2011 Rule Amendments

Any amendments you would like to see added should be placed here where they can be discussed. If you have comments on a certain amendment quote it and then send a reply.

No players on DL after November 1st?

I'd like to see Craig's Rule 5 idea go to a vote. So how many would we protect eachdyear? I'm not sure I like the 25 of 45 that I thought was mentioned. Maybe 30? Any other ideas?

A couple of quick things...

Quote :

4. Roster Limits:
ii. By March 1st, all managers must be in compliance with the 25/20 rule before the waiver wire can be opened.

Why punish everyone if one owner doesn't comply? That's how this reads. Why don't we have a set of escalating punishments for not meeting this coterie on time?

Quote :

10. MiLB Draft /Draft Order
b. Minor league players drafted must be in the minors and have been signed by their major league team prior to January 1 of that season’s draft year.

The way this reads, Twins Japanese signee Nishioka would not be eligible for the MiLB Draft. The wording on this needs changed.

Quote :

11. MiLB Bidding

This needs an end date in the rules. August 30th would be a good date as most minor league league seasons are done come September.

I don't like the Rule 5 idea at all. It would seem to benefit the crappy teams and hurt the stronger rosters. I think the MiLB draft does enough in itself to help the lower teams.

aaronfoster13 wrote:

No players on DL after November 1st?

That would be correct, I will clarify until it becomes common nomenclature.

bryanmurphy9 wrote:

I'd like to see Craig's Rule 5 idea go to a vote. So how many would we protect eachdyear? I'm not sure I like the 25 of 45 that I thought was mentioned. Maybe 30? Any other ideas?

This can be put to a vote, but like other people have mentioned, this does not necessarily work as well as it would in real life baseball.

If not enough players are protected, the rule solely benefits the lesser teams. If too many people are protected, the value of the draft pick may outweigh the actual player. The MiLB draft along with in-season bidding should assist in the lesser teams getting better.

bryanmurphy9 wrote:

A couple of quick things...

Quote :

4. Roster Limits:
ii. By March 1st, all managers must be in compliance with the 25/20 rule before the waiver wire can be opened.

Why punish everyone if one owner doesn't comply? That's how this reads. Why don't we have a set of escalating punishments for not meeting this coterie on time?

Quote :

10. MiLB Draft /Draft Order
b. Minor league players drafted must be in the minors and have been signed by their major league team prior to January 1 of that season’s draft year.

The way this reads, Twins Japanese signee Nishioka would not be eligible for the MiLB Draft. The wording on this needs changed.

Quote :

11. MiLB Bidding

This needs an end date in the rules. August 30th would be a good date as most minor league league seasons are done come September.

4. I am working on the punishments right now, but I can adjust the wording.

10. This is the way our draft has always been, international players signed after January 1st have not been eligible. Unless I am mistaken and you can provide an example, otherwise we can vote to define who is and is not eligible.

11. Previously it was the end of the season. We can go with the final day of the regular season before our playoffs begin.

smk1363 wrote:

I don't like the Rule 5 idea at all. It would seem to benefit the crappy teams and hurt the stronger rosters. I think the MiLB draft does enough in itself to help the lower teams.

^^ - Agree

10. MiLB Draft /Draft Order
b. Minor league players drafted must be in the minors and have been signed by their major league team prior to January 1 of that season’s draft year.[/quote]

The way this reads, Twins Japanese signee Nishioka would not be eligible for the MiLB Draft. The wording on this needs changed.

Quote :

10. This is the way our draft has always been, international players signed after January 1st have not been eligible. Unless I am mistaken and you can provide an example, otherwise we can vote to define who is and is not eligible.

No, I am saying it says "Minor League players drafted must be in the minors", well some International Free Agents like Nishioka are signed to Major League Deals and never subjected to the Minors. The wording of this needs changed, because one could make this out to say that guys like that are not eligible when they should be. Nishioka was signed before January 1st... so he'd be eligible.

ThunderBalls wrote:

smk1363 wrote:

I don't like the Rule 5 idea at all. It would seem to benefit the crappy teams and hurt the stronger rosters. I think the MiLB draft does enough in itself to help the lower teams.

^^ - Agree

110% Agree....

I hate the Rule 5 idea, because I think it's unfair to be put in this late into the league.

I also don't like the Nov. 1 idea, because I believe that's too early. I think the date should be up for vote.

The King Maker wrote:

I also don't like the Nov. 1 idea, because I believe that's too early. I think the date should be up for vote.

Too late for what reason? All teams would need to cut down coming off the regular season would be their DL spots. Do I need to make that more clear?

I think Nov. 1st is too early, not too late. I think one more month would be appropriate, because with injuries carrying into next year, I think there should be more time to determine if someone is getting back or not next year before being forced to cut him. I simply want the date up for vote, I don't disagree with the notion of the rule.

The King Maker wrote:

I think Nov. 1st is too early, not too late. I think one more month would be appropriate, because with injuries carrying into next year, I think there should be more time to determine if someone is getting back or not next year before being forced to cut him. I simply want the date up for vote, I don't disagree with the notion of the rule.

That's not the point, the DL spots were never meant for Off-Season use. The DL spots are there for In-Season use, and once the season concludes us owner should have to make decisions to get the players out of those spots. It was never meant as an extra spot where for example, you could carry Ben Sheets after a mid-season elbow surgery and stash him on the DL until December to see how his recovery is going. Injuries are apart of Fantasy and it's a strategic decision whether to keep or let go of a player that ends the year on the DL. Some times holding an injured player on your active roster pays off and sometimes it hurts you.

Here are my two amendment proposals for an Active Roster Cut-Date & a MiLB Roster Cut-Date; I've also posted this as a response to Jammy in another topic but thought it'd be better served here.

My proposal was to have the Active Roster cut-date on February 1st and the Minor League Draft in the middle of February. The Active Roster cut-date on February 1st would allow all Fantasy Football leagues to be over, all MLB Free Agents to have signed, and all Prospect publications to be out. This should give everyone the opportunity to obtain any information they need to make any roster decisions. The Roster Cut-Date would include having no more than 25 players on your Active Roster and meeting the Lineup Regulations. I think at some point in the off-season, everyone needs to be playing on the same "25 man active roster/ Legal Lineup/ No DL spots" playing field.

Also, my proposal for a Minor League Cut-Date was this... a week before the Draft Date you have a Cut-Date. Where if for example you have a full MiLB Roster of 20 players, and you have your own 3 Draft Picks (1st Rd, 2nd Rd, 3rd Rd). Then you have to make a decision, you can cut 3 MiLB Players, and use all 3 Draft Picks or any combination of this. Point is, this cut-date would make sure no one has more than 20 of a combination of players and/or picks. Having this cut-date a week before the draft would allow owners a chance to trade any extra picks or players if they so choose. If someone has 20 stud prospects where they don't want to forgeit their 1st and 2nd Rd. Picks without getting anything in return, those picks could still be a very valuable trade asset from the end of the World Series till the MiLB Cut-Date in Mid-February.

What does everyone think? I hope that more clearly outlines my ideas.

I'm not in favor of rearranging the divisions, but if we do I'd like to propose a "Division Draft" where we'd take the 2010 division winners and draft teams to their division. Give the Divsion Winner with the highest record the first overall choice in a snake style type draft. With this proposal I think divisions should stand for 2-3 years, then be re-drafted. If we implement this, it shouldn't be changed every year.

I propose sticking all the division winners from the previous year into the same division this year.

aaronfoster13 wrote:

I propose sticking all the division winners from the previous year into the same division this year.

I doubt that would fly, but if there is a rearrangement it would probably have to be random draw or top 4/bottom 4 picking their divisions since all other options would result in the current system or one of those options just mentioned.

I do have another proposal for Statistical Cat change I would like a little discussion on.

Changing our current batting stats from HR, R, RBI, BB, RBI, SB to HR, R, RBI, OBP, SB-CS, and Field %.

Smaller changes could be made or a different Cat could be inserted.

Knuckleball wrote:

OBP, SB-CS, and Field %.

i like all of these... i could see Field % being a problem for some because then we have to take away the UTL spot (its unfair if someone uses a DH in that spot).. also, we didnt build our teams with field % in mind.. BUT i think it could be an interesting stat and i'd definitely be willing to make changes for it

Knuckleball wrote:

Changing our current batting stats from HR, R, RBI, BB, RBI, SB to HR, R, RBI, OBP, SB-CS, and Fielding %.

If it's not broke, then don't fix it. Almost all fantasy leagues use these standard settings, they do so because it's the easiest and most simple stats to go by. It's just making the categories more complex when they don't need to be. I'm curious knuckleball, why do you think this change would make the league better? I am with Jake though that the Fielding % category just makes no sense for our league. One, for the reason he brought up with the DH's in the UT spot and owners have not drafted nor planned for this. Keep it simple!

aaronfoster13 wrote:

I propose sticking all the division winners from the previous year into the same division this year.

You'd be the only one voting for that one!

Do we have some way to track who's voted in the polls? I think it's a little ridiculous that some polls only have 10-12 votes after almost two weeks. How hard is it to check out the forum once a week and vote? This is too make our league better peoplel, it's your duty as a member of this league to vote on topics. If one can't take the 10 secs to vote on a couple topics then maybe we as a league need to rethink their status as a member of the league.

I don't like fielding % for a few reasons. It would change the value of some players and we've have the DH/Util spot - and what if we put a player into the DH/Util spot? I'd assume that's a freebie on F%, but it just seems like it can get messy. Plus, it's a pretty shitty defensive statistic and isn't an indicator of a player's defensive value. DRS or UZR/150 would be much better, with DRS (essentially +/- if you're unfamiliar) reigning supreme since it's basic. Of course, we're not going to get that in a CBS league and I don't really think it's necessary for a fantastic league anyway.

I do like OBP and SB-CS. There is something to be said for having a successful stealing percentage. A green light and racking up steals is one thing, but if we're using batting average as an indicator of a batter's success then the same logic applies to a basestealer. The rate at which a player records an out should still be measured even if it's on the basepaths.

SB% would be tricky. If I go 10 SB, 3 CS in one week that's good for ~77%. If my opponent goes 4-for-5, obviously, 80% and 80>77. I'd lose, but is 4-for-5 really better than 10/3? I don't think so. It's a little more contentious at least. If it's SB-CS, then I'd win 7-3, which is a better indicator for fantasy purposes.

And I like OBP just because it's simply because OBP rules.