-
I have to go with Walker and Bour.
-
I second Dark Knight about the polls, great idea!
Slow Worm on
March 21, 2017 11:38 PM
-
Albert, you do know that Morton didn't actually BECOME Doc Halladay, right? 😂
Earl's Pearls on
March 21, 2017 11:20 PM
-
PS you guys are gonna look a damn fool when Morton puts up 1400 points.
-
Bour. Coming from the guy who has Werth mind you
-
I like this leaguewide vote thing. Thunder, we should have a leaguewide poll every week. Builds camaraderie.
Earl's Pearls on
March 21, 2017 11:10 PM
-
I'll take Walker easily and Bour not so easily.
⚾️Otto Five⚾️ on
March 21, 2017 11:04 PM
-
Wow. I vote Walker. Thunder and I have a similar bet on Bour vs. Werth, but we never discussed stakes.
Earl's Pearls on
March 21, 2017 10:59 PM
-
Nay
-
Thunder and I are wagering whether T Walker or Morton put up more points this year. The stakes is Popeyes. As long as we're voting on shit, what do you think?
-
Aye
-
Aye Papi.
-
Nay.
-
I'll vote aye. I see the gray area where a starter can be placed in a RP spot and actually get points if for some reason he enters as a reliever, but I think the intent of the rule is clear as written. Whatever the league vote is, it's not going to bother me.
-
Also, I can do my three for your one types of deals to clear roster spots.
-
Aye.
-
In the meantime, if anyone wants to offer me some RP of various levels in exchange for prospects or other players of comparable value, I am listening. When I last updated my block on 2/25, I indicated that I was on the lookout for "elite RP." Not going to just dump off players with actual value for terrible RPs though.
-
AYE. With the caveat that there is no need to start players who do not have games that day (i.e., having 5 RP is a valid roster because all 5 can be filled, but if 3 have the day off, those slots can be empty).
-
OK, I've had the opportunity to read the posts- thanks to everyone. I asked Niv and he refused to jump in and offer a decree by saying that he does not jump into individual league decisions. I then asked for a clarification of what the rule means by "should" and I have yet to receive a response (and I am not exactly expecting one given his previous statement). Although I still believe that I am within the rules, it appears that the league will be able to vote and I will respect the res
-
NAY. Might I add that regardless of the votes, a pitcher that starts can only accumulate points if he's in the SP slot and a pitcher that does not start may only accumulate points if placed in a RP slot.
-
Please vote on the following issue as a league.
Those in favor of filling all starting roster spots with actual players that play those positions vote AYE those who oppose vote NAY. (Ex RP plays in RP, SP in SP).
Thunder Gone on
March 21, 2017 6:31 PM
-
Runs, that's too arcane. Arm wrestling, at least.
-
Who Has the Runs?'s trade block has been updated!
-
Nothing a little Rochambeau can't settle.
-
Nothing. But he'd be able to fill the starting spots. That's what is at debate here.
Thunder Gone on
March 21, 2017 4:51 PM
-
But also I think the rule is aimed at limiting dormant teams rather than people who are looking for unorthodox ways of building their team for the future. I think History makes a valid point by saying that he could just put SP in RP spots. If an owner wants to give up points in order to build their team, shouldn't they be allowed to do that? What's stopping him from rostering 5 RP and only starting 1 RP?
-
If the rule said must instead of should, there would have to be a software coded solution requiring it. Due to the nature of coding and how that would work, there would be a ton of time put into something with very little return as it's really only Niv working on it. Instead of must, should merely expects everyone to abide by what is literally written into the rules of Ottoneu. This shouldn't be this difficult to understand.
-
If you don't want to kick him out then don't kick him out. I think things probably escalated when he was threatened with being kicked out before he was able to even explain his case, which is at the very least defensible judging by the wording in the rules. At the same time, I think History should also budge a little on his stance so we can figure out what's fair for everyone.
-
Again... I do NOT want to kick him out. I asked him to fix his roster. He told me he did not have to nor would he. That where it escalated.
Thunder Gone on
March 21, 2017 4:22 PM
-
Yeah, that wouldn't be right to kick him out.
-
All of that is fine. I don't particularly care which way it goes. But I agree that kicking him out of the league is not the solution.
-
As commish looking over everyone teams, seeing that 11 or 12 owners can meet the expectation of rule a, I decided that I needed to ask him to fix it before the season. I don't feel that is too difficult of a task. I took into consideration lots of Ottoneu/Slack minds on this issue.
Thunder Gone on
March 21, 2017 4:08 PM
-
Re: Runs...that is true, but it's still Thunder's league. The way I see it, it's not a big deal either way. But if there is a dispute on the interpretation of the rule, tie goes to the commissioner.
-
Technically, by my count, he has 26 MLB players. Does the rule specify that the 22 MLB players must represent the 22 slots available in the starting lineup?
-
So the central issue here is that Thunder's interpretation of a rule contradicts History's interpretation of the same rule, and I can't say that either one is entirely right or wrong. So the main point here should be defining that rule, or deciding who/what defines that rule. I think that, as History pointed out, if the format allows you to do it, and if he doesn't have a notification saying that his roster is invalid, then his roster is not invalid.
-
At no point have I made any statement about you being a bad owner. I asked you to have a valid lineup with RP's filled. Not a lot to ask for.
Thunder Gone on
March 21, 2017 4:00 PM
-
Have a safe drive, History.
-
Anyways, I've got a one hour drive in front of me here, but I'll definitely check in before my night class.
-
I just want to have fun in this league, man. I think I've shown over the last number of years that I am an attentive owner, even when getting 200 offers from Sanchize each month! I've taken the time to accumulate talent such as Kris Bryant (trade), Corey Seager (trade), Chris Archer (trade), among others. I think I've done alright and hopefully the other owners can back me on that.
-
Does it not mean anything to you that I can put Chris Sale into an RP slot, yet I cannot put Miguel Cabrera at SS?
-
I can get you 22 starting players, buddy
-
All teams need to have 22 MLB starting players throughout the year. As stated in rule a.
Thunder Gone on
March 21, 2017 3:54 PM
-
Like I said earlier, I can literally slot an arm like Jose Berrios into my RP slots on my own lineup page. If that's what you want, I will do it
-
Again, this is a tactic that I and others have used in this league and others in the past. Is it the best tactic for me to win this year? No. Is it a smart tactic for future success? Yes
-
I kindly asked him to abide by the rule. He quickly told me that I was wrong. As commissioner I need to keep all teams within the rules. Just as I had to have Sanchize cut a couple guys last year as he was over the limit for players and cap but was out of the race so didn't care about points. Not an easy position to be in as commish. Just want to be on top of the league so all is fair. Thanks
Thunder Gone on
March 21, 2017 3:51 PM
-
I think part of the idea behind Ottoneu is that it's a lot like building a team in real life. If you aren't going to compete, you can stock up for the future. We do not have the burden of ticket sales to contend with here, so I think if someone wants to rebuild, they should be able to do it. What if someone started the season with 5 RP, fell out of contention, and then sold them off?
-
The Commish doesn't have the ability to boot whomever he chooses. What's to say that he doesn't Schrodinger in August because he's leading the standings? Now where do you draw THAT line?
-
Here's the thing, fellows. I agree with Schrodinger's compromise idea in theory, but in practice, it's Thunder's league, and his ask is reasonable. It's also reasonable, I think, for History to see where the league stands on the issue. Seems to me that it's not a big deal, and definitely not worth fighting over.
-
It's not being misinterpreted. Again, read the conversation on slack that is about this exact thing. If you are intentionally skirting a rule, logically the commish can punish that via whatever felt necessary.
-
I don't blame him for posting about here and making it a league matter. It's a gray area in the rule books. Officially, I don't care about the makeup of his pitching staff as long as he can reasonably get to 1500 innings, which he definitely can. Booting him isn't a fair solution. If anything, don't let him make anymore transactions until he reaches 5 RP. That handicaps him to eventually comply.
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages