LGP Fantasy Baseball League

[Idoit40fans]

Thats unfortunate circumstances for someone. How is it any different from having 3 or 4 guys injured in May with limited DL spots? We have 22 man rosters

[Troy Loney]

That's why I think the solution is to just reduce buyout years. Maybe 8? That way you'r stuck only buying out 1 year deals on WW pickups, and the only way your able to eat crappy contracts is if you do nothing all year on the waiver wire.

[Idoit40fans]

That makes sense to me. 8 is good. Basically 1.33 a month.

[Kraftster]

Thats unfortunate circumstances for someone. How is it any different from having 3 or 4 guys injured in May with limited DL spots? We have 22 man rosters

Well, I am in support of more (unlimited?) DL spots.

But, we've made the decision to limit it to 2 spots. So, it is significantly different. The 3 or 4 DL guys at least have the possibility of being placed on DL because their teams will assign them to the MLB Disabled List. The unfortunate circumstance in your scenario is created by the league's DL spot limits. The unfortunate circumstance in my scenario is created by a gap in what happens in MLB and what can happen in fantasy (i.e., we can't expand rosters in Yahoo!).

[Kraftster]

I support a free year reduction. 8 sounds good.

[Idoit40fans]

No the unfortunate circumstance in your scenario is that the player got hurt and you didn't have a viable replacement.

[Troy Loney]

Thats unfortunate circumstances for someone. How is it any different from having 3 or 4 guys injured in May with limited DL spots? We have 22 man rosters

Well, I am in support of more (unlimited?) DL spots.

But, we've made the decision to limit it to 2 spots. So, it is significantly different. The 3 or 4 DL guys at least have the possibility of being placed on DL because their teams will assign them to the MLB Disabled List. The unfortunate circumstance in your scenario is created by the league's DL spot limits. The unfortunate circumstance in my scenario is created by a gap in what happens in MLB and what can happen in fantasy (i.e., we can't expand rosters in Yahoo!).

Well...injuries kill people's seasons all the time. I understand there are some other issues with the DL option, but really I don't see any reason to change rules because of some injury issues. No one is saying you shouldn't have dumped teixera there, if your going for it, i don't think "good of the league" type thinking is necessary.

[Idoit40fans]

The same kind of stuff happens in football when there is no advantage to resting players in Fantasy and in hockey where you have no reason to give goalies a rest.

[Kraftster]

No the unfortunate circumstance in your scenario is that the player got hurt and you didn't have a viable replacement.

What? I replace him with a bench player and then who do I replace that bench player with? I don't. I run one roster spot short the rest of the year for the good of the league. Its idiotic to allow such a scenario to occur. I'm convinced you are just burying your head in the sand on this to defend a position, which I'm not even sure why you are so married to -- I don't think there's any way we prevent you from keeping Teixeira.

The odds of the rule even being implicated in a given year are probably slim. It might happen once every 3 years. And if the next time it happens the player is Mike Trout? The rule hurts almost nothing and stands to protect against the free addition (weakening of draft class) of a marquee player. The only person that wins by not having a rule is the random team that has a stud fall in their lap.

[Idoit40fans]

No, i'm thinking back to when I had 5 players injured earlier in the season and had to just sit them there on my bench. I know there are other scenarios that people just have to deal with because I dealt with them. I have repeatedly said that I don't care if I have Tex or not. I do not want this rule in place, its illogical.

[Kraftster]

i don't think "good of the league" type thinking is necessary.

I guess that is where we differ then.

But I do want to memorialize this moment where Kraftster the socialist is being told that he is having too altruistic an outlook.

[Idoit40fans]

Not sure if we have different innings limits for relievers, but if we did change it to appearances or something, how is that affected in the case of Chapman? Closer last year, will be a starter this year, and is under 200 IP.

[Troy Loney]

Not sure if we have different innings limits for relievers, but if we did change it to appearances or something, how is that affected in the case of Chapman? Closer last year, will be a starter this year, and is under 200 IP.

I'm pretty sure it was an appearance limit. I want to say 50 or 60. It was based off the number of appearances a reliever has in one season.

[Idoit40fans]

So 137 appearances, 135 innings, we're saying that he's an expired rookie then?

[Troy Loney]

Yeah.

[Kraftster]

In my head I was thinking that we settled on 75 appearances, but I'll go back and look to see if I can find it. I know I drafted a RP with 58 appearances as a rookie last year, so it was not 50.

I agree with that decision, though. I believe Kicksave already faced the same issue with Feliz, but I could be wrong.

[Idoit40fans]

Hopefully he starts in the majors then. Also, I get Broxton back to relevance. Wooooo.

[Kraftster]

Haha, can't believe you stuck with him. It worked, though.

[Idoit40fans]

He was helpful most of last year too. I was gonna get rid of him last year, but it looked like he was gonna be the #1 in KC.

[Mr. Colby]

Ok I'm with kraftster on the idoit rule...

Either expand the DL or make the rule to disallow the signing.

Seems a fair rule to compromise here would be Unlimited DL spots but only 2 DL replacements can be free agents. The rest must come from farm.

Additionally in September if a guy gets injured and isn't DLd in the MLB, the owner should be able to DL him if he can provide proof that player will be out a while.

Wasting a roster spot in the final month of the year due to MLB roster expansion negating DL is just dumb.

To meet what idoit is sayibg, we add the above unlimited dl rule

[Mr. Colby]

Also 8 buyouts is too few... do 10 with the ability to carry over only the first 8 to the offseason (I.e. I can use 10 in season, but if I use 8 or more I have none for offseason...)

Example: 7 in season plus 1 offseason

[Idoit40fans]

I think 8 is plenty. If we do unlimited DL, then 6(1 per month) would be good enough. The purpose of the FBY is to force people to draft a good team.

[beerman]

I think the rule was either 70 or 75 appearance on the relievers..

I'd rather add an extra DL spot or two than a rule to prohibit someone from signing somebody multi years if you drop them, but I'm also fine with it the way it is.

[beerman]

I have quite a lot of 1B and/or OF eligible guys if anyone is interested. Allen Craig, Brandon Belt and Lucas Duda all losing farm eligibility. Joey Votto and Josh Willingham have one year left, Justin Upton and Carlos Gonzalez have two..

Plenty of catching as well, Weiters has one year removing and both Wilin Rosario and Salvy Perez sneak in under 500 ab's and can remain farm eligible. d'Arnaud also there and further away.

[Loaf31]

If a guy is on LTIR, does that eat a year of his contract?