USKL

I tend to side with Stoney here. I think you need to have 1 eligible player at each position on your roster, and unless someone is injured, you need to have those eligible players on your 25-man. This is not easy to scout for as a commish so I believe it should be self-policed.

Personally I also am against intentionally playing the worst players on your roster. You can't enforce that at all really, but my belief is that if you don't want to play your best players, trade them. That in my mind is the only "legit" form of tanking. I would go nuts as commish in HCKL (and have on one occasion) if I found an owner intentionally sitting their best players in order to get a better draft slot.

FD, to your point on playing no LF & 2 CFs, I am not sure what rule HAL uses in the background. It is possible to set HAL so that this player becomes a 5e25+5, it is also possible that they get the same rating as there CF range. If you know the answer please advise.

As per Stoney's note, no issue playing a Pujols @ 4e65 as long as he is rated @ 3B, but intentionally skewing your roster so that an unrated guy plays out of position is a no-no for me. It's the same thing as somehow being able to have an RP start games on purpose - should not happen, creates unfair advantage. My 2 cents.

Just to be clear, cause my previous post isn't that clear,

I have no problem playing your worst lineup to get a higher draft position. but I do have a problem not having a guy to fill a position on your active roster. As I said I didn't even know this was possible with the game engine. If DT had guys that were eligible at 2b he definitely should have had one on his active roster.

You must choose exactly 11 pitchers. At least: 5 of your pitchers must have a starting pitcher endurance rating (e.g. S6).
4 of your pitchers must be "pure" relievers (i.e. a relief rating (R2) but no starter rating).
1 of your pitchers must have a closer endurance rating (e.g. C4).

You must choose exactly 14 hitters. 2 of your hitters must be eligible to play catcher.

From the SOM game rules. I don't think there is a check for positions except for C and pitchers.

I am hardly one to weigh in here this season consider the massive indifference my nightmarish spring imposed on my club here in USKL and elsewhere in SOMOland, but I do appreciate the opportunity to discuss the issues. I see no reason to impose limits or controls beyond those inherent in the SOMO rules above. It is interesting though to realize for the first time that it is indeed possible to play an entire season without a player eligible for a position. I assumed that the filling out the lineups prohibition at playing a player not rated at a position out of position was built into the game system. Playing Miguel Cabrera at 3rd a few years ago was sort of like playing David Ortiz at first-- but then the former got better. Not having a SS eligible player on my roster occurred to a team of mine in another keeper when I blundered in the draft and STRAT did not rate a 2B-SS at SS and I had to scramble to get someone to put in my lineups. I did not realize I could leave a position blank. Well, I do not think we need a RULE, but it does seem that not having utility type player(s) available would not go down well in MLB, but then if you look at the Marlins, Mets, or Astros today, one could make the case that it is possible.

Just my thoughts.

To me, with this being a keeper league, it is ludicrous to penalize a team that has managed to acquire (in my HCKL case) 3 elite players at the same position by forcing them to bench one--especially when two have multiple seasons of MLB experience at another position as their primary position. The reason I bring this scenario up again is because it is highly realistic to be encountered by teams in this format, and drastically affect teams if a rule change were made.

There never has been as TSN/SOM rule for carrying an eligible player at every position (only C and P limits)--so this would be a rule unique to our league that already has rosters set.

In my case, I had Pujols (when he was good)--former 3B, Cabrera--former 3B, and Votto. If we had this added rule the outcome for me would have been:

One sits the bench for a sub 2.00 replacement who will start at a position that the benched player has proven they can play. If I want value for this change I would have to trade, and most trade offers in this scenario were not great value. Any MLB team that would have had all 3 of these players would have kept them--and moved Pujols or Cabrera to 3B

When you do this in the Game Engine this is how it works. 3B is empty in the line-up... HAL moves the highest salaried position player to the vacant position, bats them 9th and gives them a 5e65 rating. I think if a manager wants to take that penalty (which is the most unrealistic thing in this scenario), and there is a reasonable argument that there team is better for it, why the need for a rule?

To answer the question on the OF for an OF switch. My experience has been that CF can move to the corner with the same (or maybe +1) to range, corners can exchange evenly to a corner or +1 (maybe +2) to CF. No effect to arm or errors. Must bat 9th, the highest salaried OF will replace (or position player if no OF left). My experience was that hal followed this (dice rolls were not indicative of a 5e65 if an OF was forced started)

Where are we with this league? Where do we proclaim our drops?

I would like to acquire another 1st round supp. pick or 2. I am open about any kind of structure of a deal.

Kyle

I don't want to overstep my bounds here, but akindian has not posted drops, so I'm wondering if stoney has heard from him. It is the middle of summer, prime vacation time. If everyone hasn't checked in, how can we start a draft.
Again not trying to overstep, I just haven't seen evidence of akindian even being aware we are drafting at this point.

I spoke to him on email- he is travelling and not able to check in. I have direction from him and will be posting shortly.

I spoke to him on email- he is travelling and not able to check in. I have direction from him and will be posting shortly.

any idea who his drops are??


Course, had I known he was taking Chacin, I'd have not mentioned it.