|
Post by jackbauer on Jan 14, 2009 21:53:01 GMT -5
Eligibility: Players are eligible for any position played at least 20 games the previous season, or at least 1 game the current season.
How about changing position eligibility to at least 5 or 10 games during the current season?
Terrorists dread the day in October that Daylight Savings Time ends. Jack Bauer gets 25 hours in which to kill them.
|
|
|
Post by harry298 on Jan 15, 2009 0:28:00 GMT -5
I agree that it should be at least 5 games during the current season at a position to gain eligibility.....
|
|
|
Post by jtbaty on Jan 15, 2009 15:17:10 GMT -5
I don't really mind either way so 5 games is fine with me
|
|
|
Post by bigggc on Jan 15, 2009 22:05:34 GMT -5
5 is good
|
|
|
Post by rickrauzi on Jan 15, 2009 22:12:03 GMT -5
I can go with 5
|
|
|
Post by #CheapPitchers on Jan 15, 2009 22:53:19 GMT -5
5 seems fine. Just confirming something though... this would mean that if you are planning on starting a rookie who makes the ball club (for example - just for the sake of argument - let's just say a Buster Posey on San Fran) you wouldn't be able to this year during our Week 1, even if he won the starting catching job (which he won't because of Molina's contract). But if he did, since he doesn't have 5 games played at C this year, you wouldn't be able to, right? Would have to wait until week 2 or week 3, once he's played 5 games. I think I have this correct.
|
|
|
Post by thebreeze on Jan 15, 2009 23:23:34 GMT -5
with rookies it should be different... whatever the rookie's position is listed as in CBS should be where he is eligible at. (i.e. Posey would be eligible at C right away). If he came up and started playing 1B, he wouldn't gain eligibility until he reached 5 games.
As for players playing in the majors already, I agree that the plateau should be at least 5. This would keep player values more accurate.
|
|
|
Post by gregous613 on Jan 15, 2009 23:27:35 GMT -5
I agree with the comment posted above this message. That seems the most fair.
|
|
|
Post by jtbaty on Jan 29, 2009 15:45:22 GMT -5
Looks like I'm a little late on this topic, but a rookie should at least be eligible to play at the position he is listed under (according to CBSsportsline).
I think the 5 game rule should apply for when managers decide to move players around during the season. Last year, Pujols had to play 2B for an inning or two--it would suck if he all of a sudden had 2B eligibility for 1 game. 5 seems like a fair amount. Rookies should be eligible for listed position--should not have to wait 5 games.
|
|
|
Post by jackbauer on Jan 29, 2009 16:43:18 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that rookies are assigned the position they are expected to play in the majors by CBS, so it hopefully shouldn't be an issue. I agree that you shouldn't have to wait for five games for a rookie to play, but I don't think it will come into play since CBS does a good job at assigning positions to rookies.
|
|
|
Post by gregous613 on Jan 29, 2009 18:03:42 GMT -5
Correct, CBS assigns positions for minor leaguers way before they are even in the bigs.
|
|
|
Post by yabud on Jan 29, 2009 18:50:58 GMT -5
They do assign positions but I would definetely say they don't always do the best job... They often mess it up especially with young infielders.
|
|
|
Post by thebreeze on Feb 6, 2009 1:00:03 GMT -5
Rob, what ever became of this? Is the GP limit set to 5 now, or is it still 1?
|
|
|
Post by bostonlagers on Feb 8, 2009 1:43:29 GMT -5
I think 5 is fair.
|
|
|
Post by adonal on Feb 8, 2009 15:21:17 GMT -5
The constitution says 5. Looks like CBS just needs to be updated, it says 1.
|
|
|
Post by thebreeze on Feb 8, 2009 15:25:51 GMT -5
The constitution says 5. Looks like CBS just needs to be updated, it says 1. Ok, good... Thanks for pointing that out Hamilton, I must have missed it.
|
|