"Since
the first pitch was thrown, baseball history has been intertwined
with American history.
"For example, during World War
II, some 95 percent of all major leaguers registered for active
duty, including its biggest stars. Hall of Fame members who put
themselves in harms way and sacrificed some of their most
productive baseball years join a special category we call true
national heroes" - Dale
Petroskey
There have been some
misunderstandings recently about the types of events that enable a CFCL team
to make a mid-week transaction, and the resulting debate and discussion
indicates it might not be a bad idea to publish a reminder of how the rule
works.
The Skinny
I can, and probably will, go into all sorts of detailed
explanations about why things are set up the way they are, but I don't want
the main message to get lost among the minutia, so here's the short version:
Our rules allow CFCL teams
to make a roster move in the middle of the week (in other words, on a day
other than the usual Friday transaction date) if one of their players is added
to or removed from his MLB team's active roster (put on or activated from
the DL, sent to or called from the minors, placed on the bereavement list,
etc). Before you can make a mid-week transaction with one of your
players, a report of the Major League transaction must have been published by
one of the thousands of major Internet news sources (ESPN.com, the MLB team's
website, newspaper website, etc). The ONLY event that qualifies for a
mid-week transaction is the publication of the MLB transaction.
That's it in a nutshell.
Now for the gory detail...
When You CAN'T Make a Mid-Week
Move
Having an injured player does not entitle you to make a
mid-week roster move, regardless of the severity of the injury or the
prognosis for the player. Until his MLB team puts him on the disabled
list AND THIS TRANSACTION IS REPORTED BY A MAJOR INTERNET NEWS SOURCE, you
cannot reserve the player mid-week.
This means that if one of your guys breaks his leg or
undergoes emergency brain surgery, you cannot reserve him until a report that
his MLB team has placed him on the DL is published. The fact that the
player will clearly miss significant time and undoubtedly be placed on the DL
at some point does not qualify for a mid-week transaction.
Reports that a player will
miss the remainder of the season are not enough to qualify for a mid-week
move. The same goes for players coming off the DL or getting called up
from the minors. Until THE TRANSACTION itself has actually been reported
you cannot activate the player in a mid-week move, regardless of published
reports of the team's plans or what it says in the newspaper's Scheduled
Starters table.
For one thing, none of
those types of reports specifically mention the transaction. For
another, they are all discussing future events. Until the a
clear report that the player HAS ALREADY been put on or activated from
the DL is published, your transaction cannot go through.
Some of the Reasoning
For better or worse, we've decided that CFCL teams can make a
mid-week move only in reaction to a move by the player's Major League
team. Since we don't have access
to Bud Selig's office, most of us have no way of knowing exactly when an MLB team has
officially reported a transaction, so we can't use that as our source for
determining whether a move has been made or not. The next best thing is to
rely on published reports about Major League transactions.
The problem with published reports is that they are often
speculative (I've been reading for two weeks that Wily Mo Pena will be activated
from the DL within the next couple days. And how many times recently has
Ben Sheets been ready to make his return from the DL, only to have it pushed
back a while?).
In order to ensure that mid-week transactions are only
permitted when an MLB move is actually made, we chose to require that there be a
published report that an MLB transaction has been completed in order for
a mid-week move to be made. Not an injury, not a report that an MLB move
will be made, but a report that the move has actually been completed.
One Way To Tell
Here's a quick acid test
for whether a particular report qualifies for a mid-week move: If the
report on which you want to base a mid-week move discusses a transaction
in the past tense, it's probably valid. If it discusses are
transaction or any other event in the future tense, it likely is not
valid.
Wise Guy Disclaimer:
The above "acid test" may not apply in every single situation.
At some point in the season someone will send me a link to a story that
contains a sentence like "After being activated from the disabled list,
Bill Bonham will make the start for the Cubs the day after tomorrow," and
claim that they should be able to activate Bonham now because the word
"activated" is in the past tense. This would not be
permissible because it's not clear that the transaction has ALREADY occurred.
The Ultimate Aim
This ensures a few things: 1) that there's definitely
an MLB transaction that the mid-week move is in response to, 2) there's no
decision-making required on the part of the League Secretary, and 3) that there
is therefore no risk that the League Secretary will allow some moves to go
through and others not. There's no room/need for speculation,
interpretation, or judgment. Either the MLB move has been reported or
not. It's very cut-and-dried, which means it's very fair in it's
application across the board.
Some Seeming Drawbacks
This reliance on reports of MLB transactions has some problems, of course. Often MLB moves
aren't reported until after our Noon mid-week transaction deadline. That
means we sometimes miss out on a start by a pitcher coming off the DL or have to
wait a day or two with a dead roster spot before we can replace an injured
player. But since we have a set standard that requires no judgment or
interpretation in terms of whether a mid-week move can be permitted, we all have
equal opportunity to lose out in this way.
Then there's the issue of serious injuries. If I've got
a player who is clearly going to be out for a long period, why shouldn't I be
allowed to replace him immediately? Why should I have to wait until his
MLB team puts him on the DL? Sure, there are cases where a DL stint is a
foregone conclusion. But there are also cases where a DL stint is likely
... or probable ... or possible ... or a remote consideration. Once we
open the gate to allowing mid-week moves in response to injuries (or anything
other than an actual MLB transaction), it means someone is going to have to
decide whether a mid-week move should be allowed or not. Not only is that
unfair to the person making the decision, but it could lead to unfair decisions
being made or the accusation of unfairness. Requiring a published report
of the completion of a transaction removes the necessity for evaluation and
decision-making, and therefore ensures the process is fair for everyone.
What's Ahead
As I said way back at the beginning of this, there's been a
bit of debate about this rule this year. There have been suggestions that
the League Secretary be allowed to use his judgment as to whether a mid-week
move should be permitted (though, oddly, also accusations that the League
Secretary is unfairly using discretionary judgment in enforcing the existing
rule, which is damn near impossible). It's been suggested that we allow
"conditional" mid-week moves, where, for example, you could reserve a
player in case he gets put on the DL later in the day. There have been
suggestions that we allow completely free movement between active and reserve
rosters, and also that we scrap mid-week moves altogether.
All of the suggestions have potential problems, but all are
worth considering. The Executive Committee is mulling things over, and at
some point it's likely there will be a thread on the topic in the Forums.
Regardless of what's decided, though, for the remainder of the 2005 season we
will follow the mid-week transaction rule as it's currently written and
explained above.
Hometown Discount Watch
In 2006, the teams that finished in 5th-12th
place in 2005 will receive a budget of up to .06 to use toward reacquiring
players who had played out their option with the team (B-contract players). The
exact amount each team receives will be based on how far behind the 5th
place team they are at the end of the year, in terms of a percentage of the 5th
place team's point total.
Team
Points
%
of 5th Place
Discount
Budget
Steve's
Stones
68.0
100.00%
.06
DoorMatts
64.0
94.12%
.05
Da
Paul Meisters
55.0
80.88%
.04
Hot
Sludge Sundae
54.0
79.41%
.04
Dem
Rebels
53.0
77.94%
.04
Eric's
Lambchops
50.0
73.53%
.04
Nick's
Picts
34.5
50.74%
.03
Splendid
Splinters
29.0
42.65%
.02
Record Book
Week Ending 5/27: No new
records were set this week.