*** VD 15 Commentary Thread ***

[The Feral Slasher]

- I think we have to go with the 2004 as per the rules. In which case I will update the spreadsheet with this information.

I need enough people to agree or disagree with this, or it'll be poll time.

I agree

[johnnya24]

While we're in full clusterfuck recovery mode - there is an "unnamed" player whose second name and b-r.com reference code do not correspond. His B-R.com code reflects his original name (which he had until 2018), while his "new" legal name has a different letter (from 2018).

Should we:

(1) Use his original name / letter and actual B-R.com reference

OR

(2) Use the letter from the name that he now legally uses.

-----------

Personally I think (2) given the spirit of the rule and the fact that he legally changed his name.

Again, please comment.

[frae]

2004 is fine for me. I don’t have a plan.

[DMT]

While we're in full clusterfuck recovery mode - there is an "unnamed" player who's second name and b-r.com reference code do not correspond. His B-R.com code reflects his original name (which he had until 2018), while his "new" legal name has a different letter (from 2018).

Should we:

(1) Use his original name / letter and actual B-R.com reference

OR

(2) Use the letter from the name that he now legally uses.

-----------

Personally I think (2) given the spirit of the rule and the fact that he legally changed his name.

Again, please comment.

twooo

[heyelander]

- I think we have to go with the 2004 as per the rules. In which case I will update the spreadsheet with this information.

I need enough people to agree or disagree with this, or it'll be poll time.

Which ruling causes the least aggravation? Because I'm down with that

[Ken]

(2) Use the letter from the name that he now legally uses.

Inside or outside of prison?

[heyelander]

While we're in full clusterfuck recovery mode - there is an "unnamed" player who's second name and b-r.com reference code do not correspond. His B-R.com code reflects his original name (which he had until 2018), while his "new" legal name has a different letter (from 2018).

Should we:

(1) Use his original name / letter and actual B-R.com reference

OR

(2) Use the letter from the name that he now legally uses.

-----------

Personally I think (2) given the spirit of the rule and the fact that he legally changed his name.

Again, please comment.

I think assholes like that don't deserve to be drafted

[heyelander]

man, Johnny trying to dead-name people, get woke!

I like this joke better than the other one, so new name for me

[johnnya24]

Which ruling causes the least aggravation? Because I'm down with that

Aggravation for who?

[johnnya24]

While we're in full clusterfuck recovery mode - there is an "unnamed" player whose second name and b-r.com reference code do not correspond. His B-R.com code reflects his original name (which he had until 2018), while his "new" legal name has a different letter (from 2018).

Should we:

(1) Use his original name / letter and actual B-R.com reference

OR

(2) Use the letter from the name that he now legally uses.

-----------

Personally I think (2) given the spirit of the rule and the fact that he legally changed his name.

Again, please comment.

(1) 0
(2) 3

[johnnya24]

That's 6 for 2004 and nothing for the alternative. So let's just continue and be vigilant with the spreadsheet classification until I get it updated.

AND ... the Ranking sheet I published earlier is showing 1999-2005 also in case anyone is using that for sorting / ranking etc

[hacko]

I would have taken Encarnacion had I known he was "normal".

I too thought they both were contemporary

[DMT]

I mean since no one else has picked and Jake already received the benefit of Zimmermann, we could classify EE as "contemporary" and let Jake repick if he wanted. Of course it doesn't make any logical sense from a consistency standpoint, but at least in terms of fairness it doesn't give Jake two extra picks that most of us would've valued higher.

[Bene Futuis]

It’s really weird that modern players who played in the league’s highest HR total years ever aren’t considered contemporary.

[DMT]

It’s really weird that modern players who played in the league’s highest HR total years ever aren’t considered contemporary.

And then there's that.