| 0 |
Subject: RG Keeper 14 Injured Reserve Rules Discussion
Posted by: Mötley Crüe
- Dude [439372011] Sat, Aug 01, 2009, 14:40
Sorry to be such a pest about this, but I'm flabbergasted by this result. It's not what I would have expected from this group - and I must confess, it really bugs me - so much, that my initial reaction was to consider withdrawing from the league. I've cooled off since then, and I do recognize that it's a loophole with limited applicability. But it's the principle of the thing. It just seems so egregious, that it continues to stick in my craw. --Guru, post 201 from this thread
After thinking about this during the offseason, I now know why the majority of our league voted as I did, to allow free agents on NFL IR to be rostered and stashed on fantasy IR. Most of us are such keeper junkies looking for the next deep sleeper that we are angling for a way to increase even a little bit our chances of snagging one. It's what lead me to propose an increase in bench size last year, a suggestion I feel was only defeated because most of us have a strong loyalty to the original RIFC rules. The keeper rules in our league, however, are untethered and can get kind of wild. I think that's what's happening in this instance.
I still feel strongly that any free agent should be available to the league, no matter their injury status. This seems a fundamental element of managing a sports team (real or fantasy). If a guy is available, he's available. I don't like to have exceptions that infringe on a manager's options in that regard.
The other side argues powerfully that players are not valued equally by each team. Last season, Mendenhall (3rd round choice) was worth a lot more to Da Bomb than he was to the other 13 managers. I am sympathetic to that, and really wish that the IR system in place would have worked to counteract that imbalance.
Since it did not, perhaps we can compromise. I propose to make every player who is placed on Fantasy IR available for a 12th round choice the following season, if kept. Players on NFL IR but not rostered in our league would maintain FA status the following season's draft (that is, they may be chosen in any round). This change would only affect Fantasy IR players rostered by a team in our league by season's end. This will harm the value of an 18th round pick (for example) who plays very well and is then placed on IR for the end of the season. But that will be a very rare occurrence, in my opinion, and if a manager was planning to use an 18th round slot on the guy, then a 12th round slot wouldn't be such a reach to keep him. Yes it penalizes the manager who drafted the player, but not as much as the current setup. In fact, it allows the manager who owns the player to consider hanging on to him for the whole season rather than fishing for a replacement IR player (like last year's move to keep Burleson over Mendenhall).
Under this proposal, if a manager elects to keep an NFL IR player on the active roster all season, that player could be kept under the same rules as non-IR players. The fantasy IR designation is the trigger for this new rule. Once a player is added to fantasy IR, he'll cost you a 12th round pick to keep in the next draft.
This compromise has the potential to benefit some managers more than others. The Tom Brady example from 2008 would yield a huge bonus for Athletics Guy, for instance. AG would be able to retain Brady this season as a 12th round keeper instead of a 2nd rounder. I'm willing to live with that possibility because of the nature of injuries in the NFL. Very few players come back from significant injuries and play up to the level they had played at previously. For Brady, coming off a season in which he threw 50 TD's, it's essentially impossible anyway. QB's are some of the least likely to be affected, but they still experience alarming dropoffs in performance (Culpepper, Bulger, even Warner until he went to Arizona). Giving a manager a reprieve of 10 rounds or so in keeper position is not a terrible prospect to me, when the benefit is that managers maintain the ability to pick up any free agent.
If you feel this is too generous, I suggest as an alternative that players drafted before the 12th round maintain their keeper round status in the event they are placed on fantasy IR. In that instance, Brady would be a 2nd rounder this season, while Mendenhall and Burleson would revert to 12th rounders.
For the record, though, I wouldn't implement any changes retroactively. I know I have a reason to be biased there, but realistically it's very harsh to penalize managers that made moves with an eye on the future at a time when those moves were legal. Any changes to the rules should be applied forwardly, in my opinion. |
| 1 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 3626821
Sat, Aug 01, 2009, 18:25
|
I've read over this post about 3 times already trying to go over the meaning of the rule. As best as I can see it's this:
#1 - NO FA IR Pickups.
#2 - The IR slot is only available for team's rostered players... in which case, they automatically get a 12th round value (locked-in/must keep?).
So my main question is this: What requirement do we use for this? Does the player in question have to be on the NFL IR?
A couple "loopwholes" to still come to mind.
For instance... how about suspended/semi-retired players?
Also, what if a player is day-to-day, but is expected to go on the IR... so maybe a player can't afford to keep him rostered, but another subsequent manager picks him up off the FA wire prior to him going on the IR, then stashes him away into the IR.
Another issue, would be IF we aren't keeping to the NFL's IR policy, who's to stop a non-playoff bound manager to "stash-away" a week 17 day-to-day ("fake" injury) NFL playoff-bound player from gaining an edge in the next years draft (ie. let's say the Pats rest Brady in week 17 this year).
I'm unsure of the wording on the IR player if he is "locked" in? I personally do not like the IR player becoming a "must-keep" player into the next season however... what if the injury is so bad that the player can't come back to full capacity for the next year? Seems illogical, and counter-productive.
I'll go along with whichever way we build the rule, but would rather there be less surprises during the season, because it often causes undo stress/animosity amongst managers.
My .02
|
| 2 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sat, Aug 01, 2009, 19:22
|
Sorry to be so unclear. I'd say you understood my meaning in the opposite manner of which I meant it!
OK, we would maintain all rules in place at the moment, meaning that any manager can pick up any available player (including FA's on NFL IR) at the appointed times (waivers, claims, free agency, trades), but if a player on NFL IR is placed on fantasy ("team") IR, that player could be kept only by sacrificing a 12th round pick the next season. If the manager elects, he may choose to not keep the player the following year. No manager would be forced to keep anyone. Only players on NFL IR may be placed on fantasy IR, just like the rules right now stipulate.
Suspended/retired/PUP/CFL/UFL or any other players may not be placed on fantasy IR unless the player is placed on NFL IR. Again, this rule is already in place.
|
| 3 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sat, Aug 01, 2009, 19:33
|
Basically, the only change I'm suggesting is that NFL IR players placed on fantasy IR cannot be kept with any draft pick higher than a 12th rounder the following year.
|
| 4 | leggestand
ID: 1972728
Sun, Aug 02, 2009, 09:28
|
Thanks for the well-thought out post, MC.
I guess the crux of the IR issue is "what is fair?" Our current system is unfair to managers who draft a player who gets hurt and placed on IR, as, using Mendenhall as an example, Da Bomb would have lose a 3rd round draft pick on him while the rest of the league would lose a 24th round draft pick. Da Bomb's choice was easy... drop Mendenhall; the rest of the league's choice was easy...pick up Mendenhall. When there is such a conflict in what managers "should do," we need to find a solution.
Erik - your proposal does help the situation, and I could see myself agreeing with this proposal if the group agrees. I don't like what happens with the "Brady" example above because he is an automatic keeper in round 12, and the following year gets to be a round 6 keeper. Whether or not he returns to 2007 form doesn't matter...he just needs to play like a top 12 QB to be kept the next few years, and that team is put at an advantage for two years because the QB got hurt for one year (this is all speculation, of course).
My proposal would be that a player retains his draft/Free agent value if placed on IR, no matter what. So, the minute Mendenhall went on IR, he was a 3rd round keeper to all managers. Now, if Mendenhall was dropped and picked up prior to going on IR, then he would of been a 24th round keeper (again, to all). I see these scenarios, and I think this solution makes it as "fair" as it can be:
1. Player on original team goes on IR - holds his draft value if dropped or held
2. Free agent is picked up at some point during season and gets put on IR - 24th round keeper
3. Free agent goes on IR, and is then picked up - 24th round keeper
This makes all IR players have the same "draft pick value" to all managers, so, that managers who have a player that goes on IR don;t have a "double loss" (lose a player for this season and also have no worth in keeping that player, while other managers can keep the player).
I also agree that we can't retroactivel implement this rule, and will need to be enforced on the upcoming season and going forward (not backward).
|
| 5 | Da Bomb
Donor
ID: 487112814
Sun, Aug 02, 2009, 20:02
|
I like leggestand's proposal and I think it makes for a good compromise and solution to the situation.
|
| 6 | Taxman
ID: 76501119
Sun, Aug 02, 2009, 21:47
|
There should be a prohibition of a waiver pick up of a player on NFL DL and then placed on Fantasy DL after the waiver claim date for the last regular season matchups of our league. This prohibits a team in the playoffs (teams still capable of making waiver claims) for obtaining an advantage, potential or otherwise, over the non-playoff teams.
|
| 7 | The Beezer
ID: 40281619
Sun, Aug 02, 2009, 23:35
|
I agree with legge's proposal and Taxman's addendum. I'm open to further improvements if anyone has them but this looks solid to me.
|
| 8 | mjd
Leader
ID: 501381415
Mon, Aug 03, 2009, 12:53
|
Agree with post #7.
|
| 9 | Doug
ID: 8744316
Mon, Aug 03, 2009, 17:44
|
Agree with post #8.
|
| 10 | GoatLocker
Leader
ID: 060151121
Tue, Aug 04, 2009, 09:46
|
Agree with post #9.
|
| 11 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 04, 2009, 10:41
|
I think I can live with post #7, although I have supported a harder line on this.
I'd like to amend Taxman's idea, though, to say that you may only keep a player who was on your roster at the end of the regular season (in our league, week #13). Any moves made after week 13 have a bearing only on the playoff results, but not on keeper status.
Perhaps there should be a caveat that any player dropped after week 13 should not be available as a keeper too, although I haven't really thought that through. That may be unnecessary.
Frankly, I can't remember precisely what our add/drop rules are during the playoffs. Do we have any limitations, similar to the RIFC?
|
| 12 | Athletics Guy
ID: 10714516
Wed, Aug 05, 2009, 17:14
|
Leggestand's suggestion is fine with me. As much as I'd like to get Tom Brady back cheap, I think that's just being way too generous. :)
|
| 13 | Doug
ID: 3630123
Sat, Aug 08, 2009, 00:11
|
Yeah, I'm in a couple dynasty leagues and that's what we do... FA process during playoffs continues as normal for playoff teams still alive, but all of those players acquired during playofss are then automatically dropped at end of season.
Also, if you cut someone during playoffs to make room for a pickup, oh well... they're gone too.
You can only keep players who you have on roster at end of regular season, and who remain on roster throughout playoffs.
|
| 14 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 3626821
Sat, Aug 08, 2009, 09:09
|
The rules adjustments from Leggestand/Taxman/Guru sound good to me.
|
| 15 | The Beezer
ID: 40281619
Sat, Aug 08, 2009, 16:18
|
Agree with post #14.
|
| 16 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 18:37
|
Since 9 people are in favor of leggestand's proposal, and no one has suggested any conflicting alternatives, I'm going to carry it into the rules. Players that are IR'd by the NFL will maintain whatever draft position they acquire in our fantasy draft for that season. The loophole is completely closed now.
As far as outlawing the keeping of players acquired during the playoffs, I'm opposed. For one thing, the rules prohibit picking up QB, RB, and WR during the playoffs, so there aren't going to be any real significant pickups during that time anyway--no one who'd likely be a steal in exchange for a 24th round pick. Also, the playoffs run for 3 weeks; that's not a lot of time for a fantastic new TE or LB to emerge from the scrap heap of free agency and confer a real advantage on one of the playoff teams in the next draft.
I'm not sympathetic regarding the criticism of the Merriman acquisition last fall and the reason is that Merriman was a free agent for nearly the whole season--from September 12th until December 4th when Challenger added him to his roster. Everyone had ample opportunity to stash Merriman at any time last season. Admittedly, the teams with a player already on IR would have had to use a roster spot for him; but given that he was available through week 13, that wouldn't have been much of a sacrifice to make if someone had done so the last week, especially for teams that missed the playoffs. Pick him up on the last day of the regular season for a less keeper-worthy player. There would have been little to criticize in that strategy.
I would like to see a defense of the suggestion to outlaw keeping players acquired in the playoffs that agrees with the philosophy of being able to use those players in the first place. I have never been a fan of allowing transactions during the playoffs, but if managers are allowed to shuttle in and out certain types of players for use in their lineups, how come it's wrong to be able to keep those players the next season? I mean, those players aren't the ones who got you there, yet you're allowed to hire them like mercenaries for the playoffs. But then we're going to say they shouldn't be allowed as keepers, despite having played in the most important fantasy games of the year?
Making the playoffs has always conferred an advantage on the teams at the end. I'm fine with that. By the time a player has a chance to emerge in the last three weeks of the season, there are only a couple of teams left to acquire him and I think that is reasonable. I really believe any player worth keeping is available and evident to the league up to week 12.
With that said, I am probably going to keep John Carlson, so it's not like it won't ever happen. But the thing about Carlson is that he was good enough to have been picked up as a FA in the early part of the season (again by Challenger in September). His performance during our playoffs was very good, but by no means a surprise. He was available to the whole league from 11/21 until 11/27. He was certainly in the top 5 or so available TE's during that period.
What I'm getting at is that I don't see a problem with allowing people to sift through the FA list at the end of the season, after we've all been through it a dozen times before, and attempt to make a strategic pickup going into the playoffs and next season. That some managers are excluded seems unfair until you consider they have 13 weeks to get their rosters looking the way they want them. I don't agree there's a problem here. I also don't have a problem with someone using their IR slot and then keeping the player, whether the player was acquired during the playoffs or regular season. By my logic, there's no point in differentiating. Finally, I don't have a problem with players being IR'd during the fantasy playoffs, whether the player is a FA acquisition or not. I just don't see how a player good enough to be kept the following season is going to be waiting on the FA list and suddenly become more attractive because he is an IR candidate. Incidentally, Merriman was on IR from mid-September on, so the timing of the move to acquire him was not suspect in my mind at all. Anyone could have IR'd him at any time through Week 12.
And finally, finally, I don't agree with players dropped during the playoffs being made available to the dropping manager as keepers. You drop a guy, he's gone. I can't imagine entertaining anything else on that one.
Please comment on whether you want to maintain IR moves during the post-season, and whether or not you feel those players should be eligible to be kept the following season. We can of course, carry this discussion into the regular season if necessary, since it won't require a complete decision until late November. But if you have an opinion I want to hear it.
|
| 17 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Aug 09, 2009, 19:03
|
Players that are IR'd by the NFL will maintain whatever draft position they acquire in our fantasy draft for that season.
Obviously I meant to say that players placed on fantasy IR will maintain whatever draft position they acquire in our fantasy draft for that season.
|
| 18 | Taxman
ID: 76501119
Mon, Aug 10, 2009, 14:17
|
MC--Sorry to keep kicking the dead horse, however:
Please reconsider your position about pickups to DL during the playoffs. Can I assume that you are discounting the preference stated by 9 managers to prohibit a pickup to DL after the waiver claim date for the last regular season matchups?
If your logic is that you don't see how it could happen, then you shouldn't have any problem with a rule not allowing such to occur. What's to lose?
|
| 19 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Aug 10, 2009, 17:30
|
I count 7 managers above who agreed with the Taxman proposal: Taxman, Beezer, mjd, Doug, GoatLocker, Guru, and IAC. I'm not going to ignore your opinions. Post 16 is mostly just me getting my own opinion out there, and my reasoning for it.
Taxman, you're right. I don't see it happening so I'm not really bothered one way or the other about disallowing pickups to IR during the playoffs. However, I am in favor of allowing players already rostered to be IR'd during the playoffs. I don't want to change that part of the rules. I realize you didn't ask for that, but just to be clear.
|
| 20 | Taxman
ID: 76501119
Tue, Aug 11, 2009, 16:20
|
Thanks for the clarification MC
btw....I counted Doug based on "all of those players acquired during playofss are then automatically dropped at end of season." (probably an over broad interpretation by me) and counted the BeeZ twice (my bad)
|
| 21 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 11, 2009, 16:37
|
The reason for not allowing a player added after the playoffs start to be kept is that not all teams are allowed to add a player at that point. Playoff teams have a limited ability to add a player. Non-playoff teams have no ability (if I recall correctly).
|
| 22 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Wed, Aug 12, 2009, 16:08
|
I understand. I'll put it up for a vote.
I'm still of the mind that it's fine to keep players acquired during the playoffs. I realize it's not fair to non-playoff managers. Putting myself in their shoes, I still don't have a problem with it. That's how I arrive at my opinion on the matter.
Please vote on the following 2 issues.
1. Should players acquired during the playoffs be eligible to be kept the following season? Yes or No
2. Should players acquired during the playoffs be eligible for fantasy IR? Yes or No
Since many of you have already agreed with Taxman on #2 above, if you choose to let that vote stand, I'll count it as is. You may of course change your vote if you so desire.
#1 above affects the keeper rules and as such, it could possibly fall under the 75% rule*. I'll look at the voting results and make a determination if the voting is close. If it's lopsided, that ought not to be necessary.
*Changes to the keeper rules will only be affected if at least 75% of the league votes in favor of the change. 75% of 14 requires at least 11 managers in favor.
|
| 23 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 12, 2009, 16:48
|
1. No
2. No - unless they were healthy when acquired
|
| 24 | Taxman
ID: 76501119
Wed, Aug 12, 2009, 16:53
|
1. No
2. No
|
| 25 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 3626821
Wed, Aug 12, 2009, 17:15
|
1. No
2. No
|
| 26 | mjd
Leader
ID: 501381415
Wed, Aug 12, 2009, 17:52
|
1. No
2. No
|
| 27 | Athletics Guy
ID: 10714516
Wed, Aug 12, 2009, 20:18
|
1. No
2. No
|
| 28 | Da Bomb
Donor
ID: 487112814
Thu, Aug 13, 2009, 00:25
|
1. No
2. No
|
| 29 | GoatLocker
Leader
ID: 060151121
Thu, Aug 13, 2009, 19:29
|
1. No
2. No
|
| 30 | Doug
ID: 467191415
Fri, Aug 14, 2009, 16:19
|
1. No
2. No, unless they were healthy when acquired, but that's sort of a moot point since they won't be eligible to be kept anyway so why bother putting them on IR? :)
|
| 31 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 11:20
|
1. Yes
2. Yes
I'd like to see a few more votes on this.
boikin, Challenger, TB, leggestand?
|
| 32 | The Beezer
Dude
ID: 191202817
Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 14:46
|
1. No
2. No
Just in case my thoughts were unclear above.
|
| 33 | leggestand
ID: 18843714
Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 15:43
|
1. No
2. No
|
| 34 | TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 17:38
|
I totally missed this thread, but I do concur with the majority with a NO and NO.
|
| 35 | Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Sep 07, 2009, 18:22
|
I suppose that settles the issue.
Players acquired during the playoffs will no longer be eligible to be kept. Players acquired during the playoffs are no longer eligible for IR, either.
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|