another early look at keepers

[Ken]

Because 3 games in 2016 does not qualify him for any position in 2016 (except in season 1 game rules). So we revert back to 2015 in which he had 20 games at catcher. Any quantity 20 or over is equal for fantasy purposes.

He worked on his catching in the off season and was going to be used by the Cubs at catcher (not primary) during this season. Should fantasy owners get penalized because of the early injury?

Just curious, if he only played catcher in 2015 (lets say 120 games) would the 3 games he played in the OF in 2016 trump that?

Schwarber has stated that he intends to catch some in 2017.

I've never played in a league where you revert back to a previous year for any reason other than 0 games played the previous season.

In every league I've played in the 20 games rule allows MULTIPLE position eligibility, but the primary eligible position is just the position they played the most games at last year.

i.e. under the 20 rule, if player A had 14 games at 1B and 12 games at 3B last year, he would be 1B only. If player B had 27 games at 1B and 21 games at 3B he would be 1B/3B.

I would hate this type rule - it would mean a utility type guy that plays lots of positions in the IF doesn't accumulate 20 for any of them he's suddenly reverted back to a previous season where maybe he was just a DH? That would make no sense to me.

Basically you are saying to ignore last year when the Cubs decided to move Swarber to OF.

[Gregg]

I've never played in a league where you revert back to a previous year for any reason other than 0 games played the previous season.

In every league I've played in the 20 games rule allows MULTIPLE position eligibility, but the primary eligible position is just the position they played the most games at last year.

i.e. under the 20 rule, if player A had 14 games at 1B and 12 games at 3B last year, he would be 1B only. If player B had 27 games at 1B and 21 games at 3B he would be 1B/3B.

I would hate this type rule - it would mean a utility type guy that plays lots of positions in the IF doesn't accumulate 20 for any of them he's suddenly reverted back to a previous season where maybe he was just a DH? That would make no sense to me.

Basically you are saying to ignore last year when the Cubs decided to move Swarber to OF.

What if a player played 120 games at 1B in 2015 then played 2 games at 3b and 1 game at 1b in 2016. Are you saying he would only qualify at 3b based on 2 games for 2017?

[TranaGreg]

What if a player played 120 games at 1B in 2015 then played 2 games at 3b and 1 game at 1b in 2016. Are you saying he would only qualify at 3b based on 2 games for 2017?

Most leagues I've been in have worked this way, yes.

My original league put in a "common sense" rule that allowed for exceptions that are agreed to by a majority of owners prior to the draft/auction - to address unusual situations such as the one you laid out. It was pretty rare that we used it though, those situations turned out to be few & far between.

[Ken]

Most leagues I've been in have worked this way, yes.

I agree. And I don't think there's a need for any outliers - the rules apply to every team the same. The very rare coincidence that your SS plays 2 games at 2B and 1 at SS and then gets hurt is 50 times less likely than just having one of your pitchers go down and need TJ surgery.

Adding subjectivity to it just clouds the issue. Rules like this should be static so that they automatically apply evenly to all teams leaving out the bias (intentional or not) that someone can have if is open to interpretation.

[mjl]

so it looks like the consensus was Turner, Bryant, Lucroy, Oh, and Sanchez, with Schwarber if he qualifies and maybe Blackmon if not. It turns out that I successfully remembered that there was a FAAB run yesterday for no good reason and that someone cut a good injured player a few weeks ago, and I was the only person who was paying attention, so now I have Carrasco $6 as an option. I assume that's better than Blackmon?

[Hornsby]

so it looks like the consensus was Turner, Bryant, Lucroy, Oh, and Sanchez, with Schwarber if he qualifies and maybe Blackmon if not. It turns out that I successfully remembered that there was a FAAB run yesterday for no good reason and that someone cut a good injured player a few weeks ago, and I was the only person who was paying attention, so now I have Carrasco $6 as an option. I assume that's better than Blackmon?

For sure, Blackmon at 32 was a good, not great keeper anyway. Carrasco at 6 is a steal...