Extra Base Hit Dynasty

Since 2006
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  Log inLog in  

Share | 
 

 Adding New FA's that have just played a game

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Which Rule to go with?
22 Hour Clock from set time
43%
 43% [ 6 ]
Full Time Waiver Wire
57%
 57% [ 8 ]
Total Votes : 14
 

AuthorMessage
Knuckleball
Commissioner


Number of posts : 666
Age : 31
Location : Granite Bay, CA
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Mon Apr 16, 2012 1:55 am

Not quite sure what we do if this vote splits.


Last edited by Knuckleball on Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:49 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:37 am

add another one why can't we just do a set time for example 3pm est the day after they played. Then there is not figuring out when they are available.
Back to top Go down
jamcam13
Commissioner
avatar

Number of posts : 855
Age : 47
Location : Long Island
Registration date : 2008-01-09

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:57 am

If we opened the Mi bidding before May, that would help, too.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:02 pm

OPen it now. I've got moves to make!
Back to top Go down
Knuckleball
Commissioner


Number of posts : 666
Age : 31
Location : Granite Bay, CA
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Mon Apr 16, 2012 4:56 pm

spundin wrote:
OPen it now. I've got moves to make!

I think we did Mid May last year, the earliest I would revise it to would be May 1st to give a full month of minor league games to be evaluated.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Knuckleball
Commissioner


Number of posts : 666
Age : 31
Location : Granite Bay, CA
Registration date : 2008-12-15

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Mon Apr 16, 2012 5:03 pm

Banekng wrote:
add another one why can't we just do a set time for example 3pm est the day after they played. Then there is not figuring out when they are available.

I think this type of concept could be incorporated into the 22 hour from a set time, but the only problem with it is that you can't necessarily say everyone is going to be sitting around their computer at 10 pm EST/7 pm PST to be fair.

If we go with WW all the time, then once a guy plays a game, a team can add them to their list (whether it be 8pm...10pm...12pm...2am...basically anytime before waivers get processed) and it is a blind transaction.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Tue Apr 17, 2012 11:29 am

Takes 16 votes either way to pass, correct?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 18, 2012 1:13 am

what if we open it only for guys like this? while players in the minors cant be bid on til the may date
Back to top Go down
jamcam13
Commissioner
avatar

Number of posts : 855
Age : 47
Location : Long Island
Registration date : 2008-01-09

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:32 am

bryanmurphy9 wrote:
Takes 16 votes either way to pass, correct?

Why are you so overly concerned about this passing? Your reaction to this is funny. It's a totally logical thing to do, and the fact it's not unanimous is humorous.

Why would a league want a rule based on the reading of times and a clock? Makes no sense except those with a ton of time on their hands (who already have an advantage in other ways) wanting to reap even more benefits from not having a life.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 18, 2012 12:20 pm

jamcam13 wrote:
bryanmurphy9 wrote:
Takes 16 votes either way to pass, correct?

Why are you so overly concerned about this passing? Your reaction to this is funny. It's a totally logical thing to do, and the fact it's not unanimous is humorous.

Why would a league want a rule based on the reading of times and a clock? Makes no sense except those with a ton of time on their hands (who already have an advantage in other ways) wanting to reap even more benefits from not having a life.

I could care less honestly... The quality of players had by this rule over the course of a season is likely average at best on the norm. My stance, is that our rules say that to change ANY rule during a season it takes a super majority vote or 16 out of 20. This should have been in place when Al made a decision by himself on the first ruling. I'm for structure, cause if you don't have it then it just opens up areas for others to interpret whatever they so choose when it comes to the rules. It's why we have a time during the off-season to bring up amendments then vote on them.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:02 pm

Curious why is there not "leave as it was before" not on there where when they were added to the 25 man roster they were free game? Not that I am saying that is what I want but basically this vote states it will change and there is no choice.
Back to top Go down
jamcam13
Commissioner
avatar

Number of posts : 855
Age : 47
Location : Long Island
Registration date : 2008-01-09

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Thu Apr 19, 2012 8:42 am

Banekng wrote:
Curious why is there not "leave as it was before" not on there where when they were added to the 25 man roster they were free game? Not that I am saying that is what I want but basically this vote states it will change and there is no choice.

That point we voted on. So, that's out the window based on prior.

But, there is the point that this specific rule was never really voted on. That's why I think a simple majority of the votes should rule.

I agree with Bryan that the value of the players is low. But, to me, we never had a rule to begin with, so this is actually voting on the rule itself (after we decided as a league we need something that's not the "leave it as it was before.").

And there is common sense that enters into this. I agree with Bryan regarding structure. I also agree with no rule changes in season. But, again, to me we had no rule. So, it's not in fact a rule CHANGE as much as it is cleaning up old business. The timing is poor. But, this is also why I advocate voting on rule ideas as they come up (for the next season) and not waiting 7 months when everyone's forgotten why the hell we cared in the first place.

I'm not faulting anyone. The whole democratic process can be cumbersome. We don't need to make it any more so by having 3 options that will surely lead to a split vote.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:35 pm

Oh boy.

Ok, I'll be direct here:

To Bryan:

http://ebhdbaseball.forumplatinum.com/t1691-minor-league-activations

That's something people voted for in the offseason. As you can see, a clear majority. And since people voted for the specific rule that free agents have atleast 1 game played in the majors, there needs to be a specification of what a game played means. This isn't a new rule, it was a specific time table as to when a player is considered to have played a game. The timing thing was put in so people from coast to coast could actually be at home at the time a player could become available. The whole point of the rule was to specify that a player becomes eligible at a certain point. So we don't have cases where someone just picks off a player on speculation or random ambiguous timing. And thus, it wasn't me tripping on random power trip, but lack of options on CBS to add the news guys to the WW. As stephen can attest (or Luis or Kevin), me and him talked about it since January the 18th, but kept running into problems about implementing rules (from WW problems to player requests).

To Jeff:

We can't go back to "as it was before" because the rule changed. There needs to be a specific time as to when a player is actually declared eligible. I actually do like your specified time idea though, albeit it has to be later in the day when both coasts are home.

To everyone:

I understand the timing on this was too close to the season, but it was because we couldn't find a common ground that worked. I would've really appreciated it, if people voiced their concerns in the initial Amendments thread, which was up for I believe 10 days before the rule was put into place, partially because no one bothered about it, leading me to believe that no one had a problem with it. Infact when I posted it on the CBS message board, I included "Please read, if you have any problems, please let us know soon. Sorry for the delayed infusion of this one, but this took some time to figure out.". Thanks for the the input.

And this is just a simple majority vote, because again, it's not the changing of the rule, it's an adjustment to define the parameters of the rule.
Back to top Go down
Gonzo
Commissioner
avatar

Number of posts : 1374
Age : 27
Location : West Bloomfield, MI
Registration date : 2007-12-05

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:54 pm

i dont want all FAs to be constantly on waivers

could give a shit after that
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:10 pm

I don't think people probably are fully understanding that "Option 2" means every FA would constantly be on waivers... that means if Player A got hurt and you needed to go pick up a SS on a Sunday to fill in to try and win a category then that would no longer be possible.. you'd have to wait a day or whatever is chosen for that waiver claim to go through. Do you really want that people?!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:12 pm

To clarify my stance, IDC what is chosen but I am not a fan of everyone being on waivers ALL the time.. that's idiotic in my mind.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:11 am

This needs a re-wording and re-vote ASAP if "Option 2" is really that all of the Free Agent's would be placed on waivers... NOT just the new rookies that have made their MLB Debuts!!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:25 am

So no re-wording I guess... this is a dictatorship and what the commishes want.. goes. Nevermind that the voting booth topic is misleading and I bet half the people that voted for Option 2 don't know that now not only will MLB rookies that have just debuted be on waivers but now everyone will be.

Me - We need a re-wording and a re-vote on this whole topic… It's pretty likely that half the votes would change considering NO ONE wants all the free agents to be on waivers

Stephen - why does it need rewording...people are then idiots if they hadn't read all the conversations leading up to it

Me - It's worded differently both areas… the voting booth says "Full Time Waiver Wire"
Jeff already said he'd change his vote… so that'd be 7-7… I guarantee he's not the only one

Me - Having a full-time waiver wire takes all strategy out of day to day pickups… streaming for pitching categories, etc…

Stephen - No it doesn't...you just strategize around it...if you want to stream you obviously miss out on the chance to pick up the random players that could enter into the mlb without having been bid upon

Me - So you want to steam.. what if you have a bad day on a saturday and need another SP to try and bail out a win or K's on Sunday… now you have to claim him and the waiver would have to go through before you get him.

Stephen - yea...where is the problem...can have waivers set to a one day turn around

Me - I'm saying what about the guy that logs on Sunday morning? before the games start....

Me - And where does the fact that now the rule we're changing goes beyond what was voted on in the off-season… wheres the super majority vote? At no point was there a vote in the off-season on regular old Free Agents

Stephen - but there is no simple way to encompass what cbs should be doing...adding people when they actually play their first game

Me - Okay, well then you don't go and do something idiotic and put EVERYONE on waivers… I'm not a fan of the 22 hour option but because of CBS's limitations.. it's our best option. You never take strategy out of anything and that's what this new rule would do. People should have that option.. I'm not saying something like streaming works but owners should have that option.

Me - And it continues to dumbify things for owners who don't pay attention that much.. say we have waivers and Top Closer A is on my team. Well I'm watching the game and he leaves holding his elbow.. I can rush out and pickup Top Closer A's Team's Set-Up Man right away… with waivers now on everyone… every joe blow and their brother has the same chance. So again, were dumbifying things for the guy who doesn't pay attention.

Stephen - and what do you say to the people that aren't online 24/7 like yourself.

Me - I'm not saying you have to be online… What if you're watching your favorite team play.. I watch a ton of Cubs games and something happens. I can jump on my iPhone and make an add… why should I not be rewarded for being on the spot when Joe Blow was drunk that night and didn't know what was going on but checked the next morning and got the player because he put a claim in the next morning.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:40 am

[img][/img]
Back to top Go down
View user profile
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:41 am

So now we know that Full WW encompassing the whole universe of Free Agents and not just MLB Rookies making their debuts is Stephen's baby... and he seems to be alone in liking this idea
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:00 am

We have no other options, 22 hour rule was the one me and Stephen agreed upon initially (which was why it was put out), but everyone went out to take a crap on that, so our only other option is the full time WW idea. There isn't a whole lot else we can do, which is why we had a vote on it between the two, since no one wanted the other rule. But now, no one wants the full time WW?

Although just for curiosity, I would like to know how people thought full time WW would work for just the new guys? Like every new guy stayed on the WW forever?
Back to top Go down
bryanmurphy9

avatar

Number of posts : 1911
Age : 30
Location : Middletown, IN
Registration date : 2008-01-18

PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:16 am

The King Maker wrote:
We have no other options, 22 hour rule was the one me and Stephen agreed upon initially (which was why it was put out), but everyone went out to take a crap on that, so our only other option is the full time WW idea. There isn't a whole lot else we can do, which is why we had a vote on it between the two, since no one wanted the other rule. But now, no one wants the full time WW?

Although just for curiosity, I would like to know how people thought full time WW would work for just the new guys? Like every new guy stayed on the WW forever?

1.) You can't assume everyone reads every little back and forth post on here
2.) You can't assume more than half the league even gets on the forums in the off-season
3.) Wording of votes, and how they're read needs to have no wiggle room or room for interpretation

There should be a vote cast reading;

Option 1: Full-Time WW for ALL Free Agents
Option 2: 22 Hour Rule stated by yourself & Stephen
Option 3: Jeff's Option (Players would be eligible to be added at 9 or 10 PM EST the day after their debut)

For Option 2 or 3 we'd use timeanddate.com

Pretty simple....
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:45 am

I think the assumption is that a Commissioner would pick up and drop the new guys and if they cleared they were open game after 3 days. I know it was said that it was going to be a pain in the butt to do this but it was never flat out said no too. I know I am not the only one that made this assumption that is what we were voting for. There isn't that many of them and starting in May people can bid on people which will eliminate them.

You guys also act like we know what the settings are in CBS I don't have access too them so I have no clue what they are.

Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 2:47 am

We can't do the manual add/drop because of two reasons, one, it's impossible to add every new guy, and if it's someone sponsoring, then it gives away their intent to pick up a new guy. And I'm saying this as a commish, because the only people that would be gaining an advantage is a commish. It elevates my knowledge of your intentions, which makes for an unfair playing field, we have accusations of conflicts of interest opening up then, and all kinds of BS. I disliked the idea just because it gives me or Stephen or any commish an extra advantage. But if people are adamant enough about it, then fine.

I understand, you don't know, but I did say, we can't change the settings on CBS to allow for it. If every rookie could be added like that, we would love it, but CBS won't allow it unless people sat there and did it themselves". That's from the thread saying we were implementing it. Lets not act like we just made up a rule, and didn't explain why the rule was implemented.

But whatever. We'll have a 2 way vote. Majority wins.

Also, to Bryan, your last scenario in your text to Stephen would not be in play, because whoever drunk guy, that wakes up the next morning will have already missed out on the WW being processed, which you would've put in while still the game is going on, thus before the nightly WW processing. So technically, that scenario wouldn't exist. Just sayin.


Last edited by The King Maker on Wed Apr 25, 2012 3:04 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   Wed Apr 25, 2012 2:48 am

And closing this one for votes as well.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Adding New FA's that have just played a game   

Back to top Go down
 
Adding New FA's that have just played a game
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next
 Similar topics
-
» has anyone played this game?
» Why We played The Game
» Games to be played tomorrow
» Adding coolant to your Swing
» Adding oil temp sensor in pan

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Extra Base Hit Dynasty :: Off Season Activity :: Voting Booth :: Voting Booth Archive-
Jump to: