Position eligibility

This is an open forum for anything related to the Dream Team Baseball League.

Re: Position eligibility

Postby Kevin » Mon Feb 09, 2015 1:57 am

Marc wrote:C'mon Kevin. That doesn't make sense. DH has to cout as a position. Your response to the scenario mentioned by Nick means that this C loophole remains open. Like I said earlier DH should equal 1B in DTBL position definitions.

I also don't see how that change is major but the rule at the start if this thread is not major


Marc, I guess that depends on what you mean by loophole. The scenario Nick described will be handled as it always has: players who primarily play as designated hitters will continue to be assigned to whatever other position they play most frequently. To me, that seems far more logical than simply assigning them as 1B across the board. Granted, in almost all cases, that's where they end up. But in the rare instances where a DH also plays some other position besides 1B, why not put them there instead? Let's take catchers out of the equation for a second. How about Carlos Beltran? Last year, he played 76 games as a DH, 32 games in the OF and one game at 1B. Why do you think he should be a 1B rather than an OF?

The major rule change I was talking about was Nick's suggestion to assign players as "Util only". I am willing to consider assigning all regular DHs to 1B if others think that is a better idea.
User avatar
Kevin
Commissioner
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 3:58 pm
Location: Vienna, VA

Re: Position eligibility

Postby Kevin » Mon Feb 09, 2015 4:17 am

Marc wrote:I didn't think it was necessary to ask. Vmart played 3 games at C and remained at that position just one year earlier. Didn't expect a drastic change in course to be made immediately


I know you don't see it this way, but this is not a drastic change in course. In fact, I'm really not changing anything. Had I not started this thread and just gone about my business making the position decisions like I've always done in the past, Martinez and Santana would have moved to 1B and I assume you would have been very upset when you saw Santana's name in the position change thread. So I'm glad we're airing this out now. The only thing I regret now is that I didn't do this sooner.

The reason why the decisions with Martinez and Santana this year are not the same as Martinez last year is because both of those guys played a significant number of games at some position in the field last year, as opposed to Martinez who only played 14 games as anything but a DH in '13. I realize you disagree with my method of ignoring games played at DH, but all I can tell you is that's exactly what I've been doing since 1998.

I'm glad to see Nick was expecting the Martinez move to 1B. And I'm sorry that the Santana move is catching you off guard. To be completely honest, it never crossed my mind that Santana moving to 1B would be in question. The Martinez move was the one I was worried about. But now that I see you didn't completely understand the reasoning behind Martinez being at catcher last year, it makes more sense to me.
User avatar
Kevin
Commissioner
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 3:58 pm
Location: Vienna, VA

Re: Position eligibility

Postby Marc » Mon Feb 09, 2015 9:34 am

I feel silly still talking about this.

Seems like I'm the only one to assume that Santana would stay at catcher based on recent history (ie, the previous season). This is the first I've heard of the DH not counting as a position, and in the past it had seemed to me that exceptions were made whenever possible to keep a guy at C. The decision on Vmart last year furthered this thought in my mind. I didn't even notice Vmart was still a C last year until early summer, and when I saw Nick in July we talked about this for a minute, and I felt from that even more sure that these C exceptions were made. I didn't know why he was a C, and Nick didn't know why he was a C. Kevin just said so.

So headed into this season, I expected Santana to get similar treatment. I thought maybe there is some grace period Kevin applies to the C position where guys keep that eligibility for an extra year. I have no idea. I think I've been in the DTBL 15 years, and I never understood what really made a guy eligible at C. Kevin would just post a list and that would be that. The main reason I thought Santana would stay at C is that he played 11 games there, while Vmart caught just 3 games in 2013 but remained at C. Vmart missed the entire 2012 season, and caught only 26 games in 2011. Over his last two full seasons Vmart remained eligible at C while playing that position an average of 13 games a year (again: Santana played 11 last year).

Does this logic not make sense to anyone but me?

I understand what you are saying now, Kevin, about the DH thing. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. as for your Beltran note, I'm fine with him in the OF. 46 games is a lot, and he's regarded as an OF by the industry. Santana seems to be in his farewell season as C in the industry, and Vmart hasn't been eligible as a C for some time. I get that the DTBL is different - it would have been good to know some of these guidelines before the cut deadline or even last season.

I'll just keep Santana and drop him after the draft. In the future, it would be good to know of position changes before we need to submit keepers
User avatar
Marc
Major Leaguer
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2003 11:42 am
Location: IL

Re: Position eligibility

Postby Kevin » Mon Feb 09, 2015 10:42 am

Marc, thank you for all of that last post. Now I completely understand where you are coming from and it has made it clear to me that I should have put these guidelines in writing a very long time ago since it is obvious that long standing members of this league like yourself didn't know why I was making the position decisions I was when it came to catchers. Hopefully now, even if you disagree with my method, you will at least know exactly when a player will be placed at a certain position. That's my goal here.

It is true that in every case from 2011 through 2014, a player who played ANY games at catcher always wound up as a catcher the following year in this league. But that is mostly a coincidence and was not an active attempt on my part to put every possible player at catcher, even if it may seem that way. We haven't had a case that I consider analogous to Santana and V-Mart this year since Pablo Sandoval in 2009->10. In that case, Sandoval played a vast majority of his games at 3B in addition to three at catcher and some more at 1B, so he was set to 3B.
User avatar
Kevin
Commissioner
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2003 3:58 pm
Location: Vienna, VA

Previous

Return to DTBL Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron