I'd like to open this up for a league-wide policy discussion about how to handle players who are not put on the DL (because MLB teams have 40 players and don't have to) but who are injured.
In my situation, I've got Jacoby Ellsbury with a hairline fracture in his foot. He was originally injured more than a week ago after fouling a ball off his foot. He played five games with the fracture, then aggravated it on a steal attempt. Now he's been examined and is in a walking boot for five days. JP and I spoke last night after he brought up the subject to the Exco, which believes players like this should be farmed.
There are many players in this position, but there's not going to be a way for all of them to be monitored. Bryce Harper has missed games, but has avoided the DL and played in the IBC. Felix Hernandez hasn't pitched in 8 days and has a back issue keeping him out of the rotation, but he remains active in the IBC. Miguel Cabrera is hurt, but playing in the IBC...there are others. When players get DFA'd, by our rules they remain active until they reach seven days unsigned. So, you can use a player not under contract, but not a player under contract and not DL'd.
Also, there are MANY times during the regular season a guy misses 4 games with a bruised pinky finger and plays in the IBC, doesn't hit the DL and no one thinks twice about it. But in September, now guys are being farmed because the DL is less of a necessity for MLB teams.
Also, there are also many minor league players who may be injured but their minor league season is over, didn't get called up and are sitting home eating Cheetos, but they have projections and are playing in the IBC.
My immediate concern is obviously selfish because I want to avoid losing Ellsbury in a playoff race. But my overall concern is equality for the situations of all these players.
If the argument is "That "slightly injured" player would play if his team was in a tight playoff race," that doesn't hold much weight because we are not MLB managers or GMs (as much as we may think we are) and can't make that argument. Likewise, if teams have big leads (like the Red Sox), they might not play a guy like Ellsbury to avoid longer injury. But how can we predict what decision may or may not be made on an individual player? We can't.
Ultimately, I think this is a policy discussion we should have in the offseason, not on Sept. 10, with only three weeks left in the season in the middle of many tight IBC playoff races. I'm sure this comes up every year, so we need to set a solid policy, not a case-by-case policy.
And I understand the need to keep the IBC as realistic as possible. I love that about this league. I want guys who are on the DL to avoid playing in the IBC. And I think this September injury issue needs to be resolved. But we can't do it for some players and not all.
Not DLed, still being farmed
-
Cardinals
- Posts: 8146
- Joined: Sat May 18, 2002 1:00 am
- Location: Manch Vegas, CT
- Name: John Paul Starkey
I'm really not sure what the problem is and why you can't differentiate Ellsbury's injury from Cabrera's, Harper's, or Felix's.
Allen Craig sprained his foot pretty good last week, was placed into a walking boot and will be re-evaluated this week. I'm farming him. Granted, I'm not in a race right now, but I'd do the same thing if I were. It's pretty clear that he would be playing for the Cardinals if he could right now.
Ellsbury has a fracture in his foot. Harper is going to play on Wednesday and has no damage to his side. Felix's shut down was precautionary according to reports. If it comes out that Felix's problem is serious and he has an actual injury other than tightness, then we should look at shutting him down.
The Nats are alive (barely) and the Mariners have nothing to play for. Unless Hernandez has damage to his back that would prevent him from pitching, it's relatively fair to assume that he would pitch if Seattle were in a playoff race. Everything I've read on it is precautionary. If you've read something that says otherwise, please, let somebody know and we'll look at shutting him down too.
Not really sure what Cabrera has to do with any of this. He played in games on the 6th, 7th and 8th this weekend. Ellsbury, meanwhile, flew back to Boston and then to Colorado while the Red Sox took on the Yankees, and was diagnosed with a fx foot and placed in a walking boot.
We've taken it on a case-by-case basis for the longest time because that's the only thing to do. I think it was Luis Gonzalez who was clearly injured and out for the year, but not disabled, that prompted this type of policy. Yeah, it sucks to have to speculate, but more often than not, we err on the player playing.
In this case, it just reeks of sour grapes entirely, especially citing players like Cabrera "not playing," and using the completely irrelevant designated for assignment example, which has nothing to do with injuries whatsoever.
In Ellsbury's case, he has a fractured foot. Boston still has regular season goals to play for. They're two ahead in the loss of Oakland for the coveted best record in the league spot (which puts a teams probability at winning the WS at ~20% rather than 10-15% if you're a 2 or 3 seed). It's pretty clear he's unable to play right now. I think any rational person would realize that. Ditto Craig. If Craig doesn't come back for the playoffs, then he'll be out of those as well.
You're clearly concerned, but offer no suggestions or ideas to fix it, other than basically you really, really want Ellsbury to play, or you really, really want Felix, Harper and Cabrera out since they're on New York and Texas.
Allen Craig sprained his foot pretty good last week, was placed into a walking boot and will be re-evaluated this week. I'm farming him. Granted, I'm not in a race right now, but I'd do the same thing if I were. It's pretty clear that he would be playing for the Cardinals if he could right now.
Ellsbury has a fracture in his foot. Harper is going to play on Wednesday and has no damage to his side. Felix's shut down was precautionary according to reports. If it comes out that Felix's problem is serious and he has an actual injury other than tightness, then we should look at shutting him down.
The Nats are alive (barely) and the Mariners have nothing to play for. Unless Hernandez has damage to his back that would prevent him from pitching, it's relatively fair to assume that he would pitch if Seattle were in a playoff race. Everything I've read on it is precautionary. If you've read something that says otherwise, please, let somebody know and we'll look at shutting him down too.
Not really sure what Cabrera has to do with any of this. He played in games on the 6th, 7th and 8th this weekend. Ellsbury, meanwhile, flew back to Boston and then to Colorado while the Red Sox took on the Yankees, and was diagnosed with a fx foot and placed in a walking boot.
We've taken it on a case-by-case basis for the longest time because that's the only thing to do. I think it was Luis Gonzalez who was clearly injured and out for the year, but not disabled, that prompted this type of policy. Yeah, it sucks to have to speculate, but more often than not, we err on the player playing.
In this case, it just reeks of sour grapes entirely, especially citing players like Cabrera "not playing," and using the completely irrelevant designated for assignment example, which has nothing to do with injuries whatsoever.
In Ellsbury's case, he has a fractured foot. Boston still has regular season goals to play for. They're two ahead in the loss of Oakland for the coveted best record in the league spot (which puts a teams probability at winning the WS at ~20% rather than 10-15% if you're a 2 or 3 seed). It's pretty clear he's unable to play right now. I think any rational person would realize that. Ditto Craig. If Craig doesn't come back for the playoffs, then he'll be out of those as well.
You're clearly concerned, but offer no suggestions or ideas to fix it, other than basically you really, really want Ellsbury to play, or you really, really want Felix, Harper and Cabrera out since they're on New York and Texas.
12, 14, 15, 17, 22
-
Guardians
- Posts: 5139
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:00 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL
- Name: Pat Gillespie
Sounds like I've struck a nerve with the mighty Exco. How dare I question the authority?! Pretty totalitarian response from Aaron, who's life is guided by the Confederates trying to break through the oppression of the North.
If Ellsbury doesn't play, he doesn't play. I understand he has a fracture. And I'm not trying to find a way for him to play. I'm trying to find a consistent policy that isn't decided based on what a group of sim league baseball managers thinks should happen to a player who isn't on the DL.
Obviously, his injury is not exact compared to another player's injury. But the situation is the same. They're injured, not playing, getting examined, etc. and not on the DL. Some get to play in the IBC, others do not.
And, as was pretty obviously stated at the top of my post, I'm asking for suggestions from all in the league who may be affected by this issue at one time or another. I don't think a case-by-case decision makes sense when there are plenty of other situations of players being active in the IBC when not active in MLB.
And since you are trying to change the topic of conversation into me looking to get an edge on the competition, Dexter Fowler has had 10 at-bats since August 26 and never hit the DL, but is still active in the IBC with a knee issue.
Also, haven't yet heard how we're going to monitor all players, not just what we see on rotoworld...
If Ellsbury doesn't play, he doesn't play. I understand he has a fracture. And I'm not trying to find a way for him to play. I'm trying to find a consistent policy that isn't decided based on what a group of sim league baseball managers thinks should happen to a player who isn't on the DL.
Obviously, his injury is not exact compared to another player's injury. But the situation is the same. They're injured, not playing, getting examined, etc. and not on the DL. Some get to play in the IBC, others do not.
And, as was pretty obviously stated at the top of my post, I'm asking for suggestions from all in the league who may be affected by this issue at one time or another. I don't think a case-by-case decision makes sense when there are plenty of other situations of players being active in the IBC when not active in MLB.
And since you are trying to change the topic of conversation into me looking to get an edge on the competition, Dexter Fowler has had 10 at-bats since August 26 and never hit the DL, but is still active in the IBC with a knee issue.
Also, haven't yet heard how we're going to monitor all players, not just what we see on rotoworld...
-
Guardians
- Posts: 5139
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:00 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL
- Name: Pat Gillespie
This wasn't intended to be a whine and I really shouldn't have been put in a position of having to defend myself if not for the insinuation that I'm trying to get an advantage through some scheme to get Ellsbury to play and other players not to play. I'll stop responding so hopefully people with more than one-liners or retorts without well-defined thoughts on the issue can contribute solutions. I don't have the answer, but maybe others do.
And yet you put yourself there.Tigers wrote:I really shouldn't have been put in a position of having to defend myself...
Ellsbury is sitting while the Red Sox try to clinch their division. If he could play at all, he would. He's not on the DL because of the roster flexibility of the expanded 40-man rosters. He absolutely should not be playing in the league under these circumstances. The league has danced this dance before, you're not making any argument that anyone hasn't made before and been shot down not just by myself when I was commish, or the ExCo representatives, but also by the league as a whole.
Suck it up.
I’m the new guy here, but I’m going to weigh in. In fact, because I’m the new guy, perhaps I can offer a fresh perspective…but forgive me if I’m raising old arguments or rehashing old points that were made before I joined the league.
Honestly, I don’t care whether Ellsbury plays or not. If I were Pat, I’d argue the same thing he’s arguing. If I were in a pennant race against Pat, I’d argue the same thing others of you are. I don’t think anyone is trying to cheat anyone else; I think what’s emerged in this thread shows a clear misunderstanding about what the rules allow.
From my new-guy perspective, The Ellsbury Issue is symptomatic of a bigger conversation to be had about when a player is allowed to play in the IBC and when he isn’t. It’s not quite so black-and-white as it may seem.
Of course, it’s well understood that you can’t use a guy who’s on the MLB or MiLB DL, who’s suspended, or who’s on paternity or family leave. But there may be other times like this, when a guy is on none of those lists but still isn’t playing for an extended period of time. Maybe it’s because of a situation like Ellsbury’s. Maybe it’s because he’s a minor leaguer whose season has ended or hasn't begun. Maybe it’s because he’s been DFA’d and is awaiting a new assignment. These situations are all different, but the result is the same: The guy isn’t playing. Seems there should be one rule that governs the gamut of “what happens when my guy isn’t playing,” and as far as I know, there isn’t one single, clear rule. If there is, someone please correct me and point it out.
What about someone like Alex Hassan, in my team’s case, who was injured for the last bit of the Triple-A regular season but whose team happened to make the playoffs? Because his team got to play in some extra games, he was able to return to the lineup, and since he was able to return to the lineup, I was able to re-activate him. But if his team didn’t happen to make the playoffs, I wouldn’t have been able to do so.
Something closer to what’s going on with Ellsbury: What about a guy who suffers a minor injury midseason, and it’s reported in advance that he won’t be DL’d but is expected to miss an upcoming Thursday-Sunday series? With that report coming out, should we be required to bench him for our Thursday-Sunday series? What if we do but then it turns out that he’s able to pinch-hit during Sunday’s MLB game after all? We lose a game with a guy we could have used. On the other hand, what if we don't have to bench him, but his injury persists and ends up missing a week without ever hitting the DL? What’s the magic number in terms of games missed?
I understand that all of these issues are a little bit different, and that Ellsbury isn’t DL’d perhaps only because of MLB’s 40-man roster rule. I also appreciate that that’s going to be a September problem every year. And it’s precisely because it’s going to be a recurring problem (and indeed, it sounds like it has been long before I joined the league) that I would suggest drafting a rule clearly stating when a guy can be in our lineup vs. when he cannot. Without such a rule, it seems rather arbitrary to go case-by-case, and it leaves the door open for people to accuse each other of all kinds of things, as is happening here. I understand that, even with a crystal-clear rule, there may still be times when case-by-case enforcement may be necessary for some unforeseen event, but at least then there would be policy to which the ExCo may all refer during these debates.
I would also suggest that the time to craft this rule and engage in this debate is during the off-season, not during the pennant race.
I think this is an important issue for all of us, not just those who happen to be in the playoff chase right now, and so I’m happy to be a part of the discussion at the appropriate time.
Honestly, I don’t care whether Ellsbury plays or not. If I were Pat, I’d argue the same thing he’s arguing. If I were in a pennant race against Pat, I’d argue the same thing others of you are. I don’t think anyone is trying to cheat anyone else; I think what’s emerged in this thread shows a clear misunderstanding about what the rules allow.
From my new-guy perspective, The Ellsbury Issue is symptomatic of a bigger conversation to be had about when a player is allowed to play in the IBC and when he isn’t. It’s not quite so black-and-white as it may seem.
Of course, it’s well understood that you can’t use a guy who’s on the MLB or MiLB DL, who’s suspended, or who’s on paternity or family leave. But there may be other times like this, when a guy is on none of those lists but still isn’t playing for an extended period of time. Maybe it’s because of a situation like Ellsbury’s. Maybe it’s because he’s a minor leaguer whose season has ended or hasn't begun. Maybe it’s because he’s been DFA’d and is awaiting a new assignment. These situations are all different, but the result is the same: The guy isn’t playing. Seems there should be one rule that governs the gamut of “what happens when my guy isn’t playing,” and as far as I know, there isn’t one single, clear rule. If there is, someone please correct me and point it out.
What about someone like Alex Hassan, in my team’s case, who was injured for the last bit of the Triple-A regular season but whose team happened to make the playoffs? Because his team got to play in some extra games, he was able to return to the lineup, and since he was able to return to the lineup, I was able to re-activate him. But if his team didn’t happen to make the playoffs, I wouldn’t have been able to do so.
Something closer to what’s going on with Ellsbury: What about a guy who suffers a minor injury midseason, and it’s reported in advance that he won’t be DL’d but is expected to miss an upcoming Thursday-Sunday series? With that report coming out, should we be required to bench him for our Thursday-Sunday series? What if we do but then it turns out that he’s able to pinch-hit during Sunday’s MLB game after all? We lose a game with a guy we could have used. On the other hand, what if we don't have to bench him, but his injury persists and ends up missing a week without ever hitting the DL? What’s the magic number in terms of games missed?
I understand that all of these issues are a little bit different, and that Ellsbury isn’t DL’d perhaps only because of MLB’s 40-man roster rule. I also appreciate that that’s going to be a September problem every year. And it’s precisely because it’s going to be a recurring problem (and indeed, it sounds like it has been long before I joined the league) that I would suggest drafting a rule clearly stating when a guy can be in our lineup vs. when he cannot. Without such a rule, it seems rather arbitrary to go case-by-case, and it leaves the door open for people to accuse each other of all kinds of things, as is happening here. I understand that, even with a crystal-clear rule, there may still be times when case-by-case enforcement may be necessary for some unforeseen event, but at least then there would be policy to which the ExCo may all refer during these debates.
I would also suggest that the time to craft this rule and engage in this debate is during the off-season, not during the pennant race.
I think this is an important issue for all of us, not just those who happen to be in the playoff chase right now, and so I’m happy to be a part of the discussion at the appropriate time.
-
Mets
- Posts: 2366
- Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:00 am
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Name: John Anderson
- Contact:
In BCMBL we use the simple rule - "if he's on the DL in MLB/MiLB, he's on the DL in the league. If he's not officially on the DL - then he's eligible to play". This is a pretty clear cut rule - and there are those September instances where guys don't get DL'd because of expanded rosters - but it takes the subjectivity out of it. If Jose Bautista was shut down by the Jays but never DL'd. He's still playing in BCMBL. Sometimes you benefit, sometimes it hurts you - but everyone is playing with the same black & white rules. Just giving an example.
2008-2023 Mets: 1,143-1,296...469%
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
And my missing a couple DL guys is related how? Oh, right, it's not, you just want to bitch... Because I'm the only person to have ever missed DLing a guy.DBacks wrote:Say's the asshole that won't take hurt players out of his lineup..............Padres wrote:As has been mentioned on many occasions... this isn't the BCMBL.
Also, that rule is stupid.
Padres wrote:And my missing a couple DL guys is related how? Oh, right, it's not, you just want to bitch... Because I'm the only person to have ever missed DLing a guy.DBacks wrote:Say's the asshole that won't take hurt players out of his lineup..............Padres wrote:As has been mentioned on many occasions... this isn't the BCMBL.
Also, that rule is stupid.
-
Mets
- Posts: 2366
- Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:00 am
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Name: John Anderson
- Contact:
I almost put a note on my post "...and Bren, we know this isn't BCMBL", but thought it would have been petty.Padres wrote:As has been mentioned on many occasions... this isn't the BCMBL.
Also, that rule is stupid.
2008-2023 Mets: 1,143-1,296...469%
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
2006-2008 Rockies: 242-244...498%
IBC Total: 1,385-1,540...474%
2022: lost WC
2023: lost WC
2024: 1st NL East; lost WC
Go for it. Any time I see a discussion on rules I ask myself "How long until we see a 'In the BCMBL...' post from John?"Mets wrote:I almost put a note on my post "...and Bren, we know this isn't BCMBL", but thought it would have been petty.Padres wrote:As has been mentioned on many occasions... this isn't the BCMBL.
Also, that rule is stupid.
In fairness to Pat, he was gone for a long time, so maybe he forgot how these things have been hashed and rehashed. The league isn't going to change the rule, so I don't know why you keep bringing up what the BCMBL does. It's different, but it's certainly not better. The idea of losing to players with broken bones just because they haven't gone on the DL officially because MLB's uses different roster rules than we do is one that members have shown a pretty serious aversion to in the past. You might have noticed the dearth of support Pat has generated here.
Sure there's some gray to it and judgement calls need to be made in some cases, but most are pretty clear, particularly this example.
-
Orioles
- Posts: 3629
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 1:00 am
- Location: Glastonbury, CT
- Name: Dan Vacek
- Contact:
I, for one, am perfectly satisfied with the current system. It's clear and easy to follow, and faithful enough to our stated desire to simulate MLB without being problematic administratively. Only a handful of players annually fall into the category at issue in this thread (injured non-DL), and we seem to have a workable solution to deal with those few.
The only "change" I'd support is IF, down the road, we had a reliable weekly DL/activation report that allowed someone to easily actually "DL" players in the DB (thus avoiding the need for penalties), that'd be cool. However this would also require that someone do an extra layer of work on the DB every week, which is not something I'm prepared to ask for since plenty of work is done by JP to maintain the DB already.
I'd also support a new logo for the Marlins, but that has nothing to do with this. Just throwing it out there. Hi Shawn.
The only "change" I'd support is IF, down the road, we had a reliable weekly DL/activation report that allowed someone to easily actually "DL" players in the DB (thus avoiding the need for penalties), that'd be cool. However this would also require that someone do an extra layer of work on the DB every week, which is not something I'm prepared to ask for since plenty of work is done by JP to maintain the DB already.
I'd also support a new logo for the Marlins, but that has nothing to do with this. Just throwing it out there. Hi Shawn.
2023 GM Totals: 1780 W - 1460 L | 0.549 wpct | 89-73 (avg 162 G record)
-
Athletics
- Posts: 1963
- Joined: Fri May 21, 2010 1:00 am
- Location: San Diego, CA
- Name: Stephen d'Esterhazy
Well is there a clear September rule...if not, could one be written in such a way that it wouldn't negatively effect a playoff race if the injury wasn't cut and dry that the guy was just resting versus going out long term.
Like maybe after 4 days goes on the DL...but one the guy does play his first game back in the mlb, he can be instantly reinstated in the IBC?
Just throwing out potential ideas that could be less hazy...i don't know, I am not being bitten by it at the moment.
Like maybe after 4 days goes on the DL...but one the guy does play his first game back in the mlb, he can be instantly reinstated in the IBC?
Just throwing out potential ideas that could be less hazy...i don't know, I am not being bitten by it at the moment.
"My shit doesn't work in the playoffs. My job is to get us to the playoffs. What happens after that is fucking luck."
LAA 11 - 15 331W - 479L
LAA 16 - 20 477W - 333L 17-20 ALW
OAK 21 - 24 297W - 189L 21-22 ALW
LAA 11 - 15 331W - 479L
LAA 16 - 20 477W - 333L 17-20 ALW
OAK 21 - 24 297W - 189L 21-22 ALW
-
Guardians
- Posts: 5139
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:00 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL
- Name: Pat Gillespie
To Bren's one reasonable post from Wednesday at 3:02: maybe the old guard caught their hair on fire because this is something that has been brought up in the past, so sorry for not monitoring IBC messageboards from 2005 to 2011. I wanted to open up the discussion to see if we can make an improvement. Improving an already good league shouldn't be frowned upon or met with "the rule isn't going to be changed." If there's a better way, explore it. If it's not better, that's fine, too.
Per Stephen's post: maybe a set timeframe of games missed makes sense.
A) If a player misses 3 games, or 4 games, or whatever the time frame is, he is farmed until he plays again and then you get to use him.
B) Or maybe if a player misses five games and exco decides he is farmed because the injury is "severe" or "he would be dled if it weren't September," and then he comes back, you lose the player for the subsequent five games you used him while he was hurt.
That would require a few more mid-week MPs, which I think is fine for one month of the year. When Neil Walker injured his pinky on a foul ball catch earlier this year, he missed a few games while recovering and didn't hit the DL initially. I used him for several games because they were trying to get the swelling to go down, but then hit the DL that Saturday, so I lost him for two weeks. If it happened today, he likely wouldn't hit the DL because there's no need. If there were a set time frame of missed games that triggered a farming, that would be something anyone could follow.
A few more guys in the injured/not sure how badly group (ibc team denoted in bold):
Edwin Encarncion(TB): Hasn't played since 9/7. One report says he may miss the year with a sprained wrist. One report said he's taking swings, another "hopes to return this year." If this were June, would he have just hit the DL? If the Jays were in a race, would he play through it? Who knows?
Dexter Fowler (MIL): As I posted earlier. 13 Abs since Aug. 26, none since 9/6, playing in the IBC with a knee injury.
Brett Gardner (CIN): Strained oblique tonight, I believe. Usually a weeks-long injury.
Something other than the current system may take more work than monitoring what headlines we see pop up to make that scenario work. But maybe that can work. Is that a reasonable approach? Also, I don't know how the Exco monitors players to decide who should be farmed. Is it only headline-grabbers like Ellsbury and Craig or is there another source to make sure all players are being captured? What about the 7th inning reliever in San Diego who's hurt (made-up example), but no one cares because he's in San Diego? Is he captured?
Also, regardless of whether the policy is changed at some point, I'd like to see these players posted on this forum so we know what players the exco is making decisions on/monitoring. Same as if a players is DLed, so everyone can keep track.
Per Stephen's post: maybe a set timeframe of games missed makes sense.
A) If a player misses 3 games, or 4 games, or whatever the time frame is, he is farmed until he plays again and then you get to use him.
B) Or maybe if a player misses five games and exco decides he is farmed because the injury is "severe" or "he would be dled if it weren't September," and then he comes back, you lose the player for the subsequent five games you used him while he was hurt.
That would require a few more mid-week MPs, which I think is fine for one month of the year. When Neil Walker injured his pinky on a foul ball catch earlier this year, he missed a few games while recovering and didn't hit the DL initially. I used him for several games because they were trying to get the swelling to go down, but then hit the DL that Saturday, so I lost him for two weeks. If it happened today, he likely wouldn't hit the DL because there's no need. If there were a set time frame of missed games that triggered a farming, that would be something anyone could follow.
A few more guys in the injured/not sure how badly group (ibc team denoted in bold):
Edwin Encarncion(TB): Hasn't played since 9/7. One report says he may miss the year with a sprained wrist. One report said he's taking swings, another "hopes to return this year." If this were June, would he have just hit the DL? If the Jays were in a race, would he play through it? Who knows?
Dexter Fowler (MIL): As I posted earlier. 13 Abs since Aug. 26, none since 9/6, playing in the IBC with a knee injury.
Brett Gardner (CIN): Strained oblique tonight, I believe. Usually a weeks-long injury.
Something other than the current system may take more work than monitoring what headlines we see pop up to make that scenario work. But maybe that can work. Is that a reasonable approach? Also, I don't know how the Exco monitors players to decide who should be farmed. Is it only headline-grabbers like Ellsbury and Craig or is there another source to make sure all players are being captured? What about the 7th inning reliever in San Diego who's hurt (made-up example), but no one cares because he's in San Diego? Is he captured?
Also, regardless of whether the policy is changed at some point, I'd like to see these players posted on this forum so we know what players the exco is making decisions on/monitoring. Same as if a players is DLed, so everyone can keep track.
-
Cardinals
- Posts: 8146
- Joined: Sat May 18, 2002 1:00 am
- Location: Manch Vegas, CT
- Name: John Paul Starkey
If we do perfect that system, that's something I can take the extra 5-10 minutes a week for to save ourselves some aggravation. But the system would need to be perfected, and we'd still need to be vigilant of minor league injuries, which aren't on that report I don't think.Marlins wrote: The only "change" I'd support is IF, down the road, we had a reliable weekly DL/activation report that allowed someone to easily actually "DL" players in the DB (thus avoiding the need for penalties), that'd be cool. However this would also require that someone do an extra layer of work on the DB every week, which is not something I'm prepared to ask for since plenty of work is done by JP to maintain the DB already.
I'd also support a new logo for the Marlins, but that has nothing to do with this. Just throwing it out there. Hi Shawn.
12, 14, 15, 17, 22
-
Dodgers
- Site Admin
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 1:00 am
- Location: Fort Lauderdale
- Name: Shawn Walsh
The weekly injury post runs automatically using Rotoworld (so MLB only) and usually needs a little filtering (paternity list, etc.). I wouldn't call it perfect (it could use some improvements so someone who has the time can administrate it) but I think it's been pretty solid this year.Pirates wrote:If we do perfect that system, that's something I can take the extra 5-10 minutes a week for to save ourselves some aggravation. But the system would need to be perfected, and we'd still need to be vigilant of minor league injuries, which aren't on that report I don't think.Marlins wrote: The only "change" I'd support is IF, down the road, we had a reliable weekly DL/activation report that allowed someone to easily actually "DL" players in the DB (thus avoiding the need for penalties), that'd be cool. However this would also require that someone do an extra layer of work on the DB every week, which is not something I'm prepared to ask for since plenty of work is done by JP to maintain the DB already.
I'd also support a new logo for the Marlins, but that has nothing to do with this. Just throwing it out there. Hi Shawn.
-
Guardians
- Posts: 5139
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:00 am
- Location: Tallahassee, FL
- Name: Pat Gillespie
A few lessons learned:
1) Don't question the people who simulate the games in the middle of a playoff race or end up with your worst losing streak of the season.
2) Either the current injury system works, there's apathy/low website traffic for those out of the playoff race or people didn't feel like posting their opinion for fear they'd be attacked.
3) Still haven't heard how we can monitor all players and not just those who show up on rotoworld.
A suggestion and please someone in charge respond: Can we post these September decisions on the injury thread? Gardner is probably out for the year, Fowler hasn't played much in weeks, Capuano apparently is out for some time now, Carlos Pena is out for the year, Encarnacion is now back after missing six games. What's been the call on these guys? I think some transparency is always a good thing.
1) Don't question the people who simulate the games in the middle of a playoff race or end up with your worst losing streak of the season.
2) Either the current injury system works, there's apathy/low website traffic for those out of the playoff race or people didn't feel like posting their opinion for fear they'd be attacked.
3) Still haven't heard how we can monitor all players and not just those who show up on rotoworld.
A suggestion and please someone in charge respond: Can we post these September decisions on the injury thread? Gardner is probably out for the year, Fowler hasn't played much in weeks, Capuano apparently is out for some time now, Carlos Pena is out for the year, Encarnacion is now back after missing six games. What's been the call on these guys? I think some transparency is always a good thing.
