-
Never mind the Duda thing. I just examined it again and that was correctly ruled on.
-
Not Bour. I meant Duda.
-
The two versions of this rule, Survey Monkey text and how it was cited on the message board, has affected this year's race. Had I known the Survey Monkey version was operational, I would have bid on and reacquired Crawford on May 27th after having cut him on April 23rd. P&E Schimpf was the only team to have bid on him for $1. I actually didn't bid on him because I thought this was a total ban.
-
Clarity problems with the rule as written in Survey Monkey: 1) It doesn't specify how long a player has to be kept prior to re-cutting him. 2) It doesn't even say if re-cutting a player is allowed. 3) It doesn't say anything about adjusting the salary back up to previous salary as was done with Bour.
-
I went back and reviewed the messages, and I see where the confusion is coming from. But the rule itself seems clear to me. I will personally refrain from reauctioning any guys I previously cut for the remainder of the season, even though I don’t see that as required by the plain language of the rule itself.
-
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/NMQ96SV
-
Go back and look at the survey monkey.
-
Dave, can you please send a linked source to that version of the rule. Thanks.
-
The rule was meant to tackle a very specific problem—reauctioning and immediately recutting players. That’s what we voted on. The rule we voted on doesn’t say anything about prohibiting owners from reacquiring players after 30 days at a lower salary, with the intention of keeping them. If you want to propose that as a rule, we can take it up in the off-season.
-
So this again? I'm siding with D-Ayes on this. I'm under the impression we are not to be re-auctioning players we've previously cut in the same season. It was gaming the system and frankly, I ain't got time for that. What we've done in the other salary league I play in is to allow you reacquiring a player, but his salary cannot be lower than it was when you cut him. That would be acceptable to me. But that's not what I thought we voted on.
-
In other words, of course you can reauction a player, you can’t just do so with the intention of cutting him for cap room.
-
So no ambiguity. Case closed.
-
I went back and checked the rule we voted on: “should we prohibit reauctioning players and cutting them for cap room.”
-
Dave, have you read the discussions on pages 11 and 12? There is no ambiguity in what we voted on. We voted to prevent reacquisition of a cut player. Period. Please show me anything in the rule allowing any reacquisition of a cut player under any circumstance. I tried to make this rule more liberal but you ignored my comment on page 12.
-
Well, like I said, if absolutely anyone else sees it the way you claim to have, then we can discuss.
-
... that need interpretation.
-
Click on "All messages", then "Prev messages" at the bottom of the page, and then change the URL from "1" to "11" and "12". You'll see the entire discussion on this rule change. It all happened before you joined the league, WD. Nor do I necessarily expect every owner to remember the exact wording of rule changes. That's why we need all this stuff written down somewhere easily accessible. I prefer solidly written rules rather than ones that need i
-
The 30-day no-reacquisition period is referenced in the rules (linked above). From Section V (g.): The team that dropped the player may not nominate or bid on the player until 30 days after the drop date, unless the keeper deadline occurs in between the drop date and the player's new auction. And again, this is enforced by the Ottoneu web tools. I don't see anything about a total ban on reacquisitions.
-
There's nothing loose about the wording. Does anyone else see anything loose about the wording? And loose rules suck in fantasy baseball. And I tried to insert modified language the rule and was ignored.
-
If anyone other than Di-Eyes understood the rule that way, then i can reconsider. But, from my perspective, you’re taking my loose paraphrase of the rule out of context.
-
Everyone understood the point of that rule. It was to prohibit reauctioning and recutting. It’s not a change and not a tweak. You can reauctioning a player if your intent is to keep him for the foreseeable future.
-
For what it's worth, on page 12, I made a suggestion to allow re-acquisition of a dropped player as long as he was held for 30 days, but my suggestion was ignored by the commissioner and the other 10 teams. The outright ban was the rule we voted on.
-
I don't mind the in season tweaks but on the 2nd day of this season we were told that absolutely no modifications of any rule changes would be accepted.
-
There were no modifications voted on. This was an outright ban, no exceptions. Please refer to pages 11 & 12 of the message archive for the entirety of the discussion.
-
Dave, this is your exact statement upon completion of the rule chg vote: "Hi Everyone--the votes are in! For the upcoming season, we'll implement the arbitration coupon system subject to the rules circulated by Wildman. If anyone wants to propose any tweaks, please do so in the next week. I'm personally fine with it, as/is. We'll also ban re-auctioning players you previously cut. This is mostly going to be on the honor system, because I'm not aware of any way to formally prohibit the practi
-
To be fair: I believe the Duda thing should be the rule. I suggest if you cut a player, you should have to reacquire them at least at their previous salary. I cut Paddack at $1 and rebid at $3, so if that won I would obviously had to have paid $3
-
Sorry, yes: I assumed I could reacquire any player at the original salary.
-
Shaw added Bader at the draft for $1 and cut him on May 10. Ottoneu would have kept him from reacquiring Bader from May 11 to June 9.
-
The part about the 30 days is automated by Ottoneu. Go to the player page of any player you recently cut, and you'll see a message: You cut Player X in the past 30 days. If you try to bid on said player you won't be able to.
-
The Duda readjustment was because he was immediately re-cut, though it was obviously an honest mistake.
-
There’s no salary readjustment, and you can have even re-cut him if you do so in good faith, after a reasonable period after picking him up again.
-
Only rule is that you can’t immediately re-cut a guy you previously owned and cut.
-
I guess I wasn't following along when Duda was reacquired so I wasn't aware that there was an adjustment to the rule.
-
In this case, Bader IS at his original salary. It seems odd to ban an owner from requiring a player for an entire season if he cuts him once. I understand the cap circumvention stuff, but I don't think that's the case here
-
I believe he can, provided Bader's previous salary is reinstated in full. I did this with Lucas Duda, and the commish manually reset his original salary. There's a 30-day period where you can't reacquire a player you cut (the system restricts you from bidding). I may have looked into this a few times.
-
Shaw, you can't reacquire Bader. You cut him previously.
-
Shaw From Shi-Nola's trade block has been updated!
-
Always thought FIP didn't mean much for relievers, but for the record, Trevor Hildenberger's FIP was 3.83 going into the day.
-
4 Baggers's trade block has been updated!
4 Baggers on
June 29, 2018 10:36 PM
-
Whirling Darvish's trade block has been updated!
-
yeah $5 or $6 for a couple guys that aren't likely to be a factor until at least late next year is a big gamble. be interesting to see
-
Paddack probably has about as much chance as Mize does of debuting by the end of 2019. They're both "older" at least.
-
You are not dumb he is going to be pretty dang good PS I bid 5 bucks best of luck Chuck
4 Baggers on
June 29, 2018 12:29 AM
-
That said it's probably dumb to bid that much, but I was annoyed after losing out on Mize.
-
He came back and struck out 79 in 46 1/3 IP in High A. It's neato.
-
Of course, I cut Paddack to shuffle my roster with the intention of picking him back up, and all of a sudden he's on every midseason prospect list.
-
Same reason I think I didn't pick him up: a subconscious belief that nobody named Scooter can be sustainably good at the major league level
-
Esco was a good get. He was good for me down the stretch in '17. Along with Gennett, I have no idea why I didn't keep both of 'em or reacquire them.
-
And the rest of the league is about 1,000 points or more behind no. 50.
-
for those of you scoring at home: P&E is #1. I'm slogging along at #17.
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages