[USML Announce] Setting Lineups

Thu Apr 24 16:07:38 EDT 2008

League:

  I am not sure my primary concern has been fully conveyed.  If we change the number of games needed to qualify from 2007, the system will make the change "retroactively."  (When I started to do this, it gives you a warning notifying you that this may cause prior rosters to show up as illegal).  As you may recall, at the beginning of this year, every time we made a retroactive change, it caused problems in the entry of roster and FAAB moves, for reasons that are not at all apparent.  My concern is that, if we make the retroactive change to 2007 games-played requirements -- even one which logically should have no impact -- it may inadvertently screw up the system in ways we do not currently anticipate.  So, my question is whether it is worth taking that risk to fix a single-player, single-team problem?  If the league concludes that this is risk is worth taking, I will go ahead and make the change (changing 20 to 18), but I want the league to do so with eyes wide open in case this creates new, unanticipated problems.

  -- Mark B.

________________________________

	From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf Of Richard Robbins
	Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 3:58 PM
	To: 'USML Announcements'
	Subject: RE: [USML Announce] Setting Lineups

	I'm fine with what you propose, but would suggest that in order to minimize inadvertent mistakes, we set the number to the highest number needed to solve the problem, i.e., in this case, 18.  If we need to lower it to another amount during the season to address other instances discovered, then so be it.

	-- Rich

________________________________

	From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On Behalf Of springkerb at aol.com
	Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 3:23 PM
	To: announce at usml.net
	Subject: Fwd: [USML Announce] Setting Lineups

	Mark Blocker has asked me to raise an issue with the league.

	I have discovered that the current website does not line up with our league's rule on position eligibility.  For 2007, the site requires the league to set a single value, so it cannot accomodate the normal rule which is based on either 20 games or the position at which the player appeared in the most games (if less than 20).  Currently, our default is set at 20, which means that a player that qualified at a position last year but did not play 20 games at that position cannot be activated at that position.

	I currently have this issue with Alberto Callaspo, who I'd like to roster at 3B based on 2007 games played.  It seems likely to me that several other players would potentially be affected as well.

	As noted below, I have proposed that we fix this glitch simply be resetting our default value to 1, and requiring the league's owners to take responsibility for positioning players consistent with our rules.  (The rule would not change, just the settings on the site.)  In effect, this is what we did for years before all this was automated.  Mark notes that we will essentially be on the honor system, which is correct and which I don't have a problem with.

	Mark's other concern is that any changes will be applied retroactively and might affect standings, etc.  Logically, that should not be a concern here, since it has been impossible to position any player based on less than 20 games of 2007 playing time.  Therefore, there should be no transactions capable of being affected retroactively.  Mark agrees with this from a logical perspective, but would like me to get league concurrence in case something screwy happens if/when he makes the change.

	Does anybody have a problem with re-setting the 2007 eligibility default to 1 game and having us all take responsibility for position eligibilty for our own teams?  (Winick, of course, will be keeping an eye on all of us.)

	Thanks.

	Mark

	-----Original Message-----
	From: springkerb at aol.com
	To: announce at usml.net
	Sent: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 2:04 pm
	Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Setting Lineups

	Can we just re-set the 2007 number?  We could put it at 18, which would fix the situation with Callaspo, or we could put it at one and handle position eligibility on an honor system.  In either case, our rules say Callaspo is eligible at 3B, and that's where I want him.

	Mark

	-----Original Message-----
	From: Blocker, Mark B. <mblocker at Sidley.com>
	To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>; MBBlocker at aol.com
	Sent: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:10 pm
	Subject: RE: [USML Announce] Setting Lineups

	Mark:

	  This cannot be fixed.  The system determines position eligibility by number of games played at position in 2007 and 2008 (and we select what the number is).  As to 2007, the number is set at 20 and for 2008 the number is 1.  There is no setting for "most games played at a position."

	  -- Mark B.

________________________________

		From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net <mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net?> ] On Behalf Of springkerb at aol.com
		Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 10:20 AM
		To: announce at usml.net; MBBlocker at aol.com
		Subject: [USML Announce] Setting Lineups

		I'd like to activate Alberto Callaspo at 3B (and reserve Marte).  3B is Callaspo's primary position from 2007.  However, our website does not recognize him as eligible at 3B.  Can that get fixed?

		Mark 

________________________________

		Get the MapQuest Toolbar <http://www.mapquest.com/toolbar?NCID=mpqmap00030000000003> , Maps, Traffic, Directions & More! 

	Sidley Austin LLP mail server made the following annotations on 04/23/08, 12:10:52:
	-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To comply with certain U.S. Treasury regulations, we inform you
	that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this
	communication, including attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be
	used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed on such 
	taxpayer by the Internal Revenue Service.  In addition, if any such tax advice is used or referred
	to by other parties in promoting, marketing or recommending any partnership or other entity,
	investment plan or arrangement, then (i) the advice should be construed as written in connection
	with the promotion or marketing by others of the transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed in this
	communication and (ii) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular
	circumstances from an independent tax advisor.

	****************************************************************************************************
	This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
	If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us
	immediately.

	****************************************************************************************************
	_______________________________________________
	announce mailing list
	announce at usml.net
	http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce

________________________________

	Get the MapQuest Toolbar <http://www.mapquest.com/toolbar?NCID=mpqmap00030000000003> , Maps, Traffic, Directions & More! 
	_______________________________________________
	announce mailing list
	announce at usml.net
	http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce

________________________________

	Plan your next roadtrip with MapQuest.com <http://www.mapquest.com/?ncid=mpqmap00030000000004> : America's #1 Mapping Site. 

Sidley Austin LLP mail server made the following annotations on 04/24/08, 16:03:01:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To comply with certain U.S. Treasury regulations, we inform you
that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this
communication, including attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be
used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed on such 
taxpayer by the Internal Revenue Service.  In addition, if any such tax advice is used or referred
to by other parties in promoting, marketing or recommending any partnership or other entity,
investment plan or arrangement, then (i) the advice should be construed as written in connection
with the promotion or marketing by others of the transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed in this
communication and (ii) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular
circumstances from an independent tax advisor.

****************************************************************************************************
This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us
immediately.

****************************************************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lyra.siteprotect.com/pipermail/announce/attachments/20080424/7d8b77ae/attachment-0001.htm