|
Post by Cubs GM (Scott B) on Nov 28, 2022 10:49:36 GMT -5
I understand its frustrating but to me its too much of a manual process to adjust eligibity. It only takes 5 games to gain in season eligiblity - i would prefer to stick to a hard set a rules rather than judgement calls.
This Darick Hall guy played in 42 games last season, to me he's rightfully UT only as thats all he really played. I have more sympathy for a guy like Yainer Diaz because he didnt even get into 20 games last season and couldnt gain eligiblty. He played 3gms at DH and 2 at C. IMO he should have C eligiblity only but when we start making these kinds of judgment calls, I could see the Hall owner being pissed if we chagned for Diaz and not Hall. That is why Id rather stick to Fantrax's rules - even if flawed.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Nov 28, 2022 11:17:39 GMT -5
I dont see how counting games from the previous season is a judgement call, if Diaz for example didn't come up for 5 games he would be a C-CI guy based on the actual count and not anyone's opinion. MLB roles and needs may differ from AAA or AA but it doesn't change the fact where someone's established primary position (20 games previous season) may be. And guys that move between levels its actually the most accurate to count games played. This wont affect many players but I think its on the owner to alert the commish of the players it would impact or else the Fantrax defaults apply.
If Hall DH's primarily this year and doesn't get to 20 games at 1B then he should become a UTL only guy in 24, but he played over 100 games at 1B last year between 2 levels!
And there are guys that when coming up will be multi positioned players and could take a few weeks to even get to 5 games at a certain position. Diaz for example may catch ever 4-5 days, DH every few days, mix in some 1B and even OF. It could take some time to get there based on his youth and role on the team to get the eligibility he should already have.
|
|
|
Post by Cubs GM (Scott B) on Nov 28, 2022 12:46:52 GMT -5
If a guy played the following in 2022:
21 games AAA - Catcher 21 games AAA - MI 130 games MLB - CI What should he be eligible for in 2023? In your scenario hed be C, MI, & CI. Because of that, I dont think you can factor in Minors. This is an unlikely scenario but it is basically the same as the Darick Hall case, just exaggerated. I understand it is shitty for Hall and Diaz but IMO you have to deal with it and wait the 5gms in 23 for that eligibility.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Nov 28, 2022 13:08:53 GMT -5
21 games - Catcher 21 games - MI 130 games - CI
Take out level, what do you have.....a guy eligible at all 3 positions. Why would that be an issue? I see absolutely no problem in that scenario because that's where he played the year before! Isn't that the point. Give players eligibility to start the season where they primarily played in the season prior? If that player continued to lock down the CI spot for their team they wont have eligibility at the other spots for more than the one season.
Its considerably better than someone coming up for a game in Sept, getting in for 1 MLB game as a PH so guess what, your 145 games you played in AAA NO LONGER MATTER and you are only a UTL guy to start. Sweet. This is exactly the Yainer Diaz situation. Cup of coffee guys are the ones getting hurt here and it shouldn't be the case. Especially with the universal DH rule now guys regardless of position are going to continue to come up for their bat first and may only play for a short time due to MLB team needs.
Point is in a roto league having the ability to play players and not have open spots in your lineup for even a week or two can be a big deal. Look at the AL East last season that came down to 1.5 points. Those spots matter especially early when more guys are rotating in and out and having that position flexibility can mean the difference in a playoff spot or not.
|
|
|
Post by Cubs GM (Scott B) on Nov 28, 2022 13:33:37 GMT -5
If we take out levels, can i count stats from my minor leaguers, they were better than my MLBers We both made our points, up to Ty to decide.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Nov 28, 2022 13:54:01 GMT -5
HA! Would be nice.
|
|
|
Post by Twins GM (Mike) on Nov 28, 2022 14:32:23 GMT -5
I don’t think milb games should count, it’s how they fit and play on MLB teams. This might have been an option prior to the NL adopting the DH. There are guys are going to be majority DHs and not make the 20 games needed per year to continue eligibility for the following year.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Nov 28, 2022 15:40:41 GMT -5
I don’t think milb games should count, it’s how they fit and play on MLB teams. This might have been an option prior to the NL adopting the DH. There are guys are going to be majority DHs and not make the 20 games needed per year to continue eligibility for the following year. How they play on their MLB team is all fine and I get that. It eventually works out. But when someone comes up for a short time to just throw out their entire prior season and only count MLB games, even when they wouldn't qualify for ANY position it doesn't make any sense to me. Again, Yainer Diaz, I drafted as a C. He played 50 games at C last year, was on the futures all star team as a C, came up and appeared for ONLY 5 games for Houston, and now to start the year I can't use him as my backup C because he didn't get 20 games at C in MLB? That is flat out ridiculous. If someone could explain to me why someone who played 75% of their prior season at a position and then not have that position eligibility to start the next season it would be great because the ONLY thing that should matter when determining eligibility to start a season is games at a position in the prior season...thats it! To me it really doesn't matter which level it was at.
|
|
|
Post by D Backs GM (Tyler) on Nov 28, 2022 16:44:39 GMT -5
Woah woah, I am not up for MiLB counting for eligibility in general at all. I am ok with it BEFORE they are eligible anywhere in MLB.
21 games AAA - Catcher 21 games AAA - MI 130 games MLB - CI
In this example, they should be C/MI for the first however long in MLB it takes them to gain real MLB eligibility. If they play CI for the first 5 games then they go straight from C/MI to CI.
But yeah, this is going to be a nightmare to do since fantrax is very very shit at updating based on minor league positional playing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2022 12:33:15 GMT -5
I don’t think milb games should count, it’s how they fit and play on MLB teams. This might have been an option prior to the NL adopting the DH. There are guys are going to be majority DHs and not make the 20 games needed per year to continue eligibility for the following year. How they play on their MLB team is all fine and I get that. It eventually works out. But when someone comes up for a short time to just throw out their entire prior season and only count MLB games, even when they wouldn't qualify for ANY position it doesn't make any sense to me. Again, Yainer Diaz, I drafted as a C. He played 50 games at C last year, was on the futures all star team as a C, came up and appeared for ONLY 5 games for Houston, and now to start the year I can't use him as my backup C because he didn't get 20 games at C in MLB? That is flat out ridiculous. If someone could explain to me why someone who played 75% of their prior season at a position and then not have that position eligibility to start the next season it would be great because the ONLY thing that should matter when determining eligibility to start a season is games at a position in the prior season...thats it! To me it really doesn't matter which level it was at. The problem is that Diaz is not really a catcher. He played over 110 games overall and fewer than half were at catcher. He’s an odd situation but he is precisely why there have to be rules about eligibility. I understand that you drafted him as a catcher but his scouting report always contained the caveat that he might not stick at catcher. Same with Hall. He was always a bat without a position at which he could show any defensive proficiency. When you draft that type of player you take this kind of chance. In situations like this everyone likes to argue for their own best interest but the good of the league and the sanity of the (unpaid and under appreciated) commissioners should take precedence. I am old and have played fantasy baseball for almost four decades. Every league I’ve been in has used this approach. It’s fair to everyone and requires no judgment calls.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Nov 29, 2022 13:17:21 GMT -5
Ok, I was done yesterday with this topic but have to respond now.
DIRECTLY FROM FANTRAX THE RULE: Games needed from previous season for a player to qualify at a specific hitting position : 20
Darick Hall at 1B in 2022 - 109 Yainer Diaz at C in 2022 - 52 Yainer Diaz at 1B in 2022 - 36
These aren't my opinions about what positions these guys really play. This isn't a judgement call, its comparing numbers to see if they are greater than 20. This isn't me trying to only advocate for my team. It isn't about trying to bend rules or not follow them. These are guys who in 2022 met the playing criteria to be eligible for those spots based on the very first line of the rule in Fantrax. Thats it.
The rule DOESN'T SAY - Games needed from the previous MLB season for a player to qualify at a specific hitting position : 20
Fantrax has counting issues and that is ultimately where I think the issue is. I get it, Fantrax has other counting issues as well (like the MI eligibility count). Thats why I think its on the owner of the team to alert the commissioners office if any adjustments need to be made. This wont be a very large lift and really affects only cup of coffee type guys who are emerging at the MLB level.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Nov 29, 2022 13:38:49 GMT -5
Just imagine, OF Jordan Walker plays all year in the OF for AA and AAA. The last game of the year gets a Sept call up and gets a big league AB as a reward for a great year. The next year because he got 1 AB in MLB he is now only a UTL player to start and his whole previous season is disregarded. SWEET!
|
|
|
Post by Cubs GM (Scott B) on Nov 29, 2022 13:52:15 GMT -5
Just imagine, OF Jordan Walker plays all year in the OF for AA and AAA. The last game of the year gets a Sept call up and gets a big league AB as a reward for a great year. The next year because he got 1 AB in MLB he is now only a UTL player to start and his whole previous season is disregarded. SWEET! This happens more often than you think. For real prospects, it'll take 5-7 games before they gain that eligibility back. It sucks but its the way it is. I've drafted Yermin Mercedes and Cooper Hummel due to their C status in the minors. Both cases, they came up for a short period of time in their intial seasons and then lose that C eligibility. They lose all value and become cuttable. Again, i think all have made their points. Up to Ty to decide.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Nov 29, 2022 14:21:50 GMT -5
Yep, you are right. It sucks. Time to clarify and make sure it doesn't. We use outside sources for contracts. Can surely use for game counts.
|
|
|
Post by D Backs GM (Tyler) on Nov 29, 2022 14:47:45 GMT -5
5-7 games is nothing in the scale of a season tbh. The amount of automation writing + API or manual checking that would have to be done by us is nowhere near worth it.
If anything gets implemented, I would prefer it to be a one off "by request" basis from Ty.
|
|
|
Post by White Sox GM (alligatorchris) on Nov 29, 2022 15:38:01 GMT -5
Yeah but this universal DH will ruin my life. I’m good with the 5-7 games
7 games leaves Bryce Harper 2 games short of being a full time DH. 😆
|
|
|
Post by Mariners GM (bdass020) on Nov 29, 2022 22:41:54 GMT -5
I am in agreement on the proposal to have teams alert the Commish if they think a player should have positional eligibility elsewhere.
It’s only 5 games, I get that. However, players really shouldn’t lose eligibility at a primary position due to a quick promotion.
|
|
|
Post by Nationals GM (corkzilla) on Dec 1, 2022 9:54:58 GMT -5
Just imagine, OF Jordan Walker plays all year in the OF for AA and AAA. The last game of the year gets a Sept call up and gets a big league AB as a reward for a great year. The next year because he got 1 AB in MLB he is now only a UTL player to start and his whole previous season is disregarded. SWEET! This is very likely to happen. He’s most likely going to play all year in the OF, when he gets called up, I’ll have him for a half year CI/OF eligible as a gift then the following year he’ll only be OF eligible. If he really is a CI, he’ll get the eligibility back. The only thing that sucks is the UTIL designation but that’s a position so it is what it is until he meets the MLB thresholds since we’re an MLB fantasy league. I had that exact scenario happen with Luis Campusano. He played 1 game at DH in 2020, at the start of 2021 he was UTIL only for a little bit.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Dec 1, 2022 10:45:02 GMT -5
The rule from the rules doc - Position eligibility: 20 games in the previous season or 5 in the current season.
Say we had to do position eligibility manually and the commissioner asked anyone using the exact wording of the rule, how many games in the previous season did Darick Hall play CI, the ONLY CORRECT ANWSER IS 106 and verified easily on many different websites. This is only a fantrax counting issue and I'm glad now multiple managers understand that the Fantrax counting issue sucks. When there are a handful of players that need adjusting that adjustment needs to happen and its not a major lift especially over the course of the months of the preseason.
And yes those early periods matter.
The Red Sox lost the AL East by 2.5 points last year. If they would have gotten a combination of the following they win the division and make the playoffs. 2 more HRs 4 more RBIs 1 more SB .01 increase in BA .01 increase in OBP
This is more than achievable when you have players you can insert in the full lineup instead of having to make them sit because they are only able to be a UTL guy. So having it correct from the start matters, and potentially a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Nationals GM (corkzilla) on Dec 4, 2022 1:47:11 GMT -5
Previous MLB season. MLB isn’t said but it’s implied because we only keep stats from MLB games.
|
|
|
Post by Red Sox GM (Ty) on Dec 5, 2022 10:05:03 GMT -5
I understand its frustrating but to me its too much of a manual process to adjust eligibity. It only takes 5 games to gain in season eligiblity - i would prefer to stick to a hard set a rules rather than judgement calls. This Darick Hall guy played in 42 games last season, to me he's rightfully UT only as thats all he really played. I have more sympathy for a guy like Yainer Diaz because he didnt even get into 20 games last season and couldnt gain eligiblty. He played 3gms at DH and 2 at C. IMO he should have C eligiblity only but when we start making these kinds of judgment calls, I could see the Hall owner being pissed if we chagned for Diaz and not Hall. That is why Id rather stick to Fantrax's rules - even if flawed. I'm in Scott's camp on this one, with a potential caveat. We definitely need less ambiguity and judgement calls, not more. I'm, however, sympathetic to someone who doesn't accrue 20 games played at any position in the prior year and, as such, is only UT eligible. I could be easily convinced that- contingent on an owner bringing it to the LO's attention- players such as this should be manually granted eligibility at the position where they made the most appearances in the prior season (other than UT/DH). In Diaz's case, I'd be inclined to grant him C eligibility. On the other hand and keeping things in perspective, we only have a 5 game hurdle for the current year. So if he's actually going to catch, it shouldn't be a significant problem to wait a week. If we get a loud response on this issue, I'm happy to implement the change I outlined, but, as usual, my default setting would be to maintain the status quo.
|
|
|
Post by Tigers (Dingo) on Dec 5, 2022 11:57:26 GMT -5
I'd rather see cases made for a guy that isn't a full-time DH to have positional eligibility at whatever position they play most, there are really just a handful of guys that DH only that should be UT.
|
|
|
Post by D Backs GM (Tyler) on Dec 5, 2022 12:53:13 GMT -5
the 20/5 rule is for MLB games only. Regardless of what the letter of the law is (and we should clarify it), people fuck around with all kinds of nonsense in the minors. If you're a catcher who can't catch at a MLB level so they have to play you at 1b/DH, you don't get to be a catcher.
|
|
|
Post by Phillies GM (ryanfitzgerald11) on Dec 5, 2022 13:35:54 GMT -5
Yes this absolutely needs clarification. I mean the league rules specifically call out things like what type of contract you need to offer MLB guys vs MiLB based on IP and AB's specifically at the MLB level so when you read the rule and it doesn't state MLB only I'm not sure why its automatically implied. Especially with new(er) owners thats a point that obviously it is easily confused when we have guys coming up and down from the minors all the time. And since GP from the previous year is an easily verifiable stat it removes any kind of judgement call at all.
I still think the easiest thing to do is keep things how they are. And for the guys that qualify for positions based on games that fantrax aren't counting from the previous year its on the manager to email the commissioners office to alert there needs to be an update based on numbers only. This would mean no judgement calls, nothing implied, just following the rules.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2022 19:53:54 GMT -5
I'm with DBacks here. The minor leagues are developmental and less concerned with winning at all costs so guys are used at positions where they are not likely to play as much in MLB (unless they develop). I'm sure the reason the rules don't delineate where the games need to have been played is that minors players don't need a position so when guys need a position (when they are active on a MLB roster and used in our league) they are major leaguers.
It seems this league has been here for quite some time and this does not seem to have been a problem in the past. I'm sure part of that is because many owners have played in other leagues where this is the common practice.
I also see the point some have made about guys who are still rookie eligible and don't have the requisite games from the previous season at the MLB level. Most leagues go with whatever their 'primary' position was in the minors. Once they qualify in MLB, though, that's where they are regardless of where they might have played in the minors.
|
|
|
Post by D Backs GM (Tyler) on Dec 5, 2022 21:27:45 GMT -5
I agree, the issue is that fantrax sucks at updating their "primary position" in the minors. So some people get stuck in purgatory.
|
|
|
Post by Padres GM (Matt) on Dec 8, 2022 10:08:22 GMT -5
Sorry that this is a little off topic from the current discussion- but why do some teams have a higher/lower salary cap than others?
|
|
|
Post by Mets GM (barnstormers) on Dec 8, 2022 10:14:21 GMT -5
Some owners are better looking than others.
|
|
|
Post by D Backs GM (Tyler) on Dec 8, 2022 10:29:47 GMT -5
In order to both reflect real life a bit more and facilitate trading/strategy, some teams have a higher cap and less tags while others have a lower cap but more tags. Like in real life, teams have to operate in different ways. The theory being that the Yankees can't hold onto many FAs while the Rays can keep their prospects hitting FAs by tagging them. However the Tanks can splash the cash a bit more in FA in exchange for this.
This has always been the case in this league but we did "flatten" the tiers a bit a few years back.
|
|
|
Post by D Backs GM (Tyler) on Dec 8, 2022 10:31:31 GMT -5
That being said, we have had champs come from each of the salary brackets, so it seems pretty balanced in fairness to our founders Ty and He Who Shall Never Be Named Again
|
|