All players are entered into team rosters and contract status is set as well. Please look over your players (especially the minors, which I entered by hand) and make sure they are all there. Please double-check the contract status as well because those draft rounds will affect 2010 keeper rounds.
As discussed here last month, the one rule change this year is free agents/waivers. All players not on a Fungo League roster are on waivers. To pick up a free agent, you must make a waiver claim. Claims are processed each night in reverse standings order (last place team gets priority). You are limited to one claim per day.
Please contact me with any questions or comments. Good luck!
16 Comments
March 29, 2009 at 7:18 pm
I don’t mind horribly, but is there a reason for the one claim per day rule? What are we trying to prevent, large-scale roster dumping / overhaul?
What if we did two or three?
March 30, 2009 at 9:47 am
What I thought was set to one claim per waiver period (one day) was actually one per scoring period (one week). I’ve changed it to three per scoring period for now, but we can adjust it later if that number doesn’t work.
March 31, 2009 at 1:25 pm
So how do the waivers get processed? I had a claim in on Willy Taveras, but John got him. Is it because I made that my second claim for the day? Do I need to pay attention to the order of my waiver claims somehow? I’m really confused.
March 31, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Maybe I didn’t get it in? I thought I did.
Is there anywhere that shows failed waiver claims?
March 31, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Yes, the order of your claims looks to have been the difference here. Your first claim for Wellemeyer was processed, dropping you to last in waiver priority, then John’s claim for Taveras happened. This made your second claim void.
March 31, 2009 at 5:27 pm
So when does the waiver order reset to standings?
March 31, 2009 at 5:32 pm
I would imagine that waiver order resets to standings whenever they are updated, which would be Sunday night/Monday morning. Thinking that through, it means that the person in last place will only get waiver claim priority on their first claim of the week. Whenever you successfully claim a player, you go to the bottom of the waiver order, and the second-to-last team will now have first pick for the rest of the week or until they make a claim, whichever comes first.
March 31, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Good to know.
April 3, 2009 at 3:47 pm
What’s the rule for picking up minors-eligible players? Can I drop a minor and replace him with a minor?
April 3, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Minors can only be added during the draft. I’ve often thought that we should have a chance to replace minors players at the All-Star break, but I never received any feedback on that idea in past years.
April 4, 2009 at 12:35 pm
What if we did some sort of mini-minors draft online during the All-Star game? Let everyone decide whether to keep their minors or chuck them back into the pool, and then redraft whatever spots are left?
While we’re discussing potential changes: check out the following:
http://fungoleague.baseball.cbssports.com/help/glossary
It lists all the stats that can be used. Perhaps we want to move to Net saves (Saves minus blown saves), or net stolen bases (SB – CS)? Maybe it’s time to move to ER or even just Runs Allowed rather than ERA?
Those are rather unique metrics, and may make it harder to evaluate talent using common stats.
On the other hand, moving to OBP instead of Walks might bring us closer in line with leagues who look at Batting Average.
Thoughts?
April 6, 2009 at 9:15 am
I was discussing some points with Myke. And I think some adjustments to the Metrics may be a good thing. I also think the roster size is way out of whack for 10 teams. With 8 teams it works, but with 10 I think the player pool is thinned beyond usability. I am juggling OFs that will maybe play every 4 days in my starting lineup.
I also think the idea behind using P instead of RP and SP causes some interesting problems. With our current metrics RPs are all but useless unless they are a lights out closer. Even a middle of the road closer has very little value. If they aren’t getting you 2 saves a week you could easily just ignore them and go with a starter.
I don’t pretend to know what changes would “solve” anything, but I do think the roster in general is too large. Dropping maybe a C, an OF and 1 P while dropping the roster down 4-6 spots may help. Anyway, not sure if these ideas are even valid, but it is what comes to mind today after really diving into my lineup.
April 6, 2009 at 9:37 am
I’m with Ryan on reducing the starting lineup by C, 1 OF and 1 P and reducing overall roster size by 5.
I’d also like to limit pitching starts per scoring period. I think it would increase the usefulness of some relievers and limit the “2-start pitcher carousel.”
I just don’t think there’s enough starting pitching to go around right now.
April 7, 2009 at 12:26 pm
I don’t mind changing things up, but I’m not really hungry to do it right now. I drafted my team with the current rosters and scoring parameters in mind. I’m glad people are looking at things and commenting on what works and doesn’t work, but I think these sound like major adjustments. Can we continue the discussion with next season in mind as a target for implementing anything?
Perhaps I’m jumping the gun and that is what you have in mind anyway.
That being said, I think the mid-season minors draft might be a nice addition and would not adversely affect anyone who concentrated on drafting for a certain position or for certain stats.
April 7, 2009 at 2:08 pm
Yeah, I assumed these would have to be changes for next year. The problem is discussion about next year always happens when people aren’t very interested and so it kind of gets skipped over. I figure if we can decide on some changes now, when people remember the draft, and are still paying attention to their teams we may get more voices in the discussion.
Any roster changes would have to wait until next year at this point unless they were really minor. The same goes for metric changes.
April 27, 2009 at 12:07 pm
So is that it? Is no one interested enough to discuss these changes?