|
ETERNAL SQUABBLERS LEAGUE
2001 WINTER SURVEY RESULTS
1. ENTRANCE FEE
2. PLAYERS SENT DOWN BETWEEN FREEZE
DATE & DRAFT DAY
3A. SHOULD PLAYERS ON D.L. COUNT AS
"ASTERISK" PLAYERS?
3B. TRADING DEAD-LINE
3C. ELIMINATE IN-SEASON TRADING?
3D. PLAYERS TRADED TO THE AL - SHOULD THEY BE
"ASTERISK" PLAYERS?
3E. CAN'T TRADE PLAYERS TRADED TO THE AL?
3F. CAN TRADE ONLY ONE "ASTERISK" PLAYER?
3G.
ANTI-DUMPING, ANOTHER GOOD IDEA
4. NO MORE "FROZEN" TEAMS
5. NO MORE J.D.DREW
6. NUMBER OF ACTIVE PLAYERS
7. NUMBER OF KEEPERS
8. NUMBER OF SEPTEMBER CALL-UPS
1. ENTRANCE FEE
For the last three years the entrance fee was $200. $40 of that went to
All-Star Stats and $15 of it goes to me because I need the money for my coke
habit. Is there any desire to raise that fee?
1 - No,
actually, I�d like it lowered to $175
 7 - I=m
a loser and it=s juuuuuust right at
$200
0 - Raise
it to $225
0 - Raise
it to $250
0 - Raise
it to $275
2 - Raise
it to $300
I wouldn=t want anyone to quit
because we are playing for too much money. If everyone votes for $300 and one
person would quit if we play for $275 or more, we=ll
only raise it to $274.
2 - $200 limit
2 - $250 limit
6 - No limit
Comments regarding this question:
"Sorry to be a dick, but I'm saving for my college education."
-- Mike Capilo, who voted to reduce the entrance fee to $175.
"I love Hooters, so I need the extra
money!!!!" -- Mike Zalegowski
2. PLAYERS SENT DOWN OR RELEASED
BETWEEN FREEZE DATE AND DRAFT
The rule in the ESL has been that keepers who are placed on the D.L. between
the time rosters are "frozen" and may be dropped back into
the pool of players to be drafted at no cost to the team that had kept that
player.
What about players who are sent down to the minors or
released? Should the owner also be allowed to drop those players or should
that team have to keep that player. The rationale, I suppose, behind
making a team keep such a player is that - unlike a player who suddenly gets
hurt - if a player is released or sent down, it couldn't have been a totally
"unforeseen" event (as it would be if a player was suddenly injured.)
1 - If
you freeze a player, you should have to keep him
7
- If
a frozen player is released on sent down before the draft, you can drop him
before drafting
2 - It
makes no difference to me.
Comments regarding this question:
"No, I don't just love Hooters, I really love
Hooters!!!!!!" -- Mike Zalegowski
3. ANTI-DUMPING...
Brace yourself, the following items on "Anti-Dumping"
are going to bore you to tears. Don't blame me. There were a LOT
of different ideas and suggestions. Hopefully the results of this
cumbersome exercise will result in putting an end to these discussions once
and for all.
3a. ANTI-DUMPING:
SHOULD PLAYERS ON D.L. COUNT
AS "ASTERISK" PLAYERS?
One way to possibly combat a loop-hole in the "asterisk" rule is
to say that once a player goes on the D.L. he can not count as an
"asterisk" player. The logic would be that
"asterisk" players are supposed to be the top notch players in the
league. Clearly if a player is injured, that most likely isn't true.
This would stop teams from trading a $30 player away as an
"asterisk" player when he is out for the season.
5
- Keep
it the way it is, a player can still be an "asterisk" player even if
he's on the D.L.
3 - Good
idea, if a player goes on the D.L. clearly he isn't as valuable and shouldn't
be an "asterisk"
2 - I
don't care
Comments regarding this question:
"I wish I were at Hooters right now!!! This survey makes no
sense to me and I still finished ahead of 5 teams!!!!!"
-- Mike Zalegowski (who abstained on nearly every question)
3b. ANTI-DUMPING:
TRADING DEAD-LINE
One other method of combating "mid-season" dumping would be move
the trading dead-line up. (Note that I didn't include an option for a
June deadline because I think that is a dangerous area to have the
dead-line. June would be early enough for teams to think they are out of
the money and dump, and it's also early enough that there is so much season
left to play that any dump trades at that point seriously affect the
Rotisserie pennant race. May dead-lines should assure that any trades
to that point are trades to help both teams and NOT dump trades.)
7
- Keep
it the way it is, teams should be able to trade thru the Thursday after the
All-Star Game
0 - Move
the trade-deadline up to 5/30
0 - Move
the trade-deadline up to 5/15
2 - Move
the trade-deadline up to 5/01
1 - I
don't care
Comments regarding this question:
"Man, I could really use a beer right now!!!!!" -- Mike
Zalegowski
3c. ANTI-DUMPING:
ELIMINATE IN-SEASON TRADING?
Here's a concept: Eliminate in-season trading all-together. Shouldn't the
winner of the season be the person who has had the best draft? What better way
to assure that than to eliminate dump trades all together by just eliminating
in-season trading?
Tired of half the teams having 90% of the keepers going
into every draft? What better way to assure that all of the keepers
remain equally distributed among all the teams than to just eliminate
in-season trading.
Tired of having to "keep up with the
Joneses" every year by being forced to trade along with your
competition? We're all busy these days - do we all have time to worry
about trading in mid-season just because if you don't, you are at a
disadvantage? Let's just get rid of in-season trading all together.
4
- No,
in-season trading is good, leave it the way it is.
4 - Good
point, let's just get rid of in-season trading.
2 - I
don't care
Comments regarding this question:
"Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, Hooters, wings and beer, maybe I'll
give My Pal Chris Mal a call." -- Mike Zalegowski
3d. ANTI-DUMPING:
PLAYERS TRADED TO AL
One of the largest loop-holes in the "Anti-dumping" rules of 2000
was the fact that we allowed players traded to the AL to be considered
"asterisk" players because they were automatically in their last year
of their contract once traded to the "other league". By
mid-season, so many journeyman players had been traded to the AL, that making
ridiculous ESL dump trades no problem at all. One suggestion was to say
that any player traded to the AL could NOT be considered an "asterisk"
player no matter what.
4
- Keep
it the way it is, players traded to the AL are "asterisk"
players.
4 - Good
idea, that would help, if a player is traded to the NL, he is not an
"asterisk" player.
2 - I
don't care
Comments regarding this question:
"Uhhhhhhh, what the hell is this thingy all about
anyway?????." -- Mike Zalegowski
3e. ANTI-DUMPING:
PLAYERS TRADED TO AL, Part 2
Someone also suggested taking the previous suggestion one step farther, to
say that a player traded to the AL can not be traded - PERIOD. And also
that any player traded FROM the AL to the NL and picked up via FAAB$ cannot be
traded either.
5
- Keep
it the way it is, players traded to the AL, or from the NL to the AL can
be traded.
2 - Any
player involved in a major league inter-league trade cannot be traded in the
ESL.
3 - I
don't care
Comments regarding this question:
"Wouldn't it make sense to determine if we should end in-season trading
first, then discuss these issues? I'm so bent on ending in-season trading
that my mind isn't processing your questions properly." -- Mike
Capilo (Note from YPCM: Yes, it would have made sense but I couldn't
think of a good way to do that without having two surveys, and I didn't feel
like doing that, so I just say 'fuck it' and threw everything together. I
kind of knew eliminating in-season trading wasn't going to happen anyway so it
didn't really matter.)
"I still love Hooters!!!!!!" -- Mike
Zalegowski
3f. ANTI-DUMPING:
TRADE ONLY ONE "ASTERISK" PLAYER
Allow teams to receive only one "asterisk" player
per year from any given team. (This will totally eliminate those
2-"asterisk" for 1-"asterisk" trades where one of the 2 is
some schmoe who is injured or in the last year of his contract.) Or,
alternatively and more strict, allow teams to only receive TWO
"asterisk" players per year and they MUST be from different ASL
teams.
6
- Keep
it the way it is: As long as the net result is that a team only gains one
"asterisk" player, it's OK
0 - Teams may only receive ONE "asterisk" player from
each team
throughout the year.
2 - Teams may only receive
TWO "asterisk" players TOTAL per year and must be from different
teams.
2 - I
don't care
Comments regarding this question:
"I wonder what Steve Julian is doing right now." --
Mike Zalegowski
3g. ANTI-DUMPING:
ANOTHER GOOD IDEA
One idea that someone suggested that I have heard another leagues of gone
to in an effort to combat mid-season dumping is to set a deadline: You
can make any trades that you'd like before the deadline just as you normally
would, but any players involved in any trades after that date automatically
have their contracts expire at the end of the year. (This would, by the
way, eliminate all the crap about "asterisk" players and the
"Drew Rule.")
5
- No,
I don't like this idea.
3 - I
like this idea.
2 - I
don't care.
If we go with this idea, when should the dead-line be?
2 - May 1st
0 - May 15th
0 - May 30th
3 - June 14th
5 - I
don't care.
Comments regarding this question:
"Geez, I really could use a beer!!!!!" -- Mike
Zalegowski
4. NO MORE FROZEN TEAMS?
This past year we did not enforce the "Frozen" teams rule which
says that any team that owes $10 or more must reduce their debt to zero within
one week or will not be allowed to making any transactions. The league
did not fall apart. I suggest we eliminate the $10 "frozen"
team rule, however, I don't think it was a very smart precedent to allow teams
to pay their entrance fee whenever they want. As it should be, all teams
should be paying their entrance fee on draft day, and those that don't will
not be permitted to make transactions until they do.
2 - Leave
it the way it is, if a team owes more than $10, they must reduce their debt to
zero.
0 - Change
it to $20 - if a team owes more than $20, they are "frozen" and must
reduce their debt to zero.
6
- Get
rid of the "frozen" concept - teams may pay their transaction debt
at the end of the season.
2 - I
don't care
Comments regarding this question:
"Dude, if I go for my master's degree, I may not be able
to pay a lump sum. I'd like to be able to pay in small increments. Plus,
I paid by check last year and Scott didn't cash it until the end of the
year. I think he should cash it immediately so that my bank statements
can be balanced. At times I was excited because I thoguht I had $200
when in fact I didn't." -- Mike Capilo.
"Hooters, Hooters, Hooters!!!!!" --
Mike Zalegowski
"(Get rid of the Frozen concept) as
long as the deadbeats pay by November 1st!" -- Drew Gallagher
5. NO MORE J.D.DREW
Because J.D.Drew is an idiot and I don't think any of us actually enjoy
even hearing his stupid stupid stupid name, it was suggested that after his
contract runs out, that he be banished from ever being drafted again in the
ESL. Additionally, anyone who so much as speaks his name will be hit
with a Cone Tariff of 25 cents per name violation.
3 - No,
I'm a pansy-ass just like J.D.Drew and I look forward to having him on my team.
4
- That's
a great idea! J.D.Drew sucks big hairy donkey wee. Once his contract
expires, good bye J.D.Drew!
3 - I
on the fence with this one (and boy does that fence post feel good up my
butt.)
Comments regarding this question:
"I believe that Cone Tariffs should be handed out without
prejudice. Therefore, I believe you should end the per-homer fine of his owner
and allow the offending player to remain in the league. As such, I
appeal to your sense of decency to end this charade. Les the ass stew in
his swill, but don't kill the owner, so to speak. But, I must admit my
butt did feel fine for a few minutes before the decision was made." -- Mike
Capilo. (Not from YPCM: Pansy-ass J.D.Drew loving homo!)
"Ahhh, a question I can actually
answer!!!!" -- Mike Zalegowski
"I think I came up with this idea and it
is pure genius. Plus it might get us into Baseball Weekly." -- Drew
Gallagher
6. NUMBER OF ACTIVE PLAYERS
One person suggested that we reduce the number of active players from its
present number of 27. I should remind everyone that the number of
keepers was once 23, but that was prior to the expansion of the NL by adding
the Arizona Diamondbacks and Milwaukee Brewers. That means that the NL
had expanded by 14% (16 teams / 14 teams = 114%). It stood to reason
that to keep our "mental values" of players in the NL the same as
they had always been, that the number of active players would also increase by
14%, so we went from 23 active players to 27. There are now 50 more
players to draft, so it makes sense that we would add 40 more active players,
does it not?
6
- Keep
it the way it is, there should be 27 active players for $290.
3 - Reduce
the number of active players to 26, and the amount of draft money to $280.
1 - I'm
undecided, kind of the same way I am about my sexuality.
Comments regarding this question:
"I've finally decided on my sexuality...so I can finally
answer this question. Oh happy day." -- Mike Capilo.
"I really think I need a beer after
filling out this survey!!!!" -- Mike Zalegowski
"It should be even lower." -- Jon
Perkins
7. NUMBER OF KEEPERS
One person suggested that we reduce the number of keepers from its
present number of 16. As noted in Survey Question #6, the NL expanded by
14% a few years ago. At that time we kept the number of keepers at 16,
since we had gone from 15 to 16 a few years prior to that. In reality,
we should have expanded the number of keepers by 14%, but we left it at 16, so
I see no reason to go the opposite direction, do you? (If this is
changed, it would be effective for the 2002 season.)
5
- Keep
it the way it is, teams may keep between 0 and 16 players from year to year.
3 - Reduce
the maximum number of keepers to 15.
2 - I
abstain from this question, not unlike the way I abstain from sexual
relations.
Comments regarding this question:
"You sir are a salesman. I'd like to suggest in the future
making these questions more cut and dry. I feel as if I'm offending you by
voting opposite of your opinion. You should seriously consider sales if
you ever lose your job. Well done!!!!!" -- Mike Capilo. (Comments
from YPCM: Although I agree with your assessment, I don't think it applies to
this question. Here I was merely stating the facts as they are. I don't
think it would be prudent to suggest a change without providing the truth of the
matter, particularly in this case when the facts aren't necessary
apparent. By the way, I am offended when you disagree with me. Just
kidding. :-)
"Beer and Hooters, that's all I need in
life!!!!!!!!!" -- Mike Zalegowski
"Um, why don't we have a reduce it even
further option?" -- Drew Gallagher
"Lower..." -- Jon Perkins
8. NUMBER OF SEPTEMBER CALL-UPS
One person suggested that we reduce the number of September call-ups to
"a couple." Presently you are allowed to activate as many
players as you want off of your reserve roster (as long as they are not on the
D.L. or in the minors.) This is the same as in the major leagues where
they can activate as many players as they want from their 40-man roster, and
identical to the way the Official Rotisserie Baseball book wrote the
rules. Personally, I think it rewards those teams that have built a
strong group of reserves. Plus, I think the more players you have to
follow for that month, the more fun it becomes, but that is clearly a matter
of opinion.
5
- Keep
it the way it is, teams may activate as many players as they want from their
reserve roster.
2 - Reduce
the maximum number of September Call-Ups to a maximum of two.
3 - My
brain is starting to hurt.
Comments regarding this question:
"I'd also like to buy one hundred widgets. Have them
shipped to Paul Rosa @ Penske and have the bill sent to Pete Gabrielli.
Thank you." -- Mike Capilo. (Comments from YPCM: You are
funny.)
"Yeah, this f-in survey is finally
over!!!! HOOTERS here I come!!!!" -- Mike Zalegowski
"My brain really is starting to
hurt!" -- Mike Zalegowski
Number of visitors to this page:
  
| 
