2010 Pre Card Draft Chat - Waiting on Misterg to load team

[keyzick]

I see what you're saying. I guess I thought that we had to stick with the 0.50 guy all year, since being able to drop him means there's really no penalty...other than a missed draft choice, in which case there really is no point in saying that he's replaced by a 0.50 guy to begin with.

Guess Dan will have to make the call as the commish...no biggie in any case, I just realized some of the gray areas when I was mulling over my last pick.

Although now I think less of you...lol (kidding of course!!) :lol:

[drew6013]

My line of thinking falls in line with Niners.

I chose Jesus Flores as a third catcher (I doubt he'll get a card) with the following logic... if Flores does get a card great and I'll cut Zaun. If Flores doesn't get a card maybe I'll replace him with a .50 player or maybe I'll just play with 27 guys. Ethier way I don't have the intention of keeping 3 catchers.

I know thats a little different than Niners situation seeing how if all his players get a card he'll have to make a decision on which pitcher to cut in order to make his team fit the 12 pitcher roster. But I do think that should be Niners decision.

[Ninersphan]

[quote:23810cd1f8="keyzick"]I see what you're saying. I guess I thought that we had to stick with the 0.50 guy all year, since being able to drop him means there's really no penalty...other than a missed draft choice, in which case there really is no point in saying that he's replaced by a 0.50 guy to begin with.

Guess Dan will have to make the call as the commish...no biggie in any case, I just realized some of the gray areas when I was mulling over my last pick.

Although now I think less of you...lol (kidding of course!!) :lol:[/quote:23810cd1f8]

The .50 rule comes into play in case you do need to replace him for roster purposes and are forced to carry him. In fact if I was Dan, I'd be nervous not having a 3rd catcher, cause I don't know if Ross will get a card, if he doesn't, dan will have to replace him in order to have 2 catchers.
I think what dan was trying to avoid is having someone take a chancy card, like Randy Ruiz for example, as a primary option on your team, ( lets say he's the only 1b you drafted) then that player not geting a card and then having the manager, after the fact, complain that they should get to replace him with the best available 1b in the free agent pool, when they had the whole draft to take a another 1b and opted not to. YMMV

[Ninersphan]

Sooooo

Is the clock on for this stadium draft, anyone want to hazard a guess??

[Jerlins]

I actually understand both points of view, but it's actually moot at this point. However, if we decide to do this again next year, I'm more in line with Keyzick's thinking. Let's take two examples on two players who were mentioned.

Player A: Flores. Ok, if he doesn't get a card, it IS a big deal. If Mauer gets hurt, as well as catcher #2 on your team, and both happen per chance to get a 15 gamer, you would have to play with that .50 catcher for the remaining time. Instead, Mauer gets hurt, you have the luxury of just playing your #2 guy, as he can not get hurt if you don't have 3rd catcher. Advantage? Yes, you have the luxury of "gambling" on a player without any downside, other than the fact you are playing with 27 as opposed to 28, not really a big deal, when you have 15 other hitters total.

Player B: Feliz. You gambled on him early, others might have waited until later, thinking they wouldn't want to replace an early pick with a .50 cent player. Now, with an "extra" pitcher drafted, you still have the luxury of carrying 12 pitchers, and going with 15 hitters, again, not a big deal as your #16 hitter probably wouldn't get many (if any) AB's anyway. And if Feliz does get a card? Well, like Keyzick said, it's now an illegal roster, and the possibility of you having selected a player that was on someone elses radar. And now you have the luxury of keeping a $3 plus RP as opposed to having a staff of 11 plus one .50 guy.

Again, at this point, there's nothing we can do, other than close the loophole for future use. It should have been made clear at the onset, that you must draft no more than 17 hitters, no more than 12 pitchers. It wasn't, so I'm good with the way it went down. Let's play ball!!!

[JAMESZIMMER]

Just skip me when my turn comes up and I'll pick at a later time.

[Ninersphan]

[quote:7c901e4a3d="Jerlins"]I actually understand both points of view, but it's actually moot at this point. However, if we decide to do this again next year, I'm more in line with Keyzick's thinking. Let's take two examples on two players who were mentioned.

Player A: Flores. Ok, if he doesn't get a card, it IS a big deal. If Mauer gets hurt, as well as catcher #2 on your team, and both happen per chance to get a 15 gamer, you would have to play with that .50 catcher for the remaining time. Instead, Mauer gets hurt, you have the luxury of just playing your #2 guy, as he can not get hurt if you don't have 3rd catcher. Advantage? Yes, you have the luxury of "gambling" on a player without any downside, other than the fact you are playing with 27 as opposed to 28, not really a big deal, when you have 15 other hitters total.

Player B: Feliz. You gambled on him early, others might have waited until later, thinking they wouldn't want to replace an early pick with a .50 cent player. Now, with an "extra" pitcher drafted, you still have the luxury of carrying 12 pitchers, and going with 15 hitters, again, not a big deal as your #16 hitter probably wouldn't get many (if any) AB's anyway. And if Feliz does get a card? Well, like Keyzick said, it's now an illegal roster, and the possibility of you having selected a player that was on someone elses radar. And now you have the luxury of keeping a $3 plus RP as opposed to having a staff of 11 plus one .50 guy.

Again, at this point, there's nothing we can do, other than close the loophole for future use. It should have been made clear at the onset, that you must draft no more than 17 hitters, no more than 12 pitchers. It wasn't, so I'm good with the way it went down. Let's play ball!!![/quote:7c901e4a3d]


All good expect for the part about the RP I'd drop, the "extra" pitcher I took was a 6th SP and it was also my last pitcher taken (Paul Maholm), so I'd still have the "extra" reliever, with or without Feliz. Cause rules state 12 pitchers max, but it can be 5, SP and 7 relievers or 6SP and 6RP... :wink:

[drew6013]

"Flores. Ok, if he doesn't get a card, it IS a big deal. If Mauer gets hurt, as well as catcher #2 on your team, and both happen per chance to get a 15 gamer, you would have to play with that .50 catcher for the remaining time. Instead, Mauer gets hurt, you have the luxury of just playing your #2 guy, as he can not get hurt if you don't have 3rd catcher. Advantage? Yes, you have the luxury of "gambling" on a player without any downside, other than the fact you are playing with 27 as opposed to 28, not really a big deal, when you have 15 other hitters total."

Hmm... I certainly wasn't under the understanding that I'd have to replace Flores with another catcher. Couldn't I select any .50 player?

[JMP1]

Maybe this is oversimplifying things, but it would seem that a reasonable rule would be that all rosters have to compy with TSN game standards (max.12 pitchers, 17 hitters) by opening day.

If a player is selected and not carded he can be replaced by any player at any position as long as the salary is .50.

If someone gambled on a player getting a card and lost then his "reward" is a .50 player, certainly not what was expected or hoped for at draft time.
If someone drafted too many pitchers they will have to drop one by opening day and add a .50 player to the roster. If any player has to be replaced by a .50 player for any reason there is no advantage. A little risk vs. reward makes the game more interesting.

I don't have anywhere near the experience with the game that most of the rest of you do, but IMHO the idea proposed above would make this issue easy to understand.

[Jerlins]

Again, it wasn't stated in advance that no more than 12 pitchers (max allowed) can be selected, so I'm ok with how things shook out. My previous post explains why I would side with Keyzick's thoughts. But, as a stickler for pre-draft rules or lack therof of them, if this came to a vote, I'd defend Dan and Bill's right to do what they did, regardless of whether it was by accident or the result of a well thought out strategy.

We're talking basically of the 28th man here, surely a minor player in the scheme of things. I could be wrong here, but I'm sure things might have played out differently if we had done the original 25 man roster.

Off to shovel the first foot of snow in what is becoming a major storm here :cry: :cry: I'm too old for this crap and should have moved out of RI long ago.