Discussion Board

Slider wrote:

michaeljchris wrote:Did Kingery debut last year?

I just ask because I didn't see him in the Roster Moves section (and I also had him on my draft board)

No.

However, Yahoo has started adding some high profile prospects (w/o any MLB experience) to our player pool. I assume that Vriezy added Kingery last year because he was available in the player pool.

I did the same with Nick Neidert, who I have subsequently dropped.

This makes it even more difficult to track players between this site and Yahoo. If Fantrax can solve this problem too, I'm all in on Fantrax.

NAFRO79 wrote:

Slider wrote:

michaeljchris wrote:Did Kingery debut last year?

I just ask because I didn't see him in the Roster Moves section (and I also had him on my draft board)

No.

However, Yahoo has started adding some high profile prospects (w/o any MLB experience) to our player pool. I assume that Vriezy added Kingery last year because he was available in the player pool.

I did the same with Nick Neidert, who I have subsequently dropped.

This makes it even more difficult to track players between this site and Yahoo. If Fantrax can solve this problem too, I'm all in on Fantrax.

So instead of having a very definitive guideline on minor league player additions, that is very clear and simple to follow: The only way a minor league player can become the property of a team is, to be drafted. If they have not been drafted, they can be added once they have made their MLB debut. After they debut, they go to standard 48 hour waiver claim period. If you add someone illegally prior to their debut, you certainly should not get to keep them.  You should also be penalized your waiver position for your illegal add.

Woh, woh, woh. Let's dial-down the moral indignation a tad. I was not suggesting that what Vriez and myself did violated ANY rules. In fact, what Vriez did was brilliant (damn Vriezy). This league has operated, from day one, with the idea that the waiver wire would not be policed, partly because, back in the day, there wasn't anything left in the player pool - in this league 740+ players are accounted for at any one time ([20 teams x 25 MLB rosters] + [20 teams x 12 MiLB rosters] + DL stashes) and Yahoo barely had all of those players in its pool back in the day. Over the past few years, Yahoo has substantially increased the size of its player pool. It wasn't always this way. We didn't need a 'definitive guideline' about FA / Waiver pickups, nor was I suggesting that we do now, and I certainly wasn't complaining - in any way - about how the league handles FA / Waivers. I was bummed that Vriezy sniped me - back in August or September - and irritated that it was difficult to know this given the different platforms we use. That is all. Again, Vriez should get an award, and not indignation.

If you are suggesting that the FA / Waiver should be better managed because of the CHANGES that Yahoo has made to its player pool, then I'm all ears. But let's hear a compelling argument for why the league needs a rule change - and let's not condemn the entire league or individual managers for CHANGES to both the platform and the direction of the game (real FAs are not getting paid like they used to; shift from veterans to cost-controllable (and disposable) minor leaguers (who don't get paid squat); no draft for international players; the stupid Player Union not representing serious player issues, etc.). I actually find it interesting that part of your reasoning about the FA / Waiver wire is that 740+ players isn't deep enough. This might actually be true, but let's hear it.

When I first joined this league, it was the first league I had ever been in. I have paid a considerable amout of money taking over a team, that had a zero chance of winning, and likely is still a year or two away from competing.  I also now am involved in some pretty intense Fantrax League's, that aren't even for money.  I have sat back, and kept my mouth shut, and watched things progress.  I would like to become more active and vocal as to how the league is managed. I understand the time, and effort it takes, and am not saying things have not been run well.

The 'consumer-schtick' might work well at the Olive Garden, but not here. You've entered a competitive league that has operated well for 11-12 years, and on the backs of those who dedicate spare time. You have always been afforded every right to participate, just like every other manager. Again, if you believe that a rule change is warranted, make your case. I can assure you the league will listen, maybe not agree, but listen. Just don't hide behind a pretence of consumer dissatisfaction. No-one owes you shit.

There is one major continuous problem with the league, that anybody using yahoo, and drafting minor league player's has. There is a very simple and beneficial solution for all of us. To run a league in Fantrax, the cost is $100-200/year, I believe. In my 30 team league we each pay $9.74, every two or three years.  Why are we spending $70/year, and not using the proper league.  Geez, I'll pay $80/yr buy in, so I don't ever have to flip back and forth figuring out who's an owned prospect. Throughout the season, and especially for the draft.

I am not sure there is a 'major continuous problem with the league'. Or if there is, I don't know what you are referring to. The discussion of Fantrax started a few years back, as a proposed solution to the inefficiencies of having to go back and forth between different platforms. The Ohtani debacle has re-kindled the discussion because Fantrax treats Ohtani as 1 player, rather than than 2 in Yahoo. TWO-WAY PLAYERS ARE ENTIRELY NEW to our discussion of platform (as far as I know). Yahoo actually was THE site for fantasy baseball when this league started a decade ago (free, dynasty, etc.). I mentioned Fantrax today in relation to having to go back and forth across different platforms. I did NOT mention Fantrax because I wanted to manage or police the FA / Waiver wire. That's on you. I have no idea how Fantrax manages FAs / Waiver claims. You still need to make a case for managing / policing it. And, try to do so without all the moral posturing.

The Czar wrote:After we finish all of this draft and setting up yahoo, my plan is to set up a mirror league on fantrax as one of their free leagues. That way everyone can log in and try it out. Then people can make an informed decision on if it works for them or not. We may decide to jump then, or play around with it for awhile until people are comfortable.

Slider wrote:

NAFRO79 wrote:

Slider wrote:

michaeljchris wrote:Did Kingery debut last year?

I just ask because I didn't see him in the Roster Moves section (and I also had him on my draft board)

No.

However, Yahoo has started adding some high profile prospects (w/o any MLB experience) to our player pool. I assume that Vriezy added Kingery last year because he was available in the player pool.

I did the same with Nick Neidert, who I have subsequently dropped.

This makes it even more difficult to track players between this site and Yahoo. If Fantrax can solve this problem too, I'm all in on Fantrax.

So instead of having a very definitive guideline on minor league player additions, that is very clear and simple to follow: The only way a minor league player can become the property of a team is, to be drafted. If they have not been drafted, they can be added once they have made their MLB debut. After they debut, they go to standard 48 hour waiver claim period. If you add someone illegally prior to their debut, you certainly should not get to keep them.  You should also be penalized your waiver position for your illegal add.

Woh, woh, woh. Let's dial-down the moral indignation a tad. I was not suggesting that what Vriez and myself did violated ANY rules. In fact, what Vriez did was brilliant (damn Vriezy). This league has operated, from day one, with the idea that the waiver wire would not be policed, partly because, back in the day, there wasn't anything left in the player pool - in this league 740+ players are accounted for at any one time ([20 teams x 25 MLB rosters] + [20 teams x 12 MiLB rosters] + DL stashes) and Yahoo barely had all of those players in its pool back in the day. Over the past few years, Yahoo has substantially increased the size of its player pool. It wasn't always this way. We didn't need a 'definitive guideline' about FA / Waiver pickups, nor was I suggesting that we do now, and I certainly wasn't complaining - in any way - about how the league handles FA / Waivers. I was bummed that Vriezy sniped me - back in August or September - and irritated that it was difficult to know this given the different platforms we use. That is all. Again, Vriez should get an award, and not indignation.

If you are suggesting that the FA / Waiver should be better managed because of the CHANGES that Yahoo has made to its player pool, then I'm all ears. But let's hear a compelling argument for why the league needs a rule change - and let's not condemn the entire league or individual managers for CHANGES to both the platform and the direction of the game (real FAs are not getting paid like they used to; shift from veterans to cost-controllable (and disposable) minor leaguers (who don't get paid squat); no draft for international players; the stupid Player Union not representing serious player issues, etc.). I actually find it interesting that part of your reasoning about the FA / Waiver wire is that 740+ players isn't deep enough. This might actually be true, but let's hear it.

When I first joined this league, it was the first league I had ever been in. I have paid a considerable amout of money taking over a team, that had a zero chance of winning, and likely is still a year or two away from competing.  I also now am involved in some pretty intense Fantrax League's, that aren't even for money.  I have sat back, and kept my mouth shut, and watched things progress.  I would like to become more active and vocal as to how the league is managed. I understand the time, and effort it takes, and am not saying things have not been run well.

The 'consumer-schtick' might work well at the Olive Garden, but not here. You've entered a competitive league that has operated well for 11-12 years, and on the backs of those who dedicate spare time. You have always been afforded every right to participate, just like every other manager. Again, if you believe that a rule change is warranted, make your case. I can assure you the league will listen, maybe not agree, but listen. Just don't hide behind a pretence of consumer dissatisfaction. No-one owes you shit.

There is one major continuous problem with the league, that anybody using yahoo, and drafting minor league player's has. There is a very simple and beneficial solution for all of us. To run a league in Fantrax, the cost is $100-200/year, I believe. In my 30 team league we each pay $9.74, every two or three years.  Why are we spending $70/year, and not using the proper league.  Geez, I'll pay $80/yr buy in, so I don't ever have to flip back and forth figuring out who's an owned prospect. Throughout the season, and especially for the draft.

I am not sure there is a 'major continuous problem with the league'. Or if there is, I don't know what you are referring to. The discussion of Fantrax started a few years back, as a proposed solution to the inefficiencies of having to go back and forth between different platforms. The Ohtani debacle has re-kindled the discussion because Fantrax treats Ohtani as 1 player, rather than than 2 in Yahoo. TWO-WAY PLAYERS ARE ENTIRELY NEW to our discussion of platform (as far as I know). Yahoo actually was THE site for fantasy baseball when this league started a decade ago (free, dynasty, etc.). I mentioned Fantrax today in relation to having to go back and forth across different platforms. I did NOT mention Fantrax because I wanted to manage or police the FA / Waiver wire. That's on you. I have no idea how Fantrax manages FAs / Waiver claims. You still need to make a case for managing / policing it. And, try to do so without all the moral posturing.

THE KILLERS wrote:

Slider wrote:

NAFRO79 wrote:

Slider wrote:

michaeljchris wrote:Did Kingery debut last year?

I just ask because I didn't see him in the Roster Moves section (and I also had him on my draft board)

No.

However, Yahoo has started adding some high profile prospects (w/o any MLB experience) to our player pool. I assume that Vriezy added Kingery last year because he was available in the player pool.

I did the same with Nick Neidert, who I have subsequently dropped.

This makes it even more difficult to track players between this site and Yahoo. If Fantrax can solve this problem too, I'm all in on Fantrax.

So instead of having a very definitive guideline on minor league player additions, that is very clear and simple to follow: The only way a minor league player can become the property of a team is, to be drafted. If they have not been drafted, they can be added once they have made their MLB debut. After they debut, they go to standard 48 hour waiver claim period. If you add someone illegally prior to their debut, you certainly should not get to keep them.  You should also be penalized your waiver position for your illegal add.

Woh, woh, woh. Let's dial-down the moral indignation a tad. I was not suggesting that what Vriez and myself did violated ANY rules. In fact, what Vriez did was brilliant (damn Vriezy). This league has operated, from day one, with the idea that the waiver wire would not be policed, partly because, back in the day, there wasn't anything left in the player pool - in this league 740+ players are accounted for at any one time ([20 teams x 25 MLB rosters] + [20 teams x 12 MiLB rosters] + DL stashes) and Yahoo barely had all of those players in its pool back in the day. Over the past few years, Yahoo has substantially increased the size of its player pool. It wasn't always this way. We didn't need a 'definitive guideline' about FA / Waiver pickups, nor was I suggesting that we do now, and I certainly wasn't complaining - in any way - about how the league handles FA / Waivers. I was bummed that Vriezy sniped me - back in August or September - and irritated that it was difficult to know this given the different platforms we use. That is all. Again, Vriez should get an award, and not indignation.

If you are suggesting that the FA / Waiver should be better managed because of the CHANGES that Yahoo has made to its player pool, then I'm all ears. But let's hear a compelling argument for why the league needs a rule change - and let's not condemn the entire league or individual managers for CHANGES to both the platform and the direction of the game (real FAs are not getting paid like they used to; shift from veterans to cost-controllable (and disposable) minor leaguers (who don't get paid squat); no draft for international players; the stupid Player Union not representing serious player issues, etc.). I actually find it interesting that part of your reasoning about the FA / Waiver wire is that 740+ players isn't deep enough. This might actually be true, but let's hear it.

When I first joined this league, it was the first league I had ever been in. I have paid a considerable amout of money taking over a team, that had a zero chance of winning, and likely is still a year or two away from competing.  I also now am involved in some pretty intense Fantrax League's, that aren't even for money.  I have sat back, and kept my mouth shut, and watched things progress.  I would like to become more active and vocal as to how the league is managed. I understand the time, and effort it takes, and am not saying things have not been run well.

The 'consumer-schtick' might work well at the Olive Garden, but not here. You've entered a competitive league that has operated well for 11-12 years, and on the backs of those who dedicate spare time. You have always been afforded every right to participate, just like every other manager. Again, if you believe that a rule change is warranted, make your case. I can assure you the league will listen, maybe not agree, but listen. Just don't hide behind a pretence of consumer dissatisfaction. No-one owes you shit.

There is one major continuous problem with the league, that anybody using yahoo, and drafting minor league player's has. There is a very simple and beneficial solution for all of us. To run a league in Fantrax, the cost is $100-200/year, I believe. In my 30 team league we each pay $9.74, every two or three years.  Why are we spending $70/year, and not using the proper league.  Geez, I'll pay $80/yr buy in, so I don't ever have to flip back and forth figuring out who's an owned prospect. Throughout the season, and especially for the draft.

I am not sure there is a 'major continuous problem with the league'. Or if there is, I don't know what you are referring to. The discussion of Fantrax started a few years back, as a proposed solution to the inefficiencies of having to go back and forth between different platforms. The Ohtani debacle has re-kindled the discussion because Fantrax treats Ohtani as 1 player, rather than than 2 in Yahoo. TWO-WAY PLAYERS ARE ENTIRELY NEW to our discussion of platform (as far as I know). Yahoo actually was THE site for fantasy baseball when this league started a decade ago (free, dynasty, etc.). I mentioned Fantrax today in relation to having to go back and forth across different platforms. I did NOT mention Fantrax because I wanted to manage or police the FA / Waiver wire. That's on you. I have no idea how Fantrax manages FAs / Waiver claims. You still need to make a case for managing / policing it. And, try to do so without all the moral posturing.

Love it.

The Czar wrote:Nitros has been texted and I explained the Kingery thing as best I could through text.  I hope I didn't text too late. Ugh.


Rosters are done on yahoo. Guess I'll work on setting up a league on fantrax next.

Rosters are done on yahoo.

The Czar wrote:Slider, I can’t fix it from work, but I’m pretty sure I double and triple checked that. The roster on your page is not the correct one. The updated one will be in draft results. I’m looking at it now and it’s showing Bradley Zimmer in 10th round. I can look, but can’t make changes from work.

NAFRO79 wrote:I really think draft windows need to be reduced to 12 hours.  24 hours to make a draft pick, is just TOO long.  Owner's need to start missing out on player's, if we ever want this draft to have some sort of normal pace. In this day and age there is no reason you cannot email a couple picks to someone who is not picking in front of you, or a commissioner, with no pick ahead of you.

NAFRO79 wrote:That seems like a lot of extra work for the people doing it....

NAFRO79 wrote:That means he got two texts. Yes this is ridiculous. I just told him, its been 15 hours, and your holding up the draft. Can we please have a league vote about making draft windows 12 hours. It is easy enough to do on fantrax. If you give some people 24, they will take it. Having one pick holding up a draft for an entire day, really make's things COANGELO, you can suspend the window from 12-6 overnight even, to be fair.