[USML Announce] USML - Commissioner Rules question

[Andy Klein]

Like Rich, I think the rule we have in place permits
players claimed on waivers to be retained.  So, Harris
should be retainable.

Let's put the question of whether to change the rule
on the winter agenda.

BTW ... the Nine *will* finish ahead of the AYM and
the Red Hots to claim the all-important third draft
slot!!

-Andy

--- jhwinick at aol.com wrote:

> Rich poses the question "Is this really an issue?" 
> I suppose it is.  I, like Mark assumed that any
> player acquired after September 1st would not be
> retainable.  Its why I was surprised to see a waiver
> claim from the Red Hots.  It seems clear that at
> least two teams (Mark and I) operated on that
> assumption.  The fact that the constitution in this
> instance may not precisely track the intentions of
> the league is beside the point.  I can't believe
> anyone really cares much about this issue, but I
> wouldn't dismiss it so cavalierly.  Let's decide
> what the rule is and then include it in the
> constitution clearly so there is no further
> question.
>  
> For what it is worth, I strongly support a rule that
> disallows keeping any player that clears waivers
> after September 1st.  Past experience with the
> Riptorns in other leagues taught me that it allows
> an avenue for monkey business.  It allows a front
> running team to essentially trade a player to the
> last place time long after the trading deadline. 
> The Riptorns used this to get very favorable deals
> with the last place team by including this future
> consideration.  The Riptorns then held onto the
> valuable player until just before the end of the
> season at which point in time they waived the player
> with the understanding that he would be picked up by
> the last place team.
>  
> I confess that it isn't a strategy that I ever would
> have thought up, but you all know that those
> Riptorns were sneaky bastages.  Let's close the
> loophole.
>  
> As for how to deal with Willy Harris - on that
> issue, I truly couldn't care less.  I doubt he'll be
> kept anyway.
>  
> Jeff
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard E. Robbins <RERobbins at iTinker.net>
> To: 'USML Announcements' <announce at usml.net>
> Sent: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 09:12:52 -0500
> Subject: RE: [USML Announce] USML - Commissioner
> Rules question
> 
> 
> I think the rules are clear.  Neither the salary or
> contract status of a player claimed on waivers are
> changed from what they were when the player was
> rostered by the team that waived him.  That makes
> sense too.  The reason we introduced the rule about
> FAAB acquisitions post September 1 was to eliminate
> the possibility of people snagging non-drafted
> prospects during the period of expanded rosters. 
> Maintaining contract status for waived players does
> not introduce the same concern.
>  
> Section 8.4 reads as follows:  The salary of a
> player claimed on waivers shall be his previous
> salary. The contract status of such player shall
> also remain unchanged.
>  
> Section 8.5 reads as follows:  The salary of a free
> agent is his acquisition price. Except as set forth
> in the next sentence, the contract status of a free
> agent acquired on or before the last weekly
> transaction deadline before September 1 is that of a
> first-year player. The contract status of a free
> agent who, during the course of the season, was in
> the final year of his contract, is that of a player
> in the final year of his contract. The contract
> status of a free agent acquired after the last
> weekly transaction deadline before September 1 is
> that of a player in the final year of his contract. 
>  
> Is this really an issue?  If we need to revise the
> text to be clear, I suggest that we do so in the
> off-season when changes like this are typically
> made.  Perhaps something like "The contract status
> of of such player shall also remain unchanged,
> without regard to when the player is claimed on
> waivers."
>  
> -- Rich
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> From: announce-bounces at usml.net
> [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf Of
> MBBlocker at aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 9:39 PM
> To: announce at usml.net
> Subject: [USML Announce] USML - Commissioner Rules
> question
> 
> 
> League:
>  
>   You should by now have received this week's weekly
> report.  I realized in processing the transactions
> that I am uncertain how to handle waiver claims, so
> I am submitting this as a question.  After 9/1, if
> you obtain a player via FAAB, his contract status is
> FA (Rule 8.5).  
>  
>   However, after 9/1, if you claim a player from
> waivers, what contract status does he have, FA or
> same as prior?  Rule 8.4 says his status is
> "unchanged," but I am unclear if that is modified by
> the fact that the player is part of the free agent
> pool after 9/1 and thus really an FA pursuant to
> 8.5.
>  
>   FYI, no matter what the answer is, we should add a
> sentence to 8.4 to clarify the constitution on this
> point.
>  
>  
>   -- Mark B.
>  
> 


Andrew R. Klein
anrklein at yahoo.com