Ian Stewart Eligbility
Moderator: Executive Committee
- Cardinals
- Posts: 8041
- Joined: Sat May 18, 2002 1:00 am
- Location: Manch Vegas, CT
- Name: John Paul Starkey
Ian Stewart Eligbility
Jag also wanted me to ask about Stewart. Apparently, he reported to the instructional leagues in late September.
Though, this really is moot. Stewart was his second DL violation, and he'll have a penalty on him. But in the event Jag keeps advancing, I guess we should rule on him.
Though, this really is moot. Stewart was his second DL violation, and he'll have a penalty on him. But in the event Jag keeps advancing, I guess we should rule on him.
12, 14, 15, 17, 22
- Rangers
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4048
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:00 am
- Location: Prosper, TX
- Name: Brett Perryman
I'd be willing to use FIL participation as evidence for later, but to even do that we need to get actual evidence that he's playing in games, not just working out and rehabbing.
Last edited by Rangers on Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Rangers
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4048
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:00 am
- Location: Prosper, TX
- Name: Brett Perryman
Dodgers wrote:Isn't this akin to a rehab stint in A ball during the season?
I know I'm generally a pest on this late season injury topic, but I feel like we have the potential to be getting back into really inconsistent ground with this kind of thing. I'm not really hung up on this case because I haven't seen that Stewart is obviously healthy and playing, but I'm wary of just dismissing anyone in this situation.DL is DL, he's out
It goes back to the question of consistency versus precision and the fact that it's almost impossible for us to be both consistent and accurate with our evaluations. I might be forgetting a previous resolution, but I just kind of hate the idea of us disallowing someone who is perfectly healthy and is even playing and then allowing a guy who isn't DLed but can barely walk or throw to play because we're not certain that he wouldn't be carried on the bench as a potential pinch hitter or something.
If we're being technical about it and actually saying DLed guys can't play, non-DLed guys can, period, great, I welcome anything that makes this simpler. I don't think we've said anything like that, though, and as long as we're willing to delve into grey areas I think we need to try to be open minded about this kind of situation as well.
Just my two cents, and I still think we should hand this off to a different trio of guys like the TRC, btw.