NCCubFan

Fixed. :D

Looks like today's finished me off for this week. A poor outing by El Duque (losing to Washington, of all teams) and another collapse by Ryan (negative points even before deductions for TBA) was the last thing I needed when I was already two starts short thanks to Mother Nature and Jennings' injury. Oh well, at least it was Hill that helped to seal my fate, so that makes it a bit easier to take.

My interpretation is that would be OK, since Escobar actually went on the major league DL. My situation is a bit different, since Jennings is missing a start but hasn't actually been placed on the DL (at least yet). Since I can't place him on my DL, I don't think I can pick up a free agent pitcher to get his start either.

Up yours, MLB. I want to watch Hill pitch, and I'm paying good money for the right to do just that.

Damn you, LaLoser. Reyes pushed back to Monday (instead of just one day) because of last night's rainout. It looks like only 5 starts for me this week (because of Jennings missing a start). :evil:

I don't think I'd like to be compared to myself either. :lol:

Blame today on Friday the 13th. Oh, wait: It was Friday the 13th for the Reds, too.

We have pitchers scheduled to go against each other tonight (Sheets vs. Reyes), but the game is being delayed by rain. At least if it is rained out it will cancel out by hurting us equally. And interestingly I have Sheets in another league, so whenever the game is played it will help me in one league and hurt me in another.

Dammit, now I may not get my 7 starts this week even with Owings. Jennings has been scratched from his start tomorrow due to tendinitis. :evil:

It would be; it would be dependent on the league members being honest enough to make self-policing practical.

And you just knew that was the day he would have been heaved. :D

That type of substitution has already been allowed; I have no problem with that. As far as the pitching issue is concerned, one week, as you mentioned, you might have five starters scheduled for a total of 8 or 9 starts, meaning with the new limit you'd have to give up the last couple of starts. The next week you may have 5 starters only making 5 starts. If you have to stick with the same 5 starters all week that seems inequitable to me because you'd lose excess starts one week without being able to offset that by making up for a deficiency the next week. It's just the luck of the draw when pitchers have one vs. two starts in a week. So my opinion is we need to either go back to the old policy of requiring the same starters for the entire week regardless of how many starts those five pitchers have, or else allow substitutions as needed to ensure that you get the seven starts. As far as BigbadB's point is concerned, I think what may be needed is a bit of clarification on certain circumstances where substitutions are allowed. I know the gereral rule is no offensive substitutions, and that would mean that you can't make changes for off-days or based on who seems hot that week. I think it's also understood that you can make changes if a player goes on or comes off the DL during the week, or if a player is sent down to or called up from the minor leagues. I believe, but am not as sure, that you can make a change if it is announced that a player is being benched by his major league team for an extended period (as opposed to being given one day off). Where I think more flexibility should be allowed, and I think BigbadB raised this issue too, is for unscheduled days off due to weather postponements. Scheduled days off are one thing; you know about them in advance, and if it's important to you you can take that into account when setting your roster for the week. However, if a team has several postponements (such as Seattle at Cleveland last week) it can really hurt you. I think it was widely known that the entire series would probably be lost even though it was announced officially one day at a time, and losing key players for that many days with no recourse can make the difference between winning or losing. In some cases it may be impractical to make a substitution for a rainout (if it's a late night game that's rained out it may just be too late to make a change because the other games have already started). However, if a rainout is announced in time, I think someone should be able to make a change. One thought I've come up with I'd like to bring up for debate. How about a policy where you can make one substitution at each position each week, with the stipulation that, once you make a change, you need to keep the replacement in your lineup the rest of the week for better or worse? It seems to me that it would be a clearly understood rule that's easy to follow, allows some flexibility, yet avoids the potential abuse of continuously substituting throughout the week that Juan's concerned with (and legitimately so, in my opinion). It just seems to me that's a possible compromise that addresses legitimate concerns on both sides. Just my :twocents: .

I'm quite sure his comment was in response to BigbadB's earlier comment, even though there were a number of posts in between the two.

I took that comment as a joke, not a statement on what Zell really thinks. And Zell has nothing to say about it anyway, since the Cubs will be sold before he takes over ownership of the Trib.

I could live with that. :D

That's the whole issue, and it's a matter of interpretation since this specific issue hadn't come up before. It has been clearly stated that we can freely move starting pitchers between the active roster and the reserve list to get the allowed 7 starts, and it just seemed to me that moving a pitcher from the minor league roster to the active list is in the same spirit (it's not like I picked up a free agent during the week and placed him on the active list; I already had Owings). If my interpretation on this is wrong I'm sure Juan can adjust the scoring, as long as I have enough notice to know that I'd need to start someone else other than Owings to get my 7 starts in. I don't believe either one of us is trying to screw over the other; this is just an issue that hasn't been addressed before in light of the 7 start rule. BTW, in one way you're actually benefitting from this. Had I made this move before the week began, Guzman would have been on my active list all week and I would have gotten 10.25 points for his relief outing on Tuesday, but because I didn't make the move until later he was on my reserve list at the time and I don't get those points.

i'm confused... I had Heilman in one of my RP positions, Guzman on my reserve list, and Owings on my minor league roster. To activate Owings I had to drop somebody, since my major league roster was full, and it was Heilman that I dropped. That in turn left the RP position empty, so I moved Guzman into that position. so we can make mid-week roster changes? In the event of a trade, promotion to majors or injury - sure. was owings promoted? He started the season on the minor league roster of Arizona (even though he didn't actually pitch a game in the minors) because he wasn't on their 40-man roster. He was then added to the 40-man and 25-man rosters before his first major league start (his contract was purchased from their AAA team) and Durbin was DFA'd to make room for Owings on both the 25-man and 40-man rosters. Durbin made one start for Arizona before Owings was promoted.

i'm confused... I had Heilman in one of my RP positions, Guzman on my reserve list, and Owings on my minor league roster. To activate Owings I had to drop somebody, since my major league roster was full, and it was Heilman that I dropped. That in turn left the RP position empty, so I moved Guzman into that position.

Win.

I've always pronounced it Wee-ters. With that spelling I think it would be pronounced that way. If it were White-ers it would probably be spelled Weiters.

They should reimburse you for your travel expenses.

Cookie for me! http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Chocolate_chip_cookies.jpg/800px-Chocolate_chip_cookies.jpg

Yep. I have Drew on two of my fantasy teams, so seeing the numbers he was putting up for me there made me think he was a good replacement for Godzilla.

Zero chance they skip a turn for Hill; he's the closest thing the Cubs have to an automatic victory in the rotation. They may move his start back a game to keep Z on his regular schedule (like they did with Miller's first start), but they wouldn't skip over Hill completely. EDIT: It might help if I actually read the rest of the thread before replying. :D

Yes they do.