Mike Minor

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Mon Aug 09, 2010 4:38 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by God Our Team Sucks:

Sorry to be the fly in the ointment, but I think there's a bunch of different ways to make it so all minor leaguers were available in the free agent pool without it slowing down the web. For example, there could be a drop down menu that only looks at MLB players, or AAA players, or AA players. And the programs could focus more on data pass through and less on graphics that don't add all that much.

Greg has the best game going, and I wouldn't consider playing anything else. I'm not too worried about the things that haven't gone right, and my teams have had to give up Mike Minor, Mike Leake, and Eric Young.

But my two cents is we'd be giving up a ton of strategy if a minor leaguer had to play a game in the majors to be waiver-eligible. I'd rather push the I/T guys to continue to improve the product. Eric does make a point that the one downfall of waiting for a minor-leaguer to first play before being eligible is the dreaded callup on Sunday or the weekend for the next series. It might eliminate a top prospect from being eligible for a week.

Whatever the designation we continue to use, we have to make this easier for all to see and get it programmed so the player pool is solid for 2011 and beyond. [/QUOTE]Agree this is a good point as well. I like Brian's idea in the absence of a better idea, but if there is a better idea ...

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Tue Aug 10, 2010 5:32 am

minor is a pefect example of why brians idea is so good. yes, gecko was correct to complain but now that we have seen minors stats- waiting a week will be just fine. for every guy you "wish" you had; there will be 2 or 3 you are glad you did not.

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Tue Aug 10, 2010 5:58 am

Im not sure this last idea is any good because it would require more from the IT to get it right and we all know that would end up in diasater. Do not think we need to open it up to minor leaguers cause the damn pages would take a week to load and another week to find the guy we are looking for. Need to find a way for the current system to work like it supposed to and get rid of all the unnesasary **** that slows the whole gdamn system at fanball down, but i doubt that will happen either so the bottom line is get used to more of the same or quit playing, but without a good alternative we're all bascically f'ed.

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:53 am

Originally posted by Quack & Willy:

so how would you handle players who make the Opening Day roster, but are undrafted rookies who have never appeared. Under that rule, they have not played a game yet? You just couldn't bid on him week one. You'd have to wait til the 2nd FA period. That would make it consistant through the year.

Pretty good idea as far as I'm concerned. Cut and dry. Player has to play in a game before he hits the FA wire if he wasn't drafted.

Maybe the Sunday night games is an issue that needs a special rule.

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:58 am

Originally posted by Trash Man:

Greg - have you heard anything from Stats regarding Minor? Was he not on the Sunday feed? Was he not there because he was on the Saturday feed? I guess I am still dumbfounded as to why he wasn't included for this weekend's FAABbump

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 11:42 am

Originally posted by RichV:

Maybe the Sunday night games is an issue that needs a special rule. Anybody playing for the first time on a Sunday, at any time on Sunday, would have to go in the next week's FAAB.

Sound good?

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:25 pm

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by RichV:

Maybe the Sunday night games is an issue that needs a special rule. Anybody playing for the first time on a Sunday, at any time on Sunday, would have to go in the next week's FAAB.

Sound good? [/QUOTE]Works for me. If he doesn't play in a game by Saturday night, he won't be a FA.

It would be pretty hard to have a controversy if this were the rule.

[ August 11, 2010, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: RichV ]

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:01 am

Looks like a pretty strong consensus to me.

Glenn

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:13 am

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Trash Man:

Greg - have you heard anything from Stats regarding Minor? Was he not on the Sunday feed? Was he not there because he was on the Saturday feed? I guess I am still dumbfounded as to why he wasn't included for this weekend's FAABbump [/QUOTE]Mark, he wasn't in our Sunday player pool by 7 am ET and since we close off adding any free agents to the pool until after FAAB is run we don't have an exact time stamp like CBS Sporstline does for his addition to this week's NFBC pool. If CBS Sportsline had him added at 2:51 pm on Sunday I'd say he was added before Sunday's game. If that's the case it shows how long it officially takes for MLB to add these players, which is why I think we're having a constructive debate to fine-tune our rule.

It's much easier to program a player being added to the pool once he plays an MLB game, that's for sure. If that's what we need to do, DONE.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:17 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by RichV:

Maybe the Sunday night games is an issue that needs a special rule. Anybody playing for the first time on a Sunday, at any time on Sunday, would have to go in the next week's FAAB.

Sound good? [/QUOTE]Yeah, the pool would still be closed at 7 am ET on Sunday and include anyone who played through Saturday's games. This is very easy to construct FAAB like this.

Again, the only downside is a top prospect getting called up over the weekend and making his first appearance on Monday or Tuesday, but right now it's already tough to sneak him in the player pool and it's causing headaches for all of us. I'm certainly fine with this addition.

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:32 am

The problem with the rule now is it's ambiguous and too dependent on an "official" time-stamp that obviously doesn't exist.

By switching to the new proposal, it takes all confusion out of the equation, and we'll all be working under the same rules and understanding.

Anything that takes debate out of the rulings is a plus.

Glenn

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 2:38 am

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

The problem with the rule now is it's ambiguous and too dependent on an "official" time-stamp that obviously doesn't exist.

By switching to the new proposal, it takes all confusion out of the equation, and we'll all be working under the same rules and understanding.

Anything that takes debate out of the rulings is a plus.

Glenn AMEN BROTHER!!

I'm with you on this change in the rules and we wouldn't have had some of these Sunday problems with this rule change in place. I'll take the blame for that and gladly change that designation. I hate that time stamp too and it's used with the DL designation on Fridays. Maybe we address that area, too.

I have no problem with this change and I too think it will help the contest.

[ August 12, 2010, 08:39 AM: Message edited by: Greg Ambrosius ]

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:12 am

I dont think this change that everyone is asking for will solve the problem. Personally think it creates more headaches and problems than it stops. Who at fanball is going to come in there sat night and enter the players that made their debut on fri or Sat night, i say nobody, and that means the same problem as we have now. Its not the rules thats the problem but how they are being applied and i dont see that changing so changing the rule just changes the type of headache.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 4:53 am

If the available player pool were tied to the stream of players getting statistics, Fanball would not have to monitor it. A player plays on Saturday, those stats show up on the stream sent to Fanball late Saturday night/early Sunday morning, the standings are updated and the player pool is updated.

There could be the issue of someone officially called up on Thursday, Friday or Saturday but not playing in a game, but those instances should be few and far between and is thus the lesser of the potential evils.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 5:25 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

If the available player pool were tied to the stream of players getting statistics, Fanball would not have to monitor it. A player plays on Saturday, those stats show up on the stream sent to Fanball late Saturday night/early Sunday morning, the standings are updated and the player pool is updated.

There could be the issue of someone officially called up on Thursday, Friday or Saturday but not playing in a game, but those instances should be few and far between and is thus the lesser of the potential evils. Todd is right, this is easily programmable. I've already asked about this and all agree this is much easier to implement from our side. On Sunday at 7 am ET, the player pool includes everyone with one or more MLB games played. That is easy and certainly not done by hand.

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:13 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

If the available player pool were tied to the stream of players getting statistics, Fanball would not have to monitor it. A player plays on Saturday, those stats show up on the stream sent to Fanball late Saturday night/early Sunday morning, the standings are updated and the player pool is updated.

There could be the issue of someone officially called up on Thursday, Friday or Saturday but not playing in a game, but those instances should be few and far between and is thus the lesser of the potential evils. Todd is right, this is easily programmable. I've already asked about this and all agree this is much easier to implement from our side. On Sunday at 7 am ET, the player pool includes everyone with one or more MLB games played. That is easy and certainly not done by hand. [/QUOTE]The rule we have now is easily programmable but we some how mananage to f' it up anyway. Just changing the rule is not the right solution in my mind. I would prefer that players be made as soon as possible but dont want to have to siff through 2000 useless players every week.

RichV · Post by **RichV** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:24 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Glenneration X:

The problem with the rule now is it's ambiguous and too dependent on an "official" time-stamp that obviously doesn't exist.

By switching to the new proposal, it takes all confusion out of the equation, and we'll all be working under the same rules and understanding.

Anything that takes debate out of the rulings is a plus.

Glenn AMEN BROTHER!!

I'm with you on this change in the rules and we wouldn't have had some of these Sunday problems with this rule change in place. I'll take the blame for that and gladly change that designation. I hate that time stamp too and it's used with the DL designation on Fridays. Maybe we address that area, too.

I have no problem with this change and I too think it will help the contest. [/QUOTE]We can fix the DL time stamp problem real easy...Moves once a week, PERIOD.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:02 am

Originally posted by Bama:

The rule we have now is easily programmable but we some how mananage to f' it up anyway. Just changing the rule is not the right solution in my mind. I would prefer that players be made as soon as possible but dont want to have to siff through 2000 useless players every week. I disagree, the rule we have now is not easily programmable as it involves a time-stamp of when a player is officially put on a roster, and this official information is not publicly available.

That is the crux of the issue, finding a means to take a time-stamp out of the rule. So long as the eligibility involves the time a player is officially on a roster, regardless of the time, it is an issue that goes beyond any programing issues that Fanball may or may not have had or will have going forward.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:08 am

Originally posted by Bama:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

If the available player pool were tied to the stream of players getting statistics, Fanball would not have to monitor it. A player plays on Saturday, those stats show up on the stream sent to Fanball late Saturday night/early Sunday morning, the standings are updated and the player pool is updated.

There could be the issue of someone officially called up on Thursday, Friday or Saturday but not playing in a game, but those instances should be few and far between and is thus the lesser of the potential evils. Todd is right, this is easily programmable. I've already asked about this and all agree this is much easier to implement from our side. On Sunday at 7 am ET, the player pool includes everyone with one or more MLB games played. That is easy and certainly not done by hand. [/QUOTE]The rule we have now is easily programmable but we some how mananage to f' it up anyway. Just changing the rule is not the right solution in my mind. I would prefer that players be made as soon as possible but dont want to have to siff through 2000 useless players every week. [/QUOTE]It is programmed right, yet it's still very confusing for players because they read on the Internet that the Braves are calling someone up on Saturday night and he isn't officially added before 7 am ET. Then we look like crap, when it's the slow process that was the problem.

Either way, Minor wouldn't be eligible to be picked up via FAAB until next week. Nothing would have changed with him or Daniel Hudson or a few others; it's just that everyone in the NFBC would understand why he wasn't available in free agency and it's because he hadn't played a game in the majors yet. Simple and easy to understand.

Raiders · Post by **Raiders** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:30 am

Under the proposed rule change (one game in majors), then someone like Jordan Zimmerman who was on the DL earlier but did not play a game in the majors this year would not be eligible for free agency. Is that correct?

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:35 am

I don't want to speak for Greg or Fanball, but it seems to me it can be written in the rules that if a player is on the opening day MLB roster, either 25-man or DL, he is eligible for free agency and remains as such all season.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 9:12 am

Originally posted by Raiders:

Under the proposed rule change (one game in majors), then someone like Jordan Zimmerman who was on the DL earlier but did not play a game in the majors this year would not be eligible for free agency. Is that correct? Actually, it's one *appearance* in a game. Subtle but important difference. I'm with Todd on the Zim question.

Chameleon · Post by **Chameleon** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:01 am

I have a different question. If I drafted a minor leaguer -- like I did with JP Arencibia this year in the 30th round -- and then threw him back in the pool, and THEN bought him on FAAB when I felt the time was "right", that would render this whole issue, a non-issue, correct? In other words, this whole thread and discussion is solely about those leagues that did NOT draft the minor leaguer in question at the Draft Table ... hence the discussion about "when" he would be available in leagues that did NOT draft him in March.

Thanks for clarifying, because I like the rule the way it is for minor leaguers drafted "at" the Draft Table.

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:01 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

It is programmed right, yet it's still very confusing for players because they read on the Internet that the Braves are calling someone up on Saturday night and he isn't officially added before 7 am ET. Then we look like crap, when it's the slow process that was the problem.

just curious...did you confirm with someone at STATS that Mike Minor was NOT in their Saturday feed to Fanball? If he wasn't, then why WAS Minor in their feed to Fanball earlier in the week?

something doesn't sound right with this one...

NorCalAtlFan · Post by **NorCalAtlFan** » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:30 am

"Thanks for clarifying, because I like the rule the way it is for minor leaguers drafted "at" the Draft Table."

Agreed. But they can't get that right. And it's August. I have little faith it will be remedied before next april