Utility Player Suggestion For Next Year - NFBC

SlackerDan · Post by **SlackerDan** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:32 am

Any chance the UTL player could be any one on our roster ? Hitter or a pitcher ? If we need saves and have the ability to load up...go for it, or if we need steals, etc... your thoughts ?

SlackerDan

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:41 am

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:53 am

I agree with CC - No!

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:13 am

SlackerDan · Post by **SlackerDan** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:55 am

Nice to see that 3 folks in the league are open to change ... I guess bringing up trading again will not have either.

Any reason why you think a utility player can not be a pitcher, other than just NO ?

Thanks!

SlackerDan

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:31 am

I'm a no trading guy all the way. I would probably never play in another league that had trading. I run an AL only league at home. I see so many shady trades every year. Trading is fun, but in general, someone is always trying to rip someone off. In mixed leagues, there is the famous three for one. I gain a stud and pick 2 players off the wire who are just as good as two of players that I traded.

A pitcher option at UT would just add more manipulation. Someone wheeling in an extra starter trying to make up win's and K's. I'd like to replace a couple of my pitcher with base stealers....

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:14 am

I've also sworn off trading leagues. Headaches for the Commish, bickering with leaguemates. The negatives far outweigh the positives. As for the Utility position being either a hitter or pitcher, a pandora's box. If I were to suggest a rule change for the NFBC it would be be twice weekly roster changes. Every Monday and every Friday when most series start, it would take a lot of the guess work out of pitching probables and injuries.

SlackerDan · Post by **SlackerDan** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:24 am

Twice a week moves: I would like it if we can make moves with our res. rosters daily, but maybe keep the pool for once a week.

UTL any player: I have played in numerous leagues with pitcher/hitter as UTL and it works very well, actually adds something to the league .. more strategy during the year.

Trading: My thought was every Sunday before bid time, the league would have to vote on the trade. Majority of the league thinks it is a fair trade then it gets approved, majority of the league thinks the trade sucks then doesnt get approved. That way everyone will have skin in the game. Noone in this league is a rookie, unless they just want to waste over 1k. Keep in mind, if someone drafts a few closers and gets lucky /skill in the pool ( runs away with saves) no reason for them to drop a closer for nothing, makes sense if they could trade to improve another cat.

With all of that being said, I agree trades can be a slippery slope unless we really have strong checks and balances in place to protect the $5 league and the overall $100k league.

SlackerDan

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:06 am

No daily moves and free agents would still be weekly. Twice weekly roster moves would enhance our game a lot. No guesswork on injuries or rotations, a twice a week pitcher can be used once or twice, hitters will hit better against one team more than another. The only drawback may be technical, but I'll let the computer wizards worry about that.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:28 am

Originally posted by SlackerDan:

Any chance the UTL player could be any one on our roster ? Hitter or a pitcher ? If we need saves and have the ability to load up...go for it, or if we need steals, etc... your thoughts ?

SlackerDan might have a good idea here.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:38 am

Originally posted by SlackerDan:

With all of that being said, I agree trades can be a slippery slope unless we really have strong checks and balances in place to protect the $5 league and the overall $100k league.

SlackerDan There is no such beast. There is no system of checks and balances that is remotely fullproof.

99% of the owners that complain about a trade can only look at how it affects there team, a natural response. They give no thought to how the two owners are thinking.

Owner approvals lead to collusion via cliques.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:00 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by SlackerDan:

Any chance the UTL player could be any one on our roster ? Hitter or a pitcher ? If we need saves and have the ability to load up...go for it, or if we need steals, etc... your thoughts ?

SlackerDan might have a good idea here. [/QUOTE]Good idea, but I think a better idea would be to leave UTIL alone, and simply expand active rosters Sept 1 by two spots from 23 to 25. Expand total roster spots by 2 also Sept 1.

Those two spots can be HH, HP, or PP.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:23 am

Originally posted by UFS:

Good idea, but I think a better idea would be to leave UTIL alone, and simply expand active rosters Sept 1 by two spots from 23 to 25. Expand total roster spots by 2 also Sept 1.

Those two spots can be HH, HP, or PP. interesting idea about the roster expansion.

what may i ask is the downfall from opening up the Util position to include pitchers? thanks

SlackerDan · Post by **SlackerDan** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:34 am

Not sure if I like the roster expan. in Sept. I think the only teams going to take advantage of it are the ones in hunt for the money. As you all know, come 2/3rds of the way, if your team sucks and you feel you have no chance to win, some folks stop playing.

Baseball is a long, long race and would rather use UTL for the addtional save, SB or win, or whatever for each week. A save in week one is just as good as a save in week 26.

SlackerDan

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:58 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by UFS:

Good idea, but I think a better idea would be to leave UTIL alone, and simply expand active rosters Sept 1 by two spots from 23 to 25. Expand total roster spots by 2 also Sept 1.

Those two spots can be HH, HP, or PP. interesting idea about the roster expansion.

what may i ask is the downfall from opening up the Util position to include pitchers? thanks [/QUOTE]Slacker... the same 2/3 teams will stop making UTIL changes also.

GG...not sure what the downfall is. Whenever I make a rules change, it always creates another smaller problem down the road though. A few times, that problem can't be anticipated.

My gut reaction w/o much thought is that P cats could be manipulated more easily. An extra 5-10 wins or saves in April and May could make the home stretch much easier to manage.

It would certainly add another level of strategy.

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:54 pm

On Trades: Big money leads to collusion and trading provides the means. You just can't have trades in leagues with such big money involved.

On the hitter/pitcher UTIL slot: There are so few people who have ever played this way that the lack of familiarity should disqualify this option. To keep the count at 300, it would be foolish to add a totally oddball roster option. It may be fun to use but not here.

On daily moves: Again, too many people who are willing to enter this competition don't want to be "chained" to their computer on a daily basis. I personally like daily moves but can understand why it can't happen.

Twice-a-week moves. I would definitely like this and think it is reasonable for those who don't want to be chained. I would understand if Greg and his folks decided against it. I am pretty sure the reason would be a fear of losing players.

You may be able to talk Greg into an online drafted league with some of these options but I doubt if any but twice-a-week moves will ever invade the main event.

SlackerDan · Post by **SlackerDan** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:05 pm

Viper,

I honestly dont see why UTL player for any postion would be such a challenge for anyone in this league. It is the best of the best fantasy baseball players ... to my point, I have never particpated in a DRAFT fantasy baseball league...not once. Only particpated in auction leagues, but wanted to try my hand at the big money. As it stands, I am in 1st place LV9. All I am saying is if you know how to play fantasy baseball ... doesnt matter if you have 5x5, 8x8, pitchers/hitters in UTL, or trades (I understand why we CAN NOT have trades in this league, as much as I would like to have it)....anyway, thanks to all for talking about this post. I would rather talk about baseball 100x more than football ... might be because my NFFC SUCKS!

SlackerDan

SlackerDan · Post by **SlackerDan** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:07 pm

Wanted to say ... MY NFFC football team sucks... worse draft/auction I have ever done! Next time I cant wait til the 6th round to take a WR.

SlackerDan

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:20 pm

SlackerDan - I'm not sure you could find 300 people who wanted to try something totally new and foreign to how they generally play with a $1250 buy-in. Consider all the negative comments in previous threads when the idea of daily moves has been brought up - and daily moves are not exactly unusual.

Odd but I have never done an auction league as I am primarily in online leagues (ESPN & Yahoo) where the auction concept is pretty much unworkable and not even available. I would like to try an auction league but not for a $1250 buy-in. Donating isn't something I like and veteran auction players would likely eat me alive the first year.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:04 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

No daily moves and free agents would still be weekly. Twice weekly roster moves would enhance our game a lot. No guesswork on injuries or rotations, a twice a week pitcher can be used once or twice, hitters will hit better against one team more than another. The only drawback may be technical, but I'll let the computer wizards worry about that. The twice weekly roster moves within your own roster has been addressed before and it's not a bad idea. Technically, this is not a problem as I have discussed this with STATS. Now that we have veteran players on board, this is the one rule change I would be interested in discussing for 2006.

Again, we'd still have just weekly free agent pickups, but you'd have the chance to move reserves (including pitchers) in and out of your lineup before Friday's first games. Thoughts?

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:36 am

I, for one, would vote to have twice weekly moves.

Don Mathis · Post by **Don Mathis** » Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:11 am

I would prefer to leave moves just the way they are

SlackerDan · Post by **SlackerDan** » Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:32 am

I am ok with it, but would like utlity postion to be either hitter or pitcher

SlackerDan

Cellar Dwellers · Post by **Cellar Dwellers** » Sun Sep 18, 2005 2:47 pm

I've been for twice weekly moves from day one. Sick of agonizing which player to start right before the deadline, only to have the guy I decided on go down with an injury in Monday's game, and the guy I kept reserved, go on to have a huge week.

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:20 am

I would be for twice a week moves also. I do like the idea of the utility player being a hitter or a pitcher. The flexibility is nice and MLB teams are not restricted to a certain mix of hitter or pitchers on their roster. They do what makes sense for them at that time and we should too.