Picking Up Pitchers after Max Innings Pitched Reached.

[pelvis_kick]

There is a team in our Yahoo Custom ROTO league who went over his innings pitched lately. However, today he picked up quite a few pitchers. Most of these players were on his team before he had a stream day to get the most out of the day he went over the limit.

Now, this is a keeper league, but we only get to keep 7 out of our 20 on our roster. Of the 5-6 players he picked up I really can't see him keeping any, but that could be an excuse, but no one would believe it. While it is a custom league, where we make our own rules, we never had a rule about this. However, the Public League rules state something like this under the Fair Play rules. Something about not picking up a player/s for the sole purpose to hamper play of other/s teams.

What, if anything, can/should be done? Thanks.

[noseeum]

Wow, you're right. Number four under fair play:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/baseba ... es-29.html

"No owner will make any roster moves (including waiver claims, trade proposals, etc.) whose sole purpose is to hamper the play of other owners."

This doesn't seem well thought out. Number 4 contradicts number 1:
"All league-related transactions will be executed with the intent of improving the owner's team and/or its standing within the league."

If I can pickup a guy that you might want, even if I don't use him, that can improve my standing. Personally, I think it's completely fair game to grab players that would help the competition. As long as the intent it to help your team improve in the standings, I think it's fair. Why would he dump a bunch of pitchers if he knew you would all pick them up?

That said, I don't really think number 4 applies in this case. It sounds like he picked up all the pitchers to use on his last day of innings available. If that's the case then you're suggesting perhaps you should force him to drop players? He made the roster moves to use the pitchers. So now he's just NOT making roster movers. Even if you strictly apply rule 4, it requires the owner to specifically add a player for the purpose of preventing another team from getting him. The rule does not say anything about holding players you already have but no longer need.

Make sense?

[Bobbleheadrusty]

Wow, you're right. Number four under fair play:
http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/baseba ... es-29.html

"No owner will make any roster moves (including waiver claims, trade proposals, etc.) whose sole purpose is to hamper the play of other owners."

This doesn't seem well thought out. Number 4 contradicts number 1:
"All league-related transactions will be executed with the intent of improving the owner's team and/or its standing within the league."

If I can pickup a guy that you might want, even if I don't use him, that can improve my standing. Personally, I think it's completely fair game to grab players that would help the competition. As long as the intent it to help your team improve in the standings, I think it's fair. Why would he dump a bunch of pitchers if he knew you would all pick them up?

That said, I don't really think number 4 applies in this case. It sounds like he picked up all the pitchers to use on his last day of innings available. If that's the case then you're suggesting perhaps you should force him to drop players? He made the roster moves to use the pitchers. So now he's just NOT making roster movers. Even if you strictly apply rule 4, it requires the owner to specifically add a player for the purpose of preventing another team from getting him. The rule does not say anything about holding players you already have but no longer need.

Make sense?

As long as he's not churning players I dont see a problem with this strategy. Do your rules require that a team drop all pitchers after hitting his limit? if not I don't see what you can do about this.

Blocking to me has always been a viable and acceptable fantasy strategy. whether it is cuff-blocking in football, or positional blocking in baseball, both seem acceptable to me.

Consider this. When Furcal went down in my yearly league this season there were 2-3 decent fill-in SSs on the waiver wire. I was facing the Furcal owner, and immediately picked them up to force him to start a guy like Fahey.

Its no different then baseball teams blocking waiver claims to keep the other teams from getting players. There is always the risk that the guy I dropped turns out to be Quentin or another player who winds up blowing up on someone elses team.


Note, I am not including churning (the one-day addition of a player to keep them on waivers for the coming period/start) That is bad form.