Roster Rules

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 6:42 pm

I may be dreaming this, but I was under the impression that we put in a rule that a player couldn't be on the active roster and the draft roster at the same time, in which case JB's roster is illegal. The wording of the rules is ambiguous:

1. Each franchise will field a team from their 25 man roster. Each team is expected to maintain a minimum of 20 active players at all times, 10 position players and 10 pitchers.
2. In addition to these 25, each team will also have a 15 player inactive/reserve roster of injured players, minor leaguers or other players not otherwise in the sim. These players are ineligible to play.
A. On September 1st active rosters expand to 40 so any player may play as long as he is in the database.
3. Each team will also have a ten man rookie roster consisting solely of players eligible for the last two rookie drafts in any combination of proportions. This brings the total number of players under a GM's control to 50.

Common sense seems to dictate that you can't be on both rosters, but it doesn't explicitly say so. Ruling?

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:47 pm

Illegal and he ought to know better. Take the players away and put them in the draft for next season.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:48 pm

Is that the rule? Fun.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:51 pm

we could make it the rule. All in favor?

Aye!

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:54 pm

Nothing vindictive about that...

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 7:57 pm

Nope, we apply it evenly to all teams. That's fair, right?

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:08 pm

Yea, you can't be both, OOPSS has prevented a player from being on both based on the "Change Roster Status" page. It has been league rule that once a player has played a game in the sim, they can no longer be eligible to be a draftee. However, maybe we should change this to be once a player becomes active--kind of like the MLB's clock starting?

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 9:27 pm

Sure. Also we should push people to maintain that roster status thing, that way it becomes easy to check if people are legal.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Thu Apr 03, 2008 10:21 pm

I'm working on editting the rules right now (there is some OLD shit in there) I'll include that in the proposed changes.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:48 am

I don't think that not letting guys be on the draft roster once they're in the DB is a good idea. I think that we should keep it like it has been and just police it better.

The reason is that DMB is too inconsistent with who they include. I had Wilfrido Perez included this year. He isn't a draftee or anything, but I mean he was a Low A reliever who didn't even make the Baltimore top 30 prospects in BA. If a guy like that, who is kind of a sleeper, gets included in the DB (and of course has a useless projection), that screws the guy who drafted him for no particular reason. It wouldn't be fair.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 12:57 am

I don't think anyone is saying that anyone projected can't be on the roster, just that if we enforce people setting their roster status in oopss once they put a guy active he can't go back to draft.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:06 am

Athletics wrote:I don't think anyone is saying that anyone projected can't be on the roster, just that if we enforce people setting their roster status in oopss once they put a guy active he can't go back to draft.

Shawn said:

However, maybe we should change this to be once a player becomes active--kind of like the MLB's clock starting?

I took that to be a suggestion that once someone has a projection they're off the draft roster, and Bren's reply was that he would propose changes. If they weren't headed down that road, great, but I think that that's what they were suggesting.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 1:12 am

If that's the road they're going down then I oppose it as well.

Padres · Post by **Padres** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 6:01 am

Tigers wrote:
Athletics wrote:I don't think anyone is saying that anyone projected can't be on the roster, just that if we enforce people setting their roster status in oopss once they put a guy active he can't go back to draft.
Shawn said:

However, maybe we should change this to be once a player becomes active--kind of like the MLB's clock starting?
I took that to be a suggestion that once someone has a projection they're off the draft roster, and Bren's reply was that he would propose changes. If they weren't headed down that road, great, but I think that that's what they were suggesting.

I would be opposed to this, i.e., once someone has a projection they're off the draft roster. I believe the rule that once a player is used in a SIM he is no longer eligible to be considered a draftee is fair and appropriate.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:09 am

Sorry, I didn't mean once they get a projection, I meant once the GM sends in a lineup with them as one of the 25 active players. Rather than having to play in a game, they would just have to be eligible to play in a game. Maybe that's too much work for now.

Down the road, I envision tying the DMB roster status reports into OOPSS, perhaps this is something we should look at more once it can be automated better?

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:44 am

Dodgers wrote:Sorry, I didn't mean once they get a projection, I meant once the GM sends in a lineup with them as one of the 25 active players. Rather than having to play in a game, they would just have to be eligible to play in a game. Maybe that's too much work for now.

Down the road, I envision tying the DMB roster status reports into OOPSS, perhaps this is something we should look at more once it can be automated better?

Yup, I'm not sure how you guys got the other thing out of it.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:05 pm

Okay, great, glad I misunderstood.