Tweet
I would like to get a neutral opinion on my situation. I'm in a 14 team 5x5 mixed league and we have daily roster moves. We play through yahoo fantasy sports. We have a maximum limit of IP from the entire staff of 1250. Here is what yahoo had to say about the rule on the site:
Each non-pitching spot on your roster (not each player) allows for a maximum number of games played, while your entire pitching staff has a total inning limit.
The table above shows you how many of each you have used, how many you have remaining, your projected pace and the maximum allowed.
Once you exceed the maximum, you will no longer accumulate stats for the position.
Here is the dispute... The guy in second place (who actually just jumped ahead of me yesterday) was credited with all the stats for 1259.2 IP, 9.2 more than the maximum. Apparently yahoo's software was unable to track the exact moment that the maximum was reached and so it credited him with all stats for all IP for the entire day. Here are the issues that I would like people's opinion on:
1. I think it is crystal clear, but anyway... The rules states that "Once you exceed the maximum, you will no longer accumulate stats for the position". Shouldn't this apply in real-time? If the limit is 1250 IP shouldn't that be a hard limit. Does it imply anywhere in the rule that it is 1250 but actually 1250 plus any other IP accumulated during the day that the limit was breached?
2. Shouldn't the IP maximum be filled in a chronological manner? My opponent had 7 innings left. Zambrano went first for him and pitched 5.2 innings. Nathan then itched 2 innings. Later that evening, oswalt pitched 7 more innings and picked up a win, 6 k's and lowered his era by .01 and whip by .01. I feel as though Zambrano's 5.2 and 1.1 of nathan's IP should count and all of oswalt's stats should not. My opponent feels that if indeed the cap is a hard cap at 1250, he should be able to choose the 7 IP. I feel as though it should be real time and there should be no choice involved.
3. Although I've written to yahoo, I have serious doubts as to if they will fix this. If a rule is clearly stated, but not enforced by the software/scoring company, shouldn't the commish have the authority to overrule it? If the rules are clear, then I don't feel a major error by the yahoo should decide who wins or loses. I feel as though the commish has the power to enforce the rules of ou league. My opponent says that since we chose yahoo, whatever yahoo says should be the end all, inal decision. So is that to mean if somehow yahoo gave delgado 980 rbis rather than 98, and refused to fix it that we should all live by that error, even when the league members could fix it?
My opponent gained 3 points in the standings just from oswalt's outing. It's 1500$ on he line here. any opinions (especially from @HQ people) would be greatly appreciated.
Each non-pitching spot on your roster (not each player) allows for a maximum number of games played, while your entire pitching staff has a total inning limit.
The table above shows you how many of each you have used, how many you have remaining, your projected pace and the maximum allowed.
Once you exceed the maximum, you will no longer accumulate stats for the position.
Here is the dispute... The guy in second place (who actually just jumped ahead of me yesterday) was credited with all the stats for 1259.2 IP, 9.2 more than the maximum. Apparently yahoo's software was unable to track the exact moment that the maximum was reached and so it credited him with all stats for all IP for the entire day. Here are the issues that I would like people's opinion on:
1. I think it is crystal clear, but anyway... The rules states that "Once you exceed the maximum, you will no longer accumulate stats for the position". Shouldn't this apply in real-time? If the limit is 1250 IP shouldn't that be a hard limit. Does it imply anywhere in the rule that it is 1250 but actually 1250 plus any other IP accumulated during the day that the limit was breached?
2. Shouldn't the IP maximum be filled in a chronological manner? My opponent had 7 innings left. Zambrano went first for him and pitched 5.2 innings. Nathan then itched 2 innings. Later that evening, oswalt pitched 7 more innings and picked up a win, 6 k's and lowered his era by .01 and whip by .01. I feel as though Zambrano's 5.2 and 1.1 of nathan's IP should count and all of oswalt's stats should not. My opponent feels that if indeed the cap is a hard cap at 1250, he should be able to choose the 7 IP. I feel as though it should be real time and there should be no choice involved.
3. Although I've written to yahoo, I have serious doubts as to if they will fix this. If a rule is clearly stated, but not enforced by the software/scoring company, shouldn't the commish have the authority to overrule it? If the rules are clear, then I don't feel a major error by the yahoo should decide who wins or loses. I feel as though the commish has the power to enforce the rules of ou league. My opponent says that since we chose yahoo, whatever yahoo says should be the end all, inal decision. So is that to mean if somehow yahoo gave delgado 980 rbis rather than 98, and refused to fix it that we should all live by that error, even when the league members could fix it?
My opponent gained 3 points in the standings just from oswalt's outing. It's 1500$ on he line here. any opinions (especially from @HQ people) would be greatly appreciated.
Comment