand why owners do not want more control over their teams......and to be so adamant against more control really is confusing. For most of us, it's not whining, but rather a chance to have some flexibility. And for those complaining about the "streaming pitchers" I think John Z already put that to rest when he stated most pitchers slated to start on the weekend were probably 2 start pitchers and already in your lineup.

Eh, what am I saying, I think we should just have our teams autodrafted, placed into our lineup, and then we can watch the standings as Crazy responds to every single post involving him.

I totally agree with this, twice a week moves gives owners more flexabilty of there team and allows more stratagey.Less headaches for Greg.

Dirt Dogs · Post by **Dirt Dogs** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:48 am

Go ahead and pick up a DL player coming off today that to start over Pedroia. You can have the 1/10 .100 AVG for stats Tuesday-Friday and miss Pedroia's game when he comes back on wednesday.

You guys are acting like these "replacement" DL guys are Ryan Braun or Evan Longoria! and you also have to drop a player to pick up this bum for 3 days. I dont know about the rest of you but i need a bigger bench cause I have trouble dropping guys as it is.

Good Luck!

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:54 am

Originally posted by eddiejag:

quote:Originally posted by GOD Loves You:

I would love to know who the worthwhile players are available in leagues and due to come of the DL this week or any other week that aren't rostered. I haven't done the research, but I would imagine every offensive player to have INSTANT AB's coming off the DL during the week is already rostered......and if a person would waste the $$$ and space for a Nomar Garciapara type for a few potential AB's, so be it.

I'm really blown away by the lack of support for a simple twice a week lineup submission. I enjoy the once a week setup, but if there is any 2nd lineup submissions during the week, it should be fullscale.....allow all players to be switched out. This would allow Greg to avoid all the headaches, give STATS a rest, and GIVE US MORE CONTROL. Like I said, I like the once a week setup, but I don't understand why owners do not want more control over their teams......and to be so adamant against more control really is confusing. For most of us, it's not whining, but rather a chance to have some flexibility. And for those complaining about the "streaming pitchers" I think John Z already put that to rest when he stated most pitchers slated to start on the weekend were probably 2 start pitchers and already in your lineup.

Eh, what am I saying, I think we should just have our teams autodrafted, placed into our lineup, and then we can watch the standings as Crazy responds to every single post involving him.

I totally agree with this, twice a week moves gives owners more flexabilty of there team and allows more stratagey.Less headaches for Greg. [/QUOTE]3 votes for this Greg. remove your headaches while closing all the loopholes and allowing owners a little more control/flexability

NorCalAtlFan · Post by **NorCalAtlFan** » Tue May 12, 2009 4:58 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

how about we just set our lineups once for the entire season. would that make some of you happy? you're on to something gek

reactionary

Ryan C · Post by **Ryan C** » Tue May 12, 2009 5:08 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by eddiejag:

quote:Originally posted by GOD Loves You:

I would love to know who the worthwhile players are available in leagues and due to come of the DL this week or any other week that aren't rostered. I haven't done the research, but I would imagine every offensive player to have INSTANT AB's coming off the DL during the week is already rostered......and if a person would waste the $$$ and space for a Nomar Garciapara type for a few potential AB's, so be it.

I'm really blown away by the lack of support for a simple twice a week lineup submission. I enjoy the once a week setup, but if there is any 2nd lineup submissions during the week, it should be fullscale.....allow all players to be switched out. This would allow Greg to avoid all the headaches, give STATS a rest, and GIVE US MORE CONTROL. Like I said, I like the once a week setup, but I don't understand why owners do not want more control over their teams......and to be so adamant against more control really is confusing. For most of us, it's not whining, but rather a chance to have some flexibility. And for those complaining about the "streaming pitchers" I think John Z already put that to rest when he stated most pitchers slated to start on the weekend were probably 2 start pitchers and already in your lineup.

Eh, what am I saying, I think we should just have our teams autodrafted, placed into our lineup, and then we can watch the standings as Crazy responds to every single post involving him.

I totally agree with this, twice a week moves gives owners more flexabilty of there team and allows more stratagey.Less headaches for Greg. [/QUOTE]3 votes for this Greg. remove your headaches while closing all the loopholes and allowing owners a little more control/flexability [/QUOTE]Make that four votes for this change - at least for the Main Event.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue May 12, 2009 5:22 am

Three questions...

1) Why do you feel that one week is an unacceptable amount of time to employ all of your strategies?

2) Why do you feel you cannot absorb injuries to your team for less than one week if all other teams had to?

7 days = hell

4 or 3 days = heaven?

3) How long before all the arguments you give for the above questions change into 4 and 3 days are unacceptable and unfair? Will those that argue that 3 and 4 days periods are unfair, just have to deal with it?

That's my argument now. Deal with it.

[ May 12, 2009, 11:28 AM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue May 12, 2009 5:37 am

Twice weekly unrestricted moves...

1) Allows for more flexibility then once weekly moves...YES.

2) Allows for more injury replacements than once weekly moves...YES.

3) Allows for unrestricted streaming of players...Yes.

4) Creates an advantage for those who stream...Yes.

5) Forces everyone to stream in order to keep up...Yes.

6) Requires twice the time and effort as once weekly moves...Yes.

7) Benefits those who are the die hards, and hurts the casual players...Yes.

8) Restricts the amount of leagues you can play in due to time required to stay competitive...Yes.

9) Could drive away casual players who see the changed game, and don't/won't/can't create more time in their schedule to stay competitive and see the same names wining each year...Yes?

You think the best players seem to always win NOW...with the current skill/strategy/setup...imagine the winning percentage when they have even MORE control! (It will not be the casual player whose winning percentage goes up...that you can bet on.)

Just like in poker...drive away the fish...and the game suffers for EVERYONE. The players who remain are tougher to beat, and the prize pools are smaller.

[ May 12, 2009, 11:48 AM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue May 12, 2009 5:50 am

Under the proposed rules:

1. Allows for more flexibility than once weekly moves...YES.

2. Allows for more injury replacements than once weekly moves...YES.

3. Allows for better teams to win...Yes.

4. Removes all the complaints from people saying STATS is slow by not updating the DL status...YES.

5. Removes all the headaches Greg receives from the DL rule...YES.

6. Removes all time Greg spends addressing the DL rule...YES.

7. Allows owners to play in more leagues due to owners having a little more control over their outcome…YES.

8. Could allow new owners craving a more than once a week lineup period to sign up. Most young and new players have ADHD!!! They need a fix more than once a week.

Under the current rules:

1) Can people stream pitchers under the current rules...YES..

2) Do most people have to stream under the current rules in order to keep up...YES.

3) Casual owners don’t stand much of a chance against diehards (and there are only a select few diehards)...YES.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:01 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

Under the proposed rules:

1. Allows for more flexibility than once weekly moves...YES.

2. Allows for more injury replacements than once weekly moves...YES.

3. Allows for better teams to win...Yes.

4. Removes all the complaints from people saying STATS is slow by not updating the DL status...YES.

5. Removes all the headaches Greg receives from the DL rule...YES.

6. Removes all time Greg spends addressing the DL rule...YES.

7. Allows owners to play in more leagues due to owners having a little more control over their outcome…YES.

8. Could allow new owners craving a more than once a week lineup period to sign up. Most young and new players have ADHD!!! They need a fix more than once a week.

Under the current rules:

1) Can people stream pitchers under the current rules...YES..

2) Do most people have to stream under the current rules in order to keep up...YES.

3) Casual owners don’t stand much of a chance against diehards (and there are only a select few diehards)...YES. I wonder how many casual players there are. (My guess would be 3 per league, at least.)

I see the best players are the most aggressively pursuing this change...so I'd guess the rich will get richer.

I'm to the point now where I've said my thoughts enough, and will predict a decline after one season of twice weekly. The first season would not change in entries...but the second season...after seeing how the game has changed, and the very low success rate of the casual players...the entries will drop.

[ May 12, 2009, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:10 am

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

I'm to the point now where I've said my thoughts enough, and will predict a decline after one season of twice weekly. The first season would not change in entries...but the second season...after seeing how the game has changed, and the very low success rate of the casual players...the entries will drop. using that logic, are you saying that the wcofb will get zero partpiciants in their first year?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:11 am

These threads all seem to take on lives of their own. At no point have I said anything about changing to twice-weekly moves, so arguing about it right now is silly. The point is whether anything should be done on Friday or nothing should be done on Friday. I think the unscientific poll showed a desire for something to be done right if it was fair and easy, rather than just keep lineups locked on Monday.

But I may be wrong. So let's not argue about scenarios that likely won't happen. Just keep the arguments on the topic on hand, which is whether you'd rather have just one set lineup for the whole week or a workable setup that takes into account injuries during the week. Thanks.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:13 am

Except for hide and seek and Candyland, to be the best you must be progressive, whatever the endeavor.

I know, somehow, I hurt Crazy's feelings with this post, I apologize in advance.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:14 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

I'm to the point now where I've said my thoughts enough, and will predict a decline after one season of twice weekly. The first season would not change in entries...but the second season...after seeing how the game has changed, and the very low success rate of the casual players...the entries will drop. using that logic, are you saying that the wcofb will get zero partpiciants in their first year? [/QUOTE]Judging by their MB...maybe.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:16 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

These threads all seem to take on lives of their own. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5URYhXE5 ... re=related

This is appropriate, too. Remind you of anyone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8GRQHsAVjI&NR=1

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:28 am

Slam Dunk Greg:

*Allow Friday switches of all hitters (healthy and DL).

*Allow Friday switches of all DL pitchers (who haven't pitched earlier in the week).

This takes away the streaming pitchers argument (even though people stream NOW). I don't think many owners remember how tErRiBlE it was to have an active player DL'd on Monday and NOT being able to replace him on Friday. Now imagine having 2 or 3 players DL'd during the week and having them stuck in your lineup ALL WEEK. Horrible, Horrible feeling.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:35 am

Sorry Greg...I'm a ramblin' man today!

Just pointing out industry trends...

"In the beginning..."

Game setups were simple, catering to more casual players. Casual players win once in a while, and reinvest. Other casual players see one win, and relax, knowing they also can win if THAT GUY won!

"Pro-players are created and make demands"

Thinking the diehards/pros are their bread and butter clients...these demanded changes get introduced into rule, and the casual players see less income from this game, and the pros get a little fame and a little money. Casual players still have enough ego and money to fight the fight.

"Pro-players change the game with new demands"

With the poor economy having its impact, and less spread out wealth to re-invest for the casual players...the game is opened up to the Pros (who are winning most of the prize money) to own multiple teams to make up the gap lost to the above.

"Pros demand even MORE change"

Casual players who are no longer ever winning now...not even the lucky ones, either run out of money or run out of ego, and give up.

Of course this is a dramatization...but it seems to be the trend of the high stakes games. (At least the ones that have not folded.)

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:40 am

lance: casual players will get chewed up whether their is a DL rule or not. who are you kidding? seriously.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue May 12, 2009 6:43 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

lance: casual players will get chewed up whether their is a DL rule or not. who are you kidding? seriously. That may be the problem with fantasy baseball growing at such a slow rate compared to football.

Remove the luck from a game, and the attendance drops.

Go to a chess tournament and then go to a poker tournament. The crowds are bigger where there is still an element of luck left.