***OFFICIAL*** FFA MLB Draft (2 Viewers)

[Mr. Pickles]

4-3 win after a 9th inning rally over King Kelly's All Stars.  Rudnicki, WTF did you do to this team?

Question! Why does this "crappy" team have pitchers who are 19-11, 16-5, and 15-6, as well as a guy with a 1.41 ERA and a 9.65 SO/9 innings ratio?THAT'S NOT WHY YOU'RE HERE!

What the ####--Aaron's team has that? Oh good god...Cappy? It happened, Cappy.

It soooo did.

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

 

[Politician Spock]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Rose played 500+ games at 5 different positions. Where woud he qualify under these rules?

 

[UCONN]

and good game Spock. Tough loss. Mantle continues his slump, . Atleast we got a win. I'll be very happy if we can go 2-2.

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Rose played 500+ games at 5 different positions. Where woud he qualify under these rules?

Rose in particular is a unique case. He could be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, 3B, OF, or without any positional requirements (which would give the drafter the best odds of a great batting year, but little control over what position he ended up at).

 

[Politician Spock]

4-3 win after a 9th inning rally over King Kelly's All Stars.  Rudnicki, WTF did you do to this team?

Question! Why does this "crappy" team have pitchers who are 19-11, 16-5, and 15-6, as well as a guy with a 1.41 ERA and a 9.65 SO/9 innings ratio?THAT'S NOT WHY YOU'RE HERE!

look at the ERAs, they aren't good... they just "won" 'cuz they were on offensive teams...

3.49, 4.09 and 4.23 ERAs for those starters, and Schiraldi's numbers are better than most everyone else's closers sans the large amount of saves. These guys aren't slouches on the mound.

 

[Capella]

"Ouch."

If you really believed in what you're saying, you wouldn't need all this.You know as well as we all do, Cappy--it's time to take yourself out of the running for this one. I personally think you will enjoy being free to compete unfetterd by questioning of the motivations and effects of your decisions. Your team might really turn out good in such a setup.

Only if you teach me how to sim-fish.Will you teach me how to sim-fish?

I can't imagine it will be of issue in the upcoming draft. It's hard to complain about the commish's tactics when he has recused himself from participation.Don't worry so much about it, Cappy. You've done a good job on this one, more or less, and there's a lot of time left in it--till mid-April, at least. And I'm sure other forms of power and validation will present themselves to you while I'm commishing the second league.

I have a few reasons to back Harrier:1. the same person shouldn't commish twice in a row...2. if at all possible, the commish shouldn't play... if someone is willing to not play, they are the commish...3. Capella deserves the time off, he's done a GREAT job with this... even though, like has been said, I might have done things different, I think he has done a good job...

@ LB taking this seriously....

:rotflmao:

 

[10993]

4-3 win after a 9th inning rally over King Kelly's All Stars. Rudnicki, WTF did you do to this team?

Question! Why does this "crappy" team have pitchers who are 19-11, 16-5, and 15-6, as well as a guy with a 1.41 ERA and a 9.65 SO/9 innings ratio?THAT'S NOT WHY YOU'RE HERE!

look at the ERAs, they aren't good... they just "won" 'cuz they were on offensive teams...

3.49, 4.09 and 4.23 ERAs for those starters, and Schiraldi's numbers are better than most everyone else's closers sans the large amount of saves. These guys aren't slouches on the mound.

These are good players, very solid players that could contribute on many of our teams.

 

[10993]

"Ouch."

If you really believed in what you're saying, you wouldn't need all this.You know as well as we all do, Cappy--it's time to take yourself out of the running for this one. I personally think you will enjoy being free to compete unfetterd by questioning of the motivations and effects of your decisions. Your team might really turn out good in such a setup.

Only if you teach me how to sim-fish.Will you teach me how to sim-fish?

I can't imagine it will be of issue in the upcoming draft. It's hard to complain about the commish's tactics when he has recused himself from participation.Don't worry so much about it, Cappy. You've done a good job on this one, more or less, and there's a lot of time left in it--till mid-April, at least. And I'm sure other forms of power and validation will present themselves to you while I'm commishing the second league.

I have a few reasons to back Harrier:1. the same person shouldn't commish twice in a row...2. if at all possible, the commish shouldn't play... if someone is willing to not play, they are the commish...3. Capella deserves the time off, he's done a GREAT job with this... even though, like has been said, I might have done things different, I think he has done a good job...

@ LB taking this seriously....

:rotflmao:

You'd do well to do the same.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

'61 Roger Maris is available as a FA. Can the Cellar Dwellers pick him up? He only hit .269.TIA

 

[larry_boy_44]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

 

[UCONN]

4-3 win after a 9th inning rally over King Kelly's All Stars.  Rudnicki, WTF did you do to this team?

Question! Why does this "crappy" team have pitchers who are 19-11, 16-5, and 15-6, as well as a guy with a 1.41 ERA and a 9.65 SO/9 innings ratio?THAT'S NOT WHY YOU'RE HERE!

look at the ERAs, they aren't good... they just "won" 'cuz they were on offensive teams...

3.49, 4.09 and 4.23 ERAs for those starters, and Schiraldi's numbers are better than most everyone else's closers sans the large amount of saves. These guys aren't slouches on the mound.

those teams should be filled w/ <.250 hitters, <10 HR hitters, >300 AB hitters>5.0 ERA pitchers, >200 innings pitchersThat would do the trick.

 

[Politician Spock]

Rose in particular is a unique case.

How many unique cases are you prepared to handle.Note: I'll vote for a non-owner commish before I vote for an owner commish. Not that I think Capella has done a bad job (he has done great), I just like the idea of the commish not having a team. But I think the rules you are proposing for selection of seasons is too similar to what we had this season. The draft will be much more interesting if you could hit the jackpot or bite the dust on some picks, as well as possibly be rewarded for taking guys who had over a decade of consistent years but didn't have peak great years.

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

 

[UCONN]

Curse Reversing Idiots 6 10 0 Larry_Boy_44's team 6 11 0 Bottom 9: Larry_Boy_44's teamSam Rice grounds out. Charlie Gehringer grounds out. Moises Alou hits a single. [1] Frank Thomas gets walked. [12] Dave Winfield gets walked. [123] Pitching change: John Hiller '68 is replaced by Doug Jones '88. Ron Santo gets walked. Alou scores from third. Curse Reversing Idiots 6 10 0 Larry_Boy_44's team 7 12 0 "Ouch"

 

[10993]

Rose in particular is a unique case.

How many unique cases are you prepared to handle.Note: I'll vote for a non-owner commish before I vote for an owner commish. Not that I think Capella has done a bad job (he has done great), I just like the idea of the commish not having a team. But I think the rules you are proposing for selection of seasons is too similar to what we had this season. The draft will be much more interesting if you could hit the jackpot or bite the dust on some picks, as well as possibly be rewarded for taking guys who had over a decade of consistent years but didn't have peak great years.

There won't be much problem, even with "unique" cases. For a player to be eligible to be drafted specifcally for one position, he must have had 3+ years in which he played that position for the majority of the season's games. If he is drafted for one position in particular, only those seasons in which the majority of his games were played at that position will be in play in the dice roll.There's no exceptions necessary to this. The only tradeoff is accepting that you could have a worse batting year in order to guarantee yourself a particular position, which seems a fair deal.

 

[Koya]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Paul Molitor

 

[larry_boy_44]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

so in other words we need to hope the dice roll gives us a complete team and not 8 2B guys??I think we should have our own eligibility for where guys are eligible...

and say 100 or more games and we can play a guys there...

if we go by the season's stats, we are in trouble... especailly on WIS...

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Paul Molitor

Same rules will apply to him as Rose and Franco.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Rose in particular is a unique case.

How many unique cases are you prepared to handle.Note: I'll vote for a non-owner commish before I vote for an owner commish. Not that I think Capella has done a bad job (he has done great), I just like the idea of the commish not having a team. But I think the rules you are proposing for selection of seasons is too similar to what we had this season. The draft will be much more interesting if you could hit the jackpot or bite the dust on some picks, as well as possibly be rewarded for taking guys who had over a decade of consistent years but didn't have peak great years.

There won't be much problem, even with "unique" cases. For a player to be eligible to be drafted specifcally for one position, he must have had 3+ years in which he played that position for the majority of the season's games. If he is drafted for one position in particular, only those seasons in which the majority of his games were played at that position will be in play in the dice roll.There's no exceptions necessary to this. The only tradeoff is accepting that you could have a worse batting year in order to guarantee yourself a particular position, which seems a fair deal.

what if we draft a guy like Rose so we could play him at all 4 positions, since he COULD have played them any year he played...

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

so in other words we need to hope the dice roll gives us a complete team and not 8 2B guys??I think we should have our own eligibility for where guys are eligible...

and say 100 or more games and we can play a guys there...

if we go by the season's stats, we are in trouble... especailly on WIS...

Of course someone can choose what position to play their players at, but they cannot choose to have the year in which that position was played, because that will have the effect of allowing, for example, Mel Ott to be chosen only at 3B, and leaving no chance for a lower batting season to be a possibility, which is the entire point of the dice roll.

 

[UCONN]

Uh, can we go back to ridiculing LB for any of the following reasons; a) blowing his priest, b) believing in the Ark, dragons, Jesus, ect., c) "sinning", d) other?

 

[larry_boy_44]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Paul Molitor

Same rules will apply to him as Rose and Franco.

Molitor's career:

1978 21 MIL AL 2B 91 197 283 12 57 .976 .980 5.27 4.74

SS 31 54 118 10 17 .945 .964 5.55 4.19

DH 2

3B 1 2 0 0 0 1.000 .952 2.00 2.60

1979 22 MIL AL 2B 122 289 413 15 81 .979 .978 5.75 4.80

SS 10 20 27 1 3 .979 .965 4.70 4.10

DH 8

1980 23 MIL AL 2B 91 240 294 16 80 .971 .981 5.87 4.91

SS 12 19 41 4 10 .938 .963 5.00 4.26

DH 7

3B 1 1 1 0 0 1.000 .952 2.00 2.60

1981 24 MIL AL OF 46 119 4 3 1 .976 .983 2.67 2.16 0 43 4

DH 16

1982 25 MIL AL 3B 150 128 340 29 48 .942 .954 3.12 2.62

DH 6

SS 4 6 10 3 0 .842 .964 4.00 4.17

1983 26 MIL AL 3B 146 105 343 16 37 .966 .955 3.07 2.57

DH 2

1984 27 MIL AL 3B 7 7 21 2 3 .933 .949 4.00 2.19

DH 4

1985 28 MIL AL 3B 135 126 263 19 30 .953 .953 2.88 2.38

DH 4

1986 29 MIL AL 3B 91 82 170 15 25 .944 .948 2.77 2.37

DH 10

OF 4 4 1 0 0 1.000 .980 1.25 2.05 4 0 0

1987 30 MIL AL DH 58

3B 41 25 64 5 8 .947 .952 2.17 2.31

2B 19 35 49 0 16 1.000 .980 4.42 4.48

1988 31 MIL AL 3B 105 86 187 17 15 .941 .954 2.60 2.36

DH 49

2B 1 1 1 0 0 1.000 1.000 2.00 4.40

1989 32 MIL AL 3B 112 78 243 17 18 .950 .943 2.87 2.34

DH 28

2B 16 28 44 1 9 .986 .981 4.50 4.51

1990 33 MIL AL 2B 60 136 190 4 36 .988 .984 5.43 4.53

1B 37 325 25 5 28 .986 .992 9.46 8.36

DH 4

3B 2 2 7 1 1 .900 .947 4.50 2.30

1991 34 MIL AL DH 112

1B 46 389 32 6 52 .986 .992 9.15 8.30

1992 35 MIL AL DH 108

1B 48 461 26 2 44 .996 .993 10.15 8.36

1993 36 TOR AL DH 137

1B 23 178 14 3 16 .985 .993 8.35 8.24

1994 37 TOR AL DH 110

1B 5 47 3 0 6 1.000 .992 10.00 8.48

1995 38 TOR AL DH 129

1996 39 MIN AL DH 143

1B 17 138 13 1 13 .993 .992 8.88 7.92

1997 40 MIN AL DH 122

1B 12 99 7 1 6 .991 .992 8.83 8.04

1998 41 MIN AL DH 115

1B 9 79 7 0 4 1.000 .992 9.56 8.30

he played multiple positions EVERY year... that was his biggest value to the Brewers... well, one of his biggest values...

 

[larry_boy_44]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

which is why we need to give us a range of years..maybe do a dice roll and go 1 over and 2 under...

if you roll a 2, you get 1-4... 5 gets 4-7... 10 gets 9-12...

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

 

[Politician Spock]

Rose in particular is a unique case.

How many unique cases are you prepared to handle.Note: I'll vote for a non-owner commish before I vote for an owner commish. Not that I think Capella has done a bad job (he has done great), I just like the idea of the commish not having a team. But I think the rules you are proposing for selection of seasons is too similar to what we had this season. The draft will be much more interesting if you could hit the jackpot or bite the dust on some picks, as well as possibly be rewarded for taking guys who had over a decade of consistent years but didn't have peak great years.

There won't be much problem, even with "unique" cases. For a player to be eligible to be drafted specifcally for one position, he must have had 3+ years in which he played that position for the majority of the season's games. If he is drafted for one position in particular, only those seasons in which the majority of his games were played at that position will be in play in the dice roll.There's no exceptions necessary to this. The only tradeoff is accepting that you could have a worse batting year in order to guarantee yourself a particular position, which seems a fair deal.

What if a 4 is rolled and a guy was drafted for a position he only played your minimum 3 seasons at?

 

[larry_boy_44]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

so, that brings up 2 questions:1. can 4 people pick him for his 4 different positions...

2. can we pick AFTER the draft what position to use him at?

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Paul Molitor

Same rules will apply to him as Rose and Franco.

Molitor's career:

1978 21 MIL AL 2B 91 197 283 12 57 .976 .980 5.27 4.74

SS 31 54 118 10 17 .945 .964 5.55 4.19

DH 2

3B 1 2 0 0 0 1.000 .952 2.00 2.60

1979 22 MIL AL 2B 122 289 413 15 81 .979 .978 5.75 4.80

SS 10 20 27 1 3 .979 .965 4.70 4.10

DH 8

1980 23 MIL AL 2B 91 240 294 16 80 .971 .981 5.87 4.91

SS 12 19 41 4 10 .938 .963 5.00 4.26

DH 7

3B 1 1 1 0 0 1.000 .952 2.00 2.60

1981 24 MIL AL OF 46 119 4 3 1 .976 .983 2.67 2.16 0 43 4

DH 16

1982 25 MIL AL 3B 150 128 340 29 48 .942 .954 3.12 2.62

DH 6

SS 4 6 10 3 0 .842 .964 4.00 4.17

1983 26 MIL AL 3B 146 105 343 16 37 .966 .955 3.07 2.57

DH 2

1984 27 MIL AL 3B 7 7 21 2 3 .933 .949 4.00 2.19

DH 4

1985 28 MIL AL 3B 135 126 263 19 30 .953 .953 2.88 2.38

DH 4

1986 29 MIL AL 3B 91 82 170 15 25 .944 .948 2.77 2.37

DH 10

OF 4 4 1 0 0 1.000 .980 1.25 2.05 4 0 0

1987 30 MIL AL DH 58

3B 41 25 64 5 8 .947 .952 2.17 2.31

2B 19 35 49 0 16 1.000 .980 4.42 4.48

1988 31 MIL AL 3B 105 86 187 17 15 .941 .954 2.60 2.36

DH 49

2B 1 1 1 0 0 1.000 1.000 2.00 4.40

1989 32 MIL AL 3B 112 78 243 17 18 .950 .943 2.87 2.34

DH 28

2B 16 28 44 1 9 .986 .981 4.50 4.51

1990 33 MIL AL 2B 60 136 190 4 36 .988 .984 5.43 4.53

1B 37 325 25 5 28 .986 .992 9.46 8.36

DH 4

3B 2 2 7 1 1 .900 .947 4.50 2.30

1991 34 MIL AL DH 112

1B 46 389 32 6 52 .986 .992 9.15 8.30

1992 35 MIL AL DH 108

1B 48 461 26 2 44 .996 .993 10.15 8.36

1993 36 TOR AL DH 137

1B 23 178 14 3 16 .985 .993 8.35 8.24

1994 37 TOR AL DH 110

1B 5 47 3 0 6 1.000 .992 10.00 8.48

1995 38 TOR AL DH 129

1996 39 MIN AL DH 143

1B 17 138 13 1 13 .993 .992 8.88 7.92

1997 40 MIN AL DH 122

1B 12 99 7 1 6 .991 .992 8.83 8.04

1998 41 MIN AL DH 115

1B 9 79 7 0 4 1.000 .992 9.56 8.30

he played multiple positions EVERY year... that was his biggest value to the Brewers... well, one of his biggest values...

There would be no need to draft Molitor for a specific position if this is the case, Larry, because if he had a good defensive rating at many positions each year. Basically, you wouldn't need to worry about it because whatever year you got would have a good rating at a bunch of positions.

 

[oso diablo]

I don't know..didn't realize he had two of the same guys.That's not acceptable.

sorry, guys. PM sent to Capella explaining what happened. I'll summarize here: in the post-94 draft, we could take two Negro Leaguers. I picked Pop Lloyd (SS) and Bullet Joe Rogan (P). But NeL guys were not available at WIS, so we had to find substitutes. I just duplicated players i had already picked (Nomar & Rivera).Tonight, i waived one of the Nomars and picked up Eddie Joost, for a salary decline of about $2mm. Still looking for a comparable pitcher to replace Rivera.

 

[UCONN]

 

[10993]

Rose in particular is a unique case.

How many unique cases are you prepared to handle.Note: I'll vote for a non-owner commish before I vote for an owner commish. Not that I think Capella has done a bad job (he has done great), I just like the idea of the commish not having a team. But I think the rules you are proposing for selection of seasons is too similar to what we had this season. The draft will be much more interesting if you could hit the jackpot or bite the dust on some picks, as well as possibly be rewarded for taking guys who had over a decade of consistent years but didn't have peak great years.

There won't be much problem, even with "unique" cases. For a player to be eligible to be drafted specifcally for one position, he must have had 3+ years in which he played that position for the majority of the season's games. If he is drafted for one position in particular, only those seasons in which the majority of his games were played at that position will be in play in the dice roll.There's no exceptions necessary to this. The only tradeoff is accepting that you could have a worse batting year in order to guarantee yourself a particular position, which seems a fair deal.

What if a 4 is rolled and a guy was drafted for a position he only played your minimum 3 seasons at?

The roll would be from 1-3 if there were only three eligible season at that position. The only alternative is to make it a required 4 seasons at that position, or 5, and I feel that that would be an unfairly restrictive requirement.

 

[Politician Spock]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

Who in their right mind would draft him then unless it was late in the draft? You'd have an all time great draft where people are avoiding all time greats who played different positions through out their career.

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

so, that brings up 2 questions:1. can 4 people pick him for his 4 different positions...

2. can we pick AFTER the draft what position to use him at?

No, each player may be picked only once. No, if you are drafting him for a particular position, that must be declared at the time, in order to do the dice roll.

 

[Nipsey]

EXCUSE ME,

I will be running the next league. I have the experience, as I ran the Milker draft almost flawlessly. I made quick decisions, including drafting and all-world Milker squad. I think the participants would agree that the draft went smoothly, I was affable and a good time was had by all.

I hereby throw my hat into the ring and if anything, I do so to steal possible votes away from Capella.

God bless (for Larry) and good luck in my upcoming draft!

Remember, you ain't no gypsy, if you vote for Nipsey.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Rose in particular is a unique case.

How many unique cases are you prepared to handle.Note: I'll vote for a non-owner commish before I vote for an owner commish. Not that I think Capella has done a bad job (he has done great), I just like the idea of the commish not having a team. But I think the rules you are proposing for selection of seasons is too similar to what we had this season. The draft will be much more interesting if you could hit the jackpot or bite the dust on some picks, as well as possibly be rewarded for taking guys who had over a decade of consistent years but didn't have peak great years.

There won't be much problem, even with "unique" cases. For a player to be eligible to be drafted specifcally for one position, he must have had 3+ years in which he played that position for the majority of the season's games. If he is drafted for one position in particular, only those seasons in which the majority of his games were played at that position will be in play in the dice roll.There's no exceptions necessary to this. The only tradeoff is accepting that you could have a worse batting year in order to guarantee yourself a particular position, which seems a fair deal.

What if a 4 is rolled and a guy was drafted for a position he only played your minimum 3 seasons at?

The roll would be from 1-3 if there were only three eligible season at that position. The only alternative is to make it a required 4 seasons at that position, or 5, and I feel that that would be an unfairly restrictive requirement.

I think we should be able to narrow it down some...But I don't think picking a position is the way to do it...I would personally pick the position they were best at the for smallest number of years, maximizing the quality...and you can't say more than 4 or 5 seasons, 'cuz that would eliminate Paul Molitor from the draft basically...

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

"Ouch."

If you really believed in what you're saying, you wouldn't need all this.You know as well as we all do, Cappy--it's time to take yourself out of the running for this one. I personally think you will enjoy being free to compete unfetterd by questioning of the motivations and effects of your decisions. Your team might really turn out good in such a setup.

Only if you teach me how to sim-fish.Will you teach me how to sim-fish?

I can't imagine it will be of issue in the upcoming draft. It's hard to complain about the commish's tactics when he has recused himself from participation.Don't worry so much about it, Cappy. You've done a good job on this one, more or less, and there's a lot of time left in it--till mid-April, at least. And I'm sure other forms of power and validation will present themselves to you while I'm commishing the second league.

I have a few reasons to back Harrier:1. the same person shouldn't commish twice in a row...2. if at all possible, the commish shouldn't play... if someone is willing to not play, they are the commish...3. Capella deserves the time off, he's done a GREAT job with this... even though, like has been said, I might have done things different, I think he has done a good job...

@ LB taking this seriously....Mr. Rudnicki...please explain to me how to upload an avatar of my choosing (I've done this many times before but for some reason can't now) like I'm the ######ed offspring of LB and his sister. TIA. Just trying to put a nice jpeg image of Miss Taurasi on there. Nothing fancy. Well within the size limit. Keep getting the red X.

email it to me at: rudnicki@footballguys.com and I'll try to upload it for you

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

Who in their right mind would draft him then unless it was late in the draft? You'd have an all time great draft where people are avoiding all time greats who played different positions through out their career.

Why would anyone avoid him? If you just want Rose, you could draft him early without any positional requirements, and just build around whatever season and position you had him at.

 

[UCONN]

http://clickit.go2net.com/search?pos=16&pp...n-preview_x.htm

http://clickit.go2net.com/search?pos=23&pp...aurasi/bio.html

http://clickit.go2net.com/search?pos=25&pp.../sports/mercury

http://clickit.go2net.com/search?pos=26&pp...was_040603.html

http://clickit.go2net.com/search?pos=30&pp...csports.go.com/

make one of those my avatar. TIA

Pimp smack Larry.

 

[UCONN]

gb Mr. Rudnicki. Mod of the year, .

 

[larry_boy_44]

Harrier...since we know guys CAN play OOP at WIS if they have good range... I think we should just give people a range of years they can pick from....do the dice roll and give them a range of (roll - 1) to (roll + 2)...

 

[10993]

EXCUSE ME,

I will be running the next league. I have the experience, as I ran the Milker draft almost flawlessly. I made quick decisions, including drafting and all-world Milker squad. I think the participants would agree that the draft went smoothly, I was affable and a good time was had by all.

I hereby throw my hat into the ring and if anything, I do so to steal possible votes away from Capella.

God bless (for Larry) and good luck in my upcoming draft!

Remember, you ain't no gypsy, if you vote for Nipsey.

Nipsey, I'll accept your candidacy only under the secret alliance we already have worked out for you to push all of your votes to me at the last minute. Thanks for that.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

Who in their right mind would draft him then unless it was late in the draft? You'd have an all time great draft where people are avoiding all time greats who played different positions through out their career.

Why would anyone avoid him? If you just want Rose, you could draft him early without any positional requirements, and just build around whatever season and position you had him at.

In that case (which I'm fine with), I would need the "roll" to happen immediately after the pick so as to be able adjust my draft strategy on the fly.Is that an option.

 

[oso diablo]

Hijackers..you were supposed to take the third season. I know you guys talked about second in your draft thread, but I thought we all cleared it that it was the third before we got started.

didn't know this either. we had drafted based on 2nd best year by Win Shares. mea culpa. how to solve?

just went and checked them all out. have 3 guys using their 4th best year at WIS. The Rivera i'm keeping is his 5th best year. Two are their highest salaried year. Two (now three with Joost) are their 3rd year. And the rest are their 2nd highest salaried years.

I'll do whatever you guys want to do.

 

[Koya]

why must we be LOCKED into one year for a guy. what is so wrong with going 4th or worse, something like that. gives flexibility while remaining neutrality/fairness while eliminating guys that only had 1-3 good years.Plus, makes it more fun. You want Rose at two positions, great... he proved he could do it. Locking into a year should be a lesson learned.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

my team still blows, and the only team I've played close is Harrier. I took a lead into the 9th inning against him in a live sim 3 or 4 days ago before I added many of the guys you are all #####ing about.It just looks like these guys match up well with Harrier for whatever reason. They haven't played anyone else close.In fact, Schiraldi was already on the roster when I took it over, he pitched great in that game and he's been exhausted ever since (he hasn't pitched in 5 games yet his stamina is only at 31%).I added some pitchers with lots of innings who could keep the games close because I was told to try and lose 9-0 instead of 30-0. My offense is still terrible and are lucky to score a run or two a game.If you guys want me to make the team worse, that's fine too. It's not like this team is beating anybody in here.

 

[10993]

why must we be LOCKED into one year for a guy. what is so wrong with going 4th or worse, something like that. gives flexibility while remaining neutrality/fairness while eliminating guys that only had 1-3 good years.

Plus, makes it more fun. You want Rose at two positions, great... he proved he could do it.

Locking into a year should be a lesson learned.

Commish Rules

I think what we'll do here is roll from years 3-5, and then whichever you roll, you can choose up or down one year if you like.

So if you roll a 3, you can choose years 2, 3, or 4

Roll a 4, choose from years 3, 4, or 5

Roll a 5, choose from 4, 5, or 6

Same positional choices will be allowed, if someone wants to be SURE to get someone at a particular position.

Thanks to Larry for the idea.

 

[10993]

Commissioner-elect Harrier. What about the players who can play multiple positions? If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d. I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish Rules

We will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??

I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...

628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.

Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.

The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

Who in their right mind would draft him then unless it was late in the draft? You'd have an all time great draft where people are avoiding all time greats who played different positions through out their career.

Why would anyone avoid him? If you just want Rose, you could draft him early without any positional requirements, and just build around whatever season and position you had him at.

In that case (which I'm fine with), I would need the "roll" to happen immediately after the pick so as to be able adjust my draft strategy on the fly.

Is that an option.

Yes, the roll could happen immediately after each pick.

 

[UCONN]

Uh, can we go back to ridiculing LB for any of the following reasons; a) blowing his priest, b) believing in the Ark, dragons, Jesus, ect., c) "sinning", d) other?

 

[Politician Spock]

Commissioner-elect Harrier.  What about the players who can play multiple positions?  If we're stuck with a roll of the dice we may get a sub-optimal position and thus find our defense f-d.  I like to call this the Charlie Hustle Blows at 3rd clause.

Signed,

Confused in St. Paul

Commish RulesWe will allow for players to be drafted for a specific position, assuming that was a position that the player was well-known for playing, and played for years. Thus, Mel Ott could be drafted specifically at OF, or without any positional requirements, but could not be drafted specifically at 3B.

what about guys who never played at one position long enough to be known there??I mean, if a guy played 200+ games at 5 different positions, he isn't gonna be well known at any of them...

Hypotheticals generally aren't that instructive. Do you have an example that you think would present a problem?

Pete Rose...628 games at 2B

638 at 3B

939 at 1B

1327 in OF

Julio Franco...

367 at DH

403 at 1B

663 at 2B

715 at SS

both of these guys, are they really known at 1 position? ARe they eligible for all of them??

We need to have a game minimum for positions, IMO...

and other guys (Paul Molitor) were used as a utility guy, even though they had a main position, which is valuable to have on a team...

Rose we already addressed.Franco would be eligible to be drafted specifically at 1B, 2B, or SS--DH would not be allowed.

Any year in which a majority of the player's games were at one particular position would be eligible in terms of drafting "only" for that position.

Yes, but the issue because when you have to use his 3rd or whatever best year on WIS and they're an awful fielder at the position you drafted him for.The way Rose booted around the ball in live action you'd think his name was Pele.

Right--so you could draft Rose specifically for third base, and the dice roll would be done between only his 1975, 76, 77, and 78 seasons.

Who in their right mind would draft him then unless it was late in the draft? You'd have an all time great draft where people are avoiding all time greats who played different positions through out their career.

Why would anyone avoid him? If you just want Rose, you could draft him early without any positional requirements, and just build around whatever season and position you had him at.

Hypothetically consider two great players. The first player played 2B his entire career. The second player had half his career at 2B, and half his career at 1B. You are wanting to take a 2B as your next pick. The second player had just as many good seasons at first as he did at second. Assuming a 3 is rolled on the dice, you are guarenteed to get the first players third best season on WIS. However the second player could give you the players 6th best season, maybe ever worse. Who would you take assuming both players had similar careers?