Re: 2009 Draft discussion

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

no, what was the question on sandoval? Tim, yes, same rule on IR. You can add/drop at will. once you legalize your roster, you can also make trades.

I'll take Bonderman.

I just asked how many games he has to play to be eligible at C. He played 11 last year in limited time in the majors, but didn't retain his eligibility there. Does he now have to play 10 at C to get eligibility? Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.
yes, he needs to play 10 to get there this year. if he starts at 3b opening day, he is eligible there.

I belive you will be incorrect should he start the season there.. and this confirms it. So why again should you be able to place Sheets on the DL? Stop deflecting and give a reasonable answer.

because he's got a broken fucking arm or some shit. he's hurt. he's unable to pitch due to injury. he is about to have surgery. he is unsigned due to injury. he is disabled.

why am i incorrect on sandavol?

bukie · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.

No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.

tadowdaddy · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.

I was not asking for him to be automatically available as a 3b, I was asking if he would be. Can you even read????

February 23, 2009

Wait. If a guy is named a starter at a particular position, that player immediately becomes eligible at that position? When did this start?

This will be really good for me if Ian Stewart gets named an outfield starter, Kendry Morales gets named a 1b starter and Alexei Ramirez gets named as a SS starter to start the year. I'll have all kinds of options.

bukie · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.

Yes, he was asking for a clarification of the rules. He doesn't currently have him at 3B to sidestep them, he asked what the eligibility rules were. Juan clarified that if a player is the opening day starter at a position, that player becomes eligible for that position, by CBS's player eligibility rules.

He's not asking if he can stash him at 3B until he plays there. You're trying to claim this as some kind of precedent to side-stepping the rules. If Sheets is signed and placed on the DL before the season starts, he can go on the IR. That's as similar as the two scenarios get.

tadowdaddy · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.
Yes, he was asking for a clarification of the rules. He doesn't currently have him at 3B to sidestep them, he asked what the eligibility rules were. Juan clarified that if a player is the opening day starter at a position, that player becomes eligible for that position, by CBS's player eligibility rules.

He's not asking if he can stash him at 3B until he plays there. You're trying to claim this as some kind of precedent to side-stepping the rules. If Sheets is signed and placed on the DL before the season starts, he can go on the IR. That's as similar as the two scenarios get.

Thank you Kevin. It's really not that hard to understand. Adam just can't seem to give a reason that Sheets should be able to be placed on the DL even though he's not on the MLB DL. He just tries to deflect upon others because he can't give a valid reason.

February 23, 2009

Wait. If a guy is named a starter at a particular position, that player immediately becomes eligible at that position? When did this start?

This will be really good for me if Ian Stewart gets named an outfield starter, Kendry Morales gets named a 1b starter and Alexei Ramirez gets named as a SS starter to start the year. I'll have all kinds of options.

It started a long time ago and has been the case many many times.

February 23, 2009

Adam, if you don't want Sheets, I'd be willing to give up something for him.

February 23, 2009

Wait. If a guy is named a starter at a particular position, that player immediately becomes eligible at that position? When did this start?

This will be really good for me if Ian Stewart gets named an outfield starter, Kendry Morales gets named a 1b starter and Alexei Ramirez gets named as a SS starter to start the year. I'll have all kinds of options.

It started a long time ago and has been the case many many times.

I know it's been that way for pitchers who convert from RP to SP and vice versa. But, I wasn't aware that this happened for position players. In fact, I remember talking to you about this during the offseason about shortening the amount of games a guy has to play to be eligible. Turns out, you get eligibility if you don't play any, but get named at that position to start the season, which is even better than what I was originally asking.

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.
Yes, he was asking for a clarification of the rules. He doesn't currently have him at 3B to sidestep them, he asked what the eligibility rules were. Juan clarified that if a player is the opening day starter at a position, that player becomes eligible for that position, by CBS's player eligibility rules.

He's not asking if he can stash him at 3B until he plays there. You're trying to claim this as some kind of precedent to side-stepping the rules. If Sheets is signed and placed on the DL before the season starts, he can go on the IR. That's as similar as the two scenarios get.

Thank you Kevin. It's really not that hard to understand. Adam just can't seem to give a reason that Sheets should be able to be placed on the DL even though he's not on the MLB DL. He just tries to deflect upon others because he can't give a valid reason.

like i've said eight fucking times. he's hurt. he's disabled. he is unable to pitch due to injury. he is going to surgery.

tadowdaddy · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.
Yes, he was asking for a clarification of the rules. He doesn't currently have him at 3B to sidestep them, he asked what the eligibility rules were. Juan clarified that if a player is the opening day starter at a position, that player becomes eligible for that position, by CBS's player eligibility rules.

He's not asking if he can stash him at 3B until he plays there. You're trying to claim this as some kind of precedent to side-stepping the rules. If Sheets is signed and placed on the DL before the season starts, he can go on the IR. That's as similar as the two scenarios get.

Thank you Kevin. It's really not that hard to understand. Adam just can't seem to give a reason that Sheets should be able to be placed on the DL even though he's not on the MLB DL. He just tries to deflect upon others because he can't give a valid reason.

like i've said eight fucking times. he's hurt. he's disabled. he is unable to pitch due to injury. he is going to surgery.

How does that get around the fact that he is not on the MLB DL????????????????????????????????????????? Why won't you answer that?

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

Wait. If a guy is named a starter at a particular position, that player immediately becomes eligible at that position? When did this start?

This will be really good for me if Ian Stewart gets named an outfield starter, Kendry Morales gets named a 1b starter and Alexei Ramirez gets named as a SS starter to start the year. I'll have all kinds of options.

It started a long time ago and has been the case many many times.

I know it's been that way for pitchers who convert from RP to SP and vice versa. But, I wasn't aware that this happened for position players. In fact, I remember talking to you about this during the offseason about shortening the amount of games a guy has to play to be eligible. Turns out, you get eligibility if you don't play any, but get named at that position to start the season, which is even better than what I was originally asking.

it's different for pitchers. dempster, for instance wasn't eligible as a SP last year b/c he hadn't made 10 starts or whatever. but he also wasn't eligible at RP b/c you can't have a guy in your lineup as a RP when he's starting games. if dempster wasn't eligible as a SP, he would be an unusable player for 1/3 of the season.

position players are different. sandoval is eligible at 1b and 1b only. that is the position he is eligible at. he can still be used as a 1b.

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.
Yes, he was asking for a clarification of the rules. He doesn't currently have him at 3B to sidestep them, he asked what the eligibility rules were. Juan clarified that if a player is the opening day starter at a position, that player becomes eligible for that position, by CBS's player eligibility rules.

He's not asking if he can stash him at 3B until he plays there. You're trying to claim this as some kind of precedent to side-stepping the rules. If Sheets is signed and placed on the DL before the season starts, he can go on the IR. That's as similar as the two scenarios get.

Thank you Kevin. It's really not that hard to understand. Adam just can't seem to give a reason that Sheets should be able to be placed on the DL even though he's not on the MLB DL. He just tries to deflect upon others because he can't give a valid reason.

like i've said eight fucking times. he's hurt. he's disabled. he is unable to pitch due to injury. he is going to surgery.

How does that get around the fact that he is not on the MLB DL????????????????????????????????????????? Why won't you answer that?

he's not on a cocksucking team. the only reason he's not on a major league DL is because he happened to be a FA when this happened.

tadowdaddy · February 23, 2009

well, don wants a special exemption to apply to his guy, but apparently not mine. if we're going by the exact wording of the rules, his guy's not eligible.
No, Don wanted to know if/when his player would become eligible at a position, not to get a special exemption to put him there to sidestep the rules.

Also, if he's named the starting 3b for SF, will he be automatically eligible there, even though he didn't play any 3b last year.
Yes, he was asking for a clarification of the rules. He doesn't currently have him at 3B to sidestep them, he asked what the eligibility rules were. Juan clarified that if a player is the opening day starter at a position, that player becomes eligible for that position, by CBS's player eligibility rules.

He's not asking if he can stash him at 3B until he plays there. You're trying to claim this as some kind of precedent to side-stepping the rules. If Sheets is signed and placed on the DL before the season starts, he can go on the IR. That's as similar as the two scenarios get.

Thank you Kevin. It's really not that hard to understand. Adam just can't seem to give a reason that Sheets should be able to be placed on the DL even though he's not on the MLB DL. He just tries to deflect upon others because he can't give a valid reason.

like i've said eight fucking times. he's hurt. he's disabled. he is unable to pitch due to injury. he is going to surgery.

How does that get around the fact that he is not on the MLB DL????????????????????????????????????????? Why won't you answer that?

he's not on a [expletive] team. the only reason he's not on a major league DL is because he happened to be a FA when this happened.

Guess that sucks for you then. You should really hope he gets picked up prior to the season or he'll be sitting on your bench. Tim's even said that he was prepared to lose a bench spot to keep him. Sorry. Tim plays by the rules. Don't see why it's so hard for you to do so.

Edited February 23, 2009 by tadowdaddy

tadowdaddy · February 23, 2009

Wait. If a guy is named a starter at a particular position, that player immediately becomes eligible at that position? When did this start?

This will be really good for me if Ian Stewart gets named an outfield starter, Kendry Morales gets named a 1b starter and Alexei Ramirez gets named as a SS starter to start the year. I'll have all kinds of options.

It started a long time ago and has been the case many many times.

I know it's been that way for pitchers who convert from RP to SP and vice versa. But, I wasn't aware that this happened for position players. In fact, I remember talking to you about this during the offseason about shortening the amount of games a guy has to play to be eligible. Turns out, you get eligibility if you don't play any, but get named at that position to start the season, which is even better than what I was originally asking.

it's different for pitchers. dempster, for instance wasn't eligible as a SP last year b/c he hadn't made 10 starts or whatever. but he also wasn't eligible at RP b/c you can't have a guy in your lineup as a RP when he's starting games. if dempster wasn't eligible as a SP, he would be an unusable player for 1/3 of the season.

position players are different. sandoval is eligible at 1b and 1b only. that is the position he is eligible at. he can still be used as a 1b.

Wrong.. see Juan's note above. You're 0 for 2. I'm done discussing it with you.

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

aren't you testy.

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

the "must be on a team's DL" rule is meant to prevent the DL'ing of players who are day-to-day with injuries. not to prevent guys who are injured for half the season yet unsigned from being placed on the DL. i can't believe this is even a debate.

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

and i realize the sheets and sandoval issues are separate. i just bring that up because i kinda sorta doubt don would have this same opinion about sheets if he were on, say...i dunno...matt's team.

tadowdaddy · February 23, 2009

and i realize the sheets and sandoval issues are separate. i just bring that up because i kinda sorta doubt don would have this same opinion about sheets if he were on, say...i dunno...matt's team.

Are you kidding me???? Quit assuming dude. Tim and I discussed it (I'm sure he'll agree that I was the one that brought it up) even before Sheets was drafted by ANYONE.

NCCubFan · February 23, 2009

and i realize the sheets and sandoval issues are separate. i just bring that up because i kinda sorta doubt don would have this same opinion about sheets if he were on, say...i dunno...matt's team.

I disagree with that. I think most of us simply understand what the rule clearly states, and it doesn't matter what owner is trying to get around the rule. From my perspective I stayed away from Sheets because I understand the rule and didn't want to free up a reserve spot for him (at least not this early); if he were eligible to be on a DL you never would have got him at this point because somebody (me, if nobody else) would have drafted him sooner. The fact that it's you specifically is irrelevant; it would have been the same issue if someone else drafted him and tried to DL him against clearly stated league rules. If you wanted to put him on your DL now in anticipation of him signing before the season, with the understanding that you then have to release him if he doesn't start the season on a major league disabled list, that's perfectly legal.

cbbryan · February 23, 2009

Didn't we kind of go through this with Bonds as well?

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

so the rules strictly apply to sheets (even though the rule clearly wasn't worded like that to apply to situations like this), but not sandoval.

February 23, 2009

and i realize the sheets and sandoval issues are separate. i just bring that up because i kinda sorta doubt don would have this same opinion about sheets if he were on, say...i dunno...matt's team.

Are you kidding me???? Quit assuming dude. Tim and I discussed it (I'm sure he'll agree that I was the one that brought it up) even before Sheets was drafted by ANYONE.

When I traded up in the draft to get a shot at him, gonzo & buchholz, you pm'd me and guessed at who I was going after and we talked about it at that time.

I also talked about sheets last night with UK, but I can't remember if we discussed IR eligibility specifically.

abuck1220 · February 23, 2009

Didn't we kind of go through this with Bonds as well?

maybe, but bonds wasn't hurt.

Re: 2009 Draft discussion

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs