[USML Announce] USML - Draft Day 2011 and related information

Tue Feb 22 19:47:58 EST 2011

The one time I try to help and I still make trouble.

My proposal was made to address Rick's concern. Seeing that I failed miserably I hereby withdraw my proposal. My apologies.

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 22, 2011, at 7:15 PM, "Jim Barrett" <chicagojab at gmail.com> wrote:

> When I joined in '01 or '02, I was the tenth team and it was only ten
> for a few years before Buddha and the short lived Cups franchise
> entered.  I think we went back to 10 for a brief period when the
> Riptorns went on a hiatus.  We didn't adjust then and I don't think we
> need any adjustments to roster or retention now.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 22, 2011, at 4:56 PM, Jeffrey Winick <jhwinick at aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Andy,
>>
>> I'm certain we didn't increase the size of the reserve rosters in
>> the past.  And it wouldn't address the issue of the 23 extra players
>> available in the auction.  The whole idea of adding the extra UT is
>> to do exactly what you apparently don't like, i.e. impact position
>> scarcity.  But the only impact would be to keep position scarcity as
>> it would be with a 11 team league.  It wouldn't make it worse, it
>> would simply maintain the status quo.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew Klein <anrklein at gmail.com>
>> To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>
>> Sent: Tue, Feb 22, 2011 3:27 pm
>> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] USML - Draft Day 2011 and related
>> information
>>
>>
>> I am pretty sure that in the past we added players to the reserve
>> roster, not the active roster. I would favor doing that, but not
>> changing the active roster. I especially don't like adding a UT,
>> which impacts position scarcity stuff on draft day.
>>
>> -Andy
>>
>> On 2/22/11 3:39 PM, Richard Robbins wrote:
>>> I agree with Jeff that dropping the league to ten owners doesn't seem
>> to
>>> warrant changing retention roster configuration.
>>>
>>> On the other point, haven't we run our league at ten before with the
>> current
>>> traditional roster size? I'm OK either way, i.e., making the change
>> Jeff
>>> suggests or just sticking with the current configuration. Whatever
>> makes
>>> sense to the balance of you is fine with me.
>>>
>>> -- Rich
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On
>> Behalf
>>> Of Jeffrey Winick
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 2:26 PM
>>> To: announce at usml.net
>>> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] USML - Draft Day 2011 and related
>> information
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> In other leagues and, if I recall correctly, in this league as well,
>> when
>>> the number of teams has been reduced, we have dealt with the
>> resulting
>>> deeper pool of talent by increasing the number of roster positions -
>> i.e.
>>> you add a 2nd utility slot and you add a 10th pitching slot. That
>> would
>>> take an additional 10 pitchers/10 hitters out of the pool (roughly
>> the same
>>> as the number that would have been drafted by the 11th team). I would
>>> definitely support that change.
>>>
>>> I would not support an increase in the number of keepers as the
>> reduction in
>>> the total number of teams in the league has no logical relationship
>> to the
>>> quantity of keepers.
>>>
>>> The King
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Blocker, Mark B.<mblocker at Sidley.com>
>>> To: USML Announcements<announce at usml.net>
>>> Sent: Tue, Feb 22, 2011 2:13 pm
>>> Subject: RE: [USML Announce] USML - Draft Day 2011 and related
>> information
>>>
>>>
>>> Is that what we did back in 2002?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On
>>> Behalf Of
>>> Brad Jansen
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 2:09 PM
>>> To: USML Announcements
>>> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] USML - Draft Day 2011 and related
>>> information
>>>
>>> Let's stick with ten, then, and increase allowable keepers to ten
>> plus
>>> three rookies.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 1:29 PM,<rickgam at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Indeed! My concern is that with 10 teams or less, it's too easy
>>> to end
>>>> up with a bunch of All-Star teams,
>>>>
>>>> which cancels out to some extent the joy of scouting out those
>>> all-important
>>>> end-of-roster guys. Shoot, I'd be
>>>>
>>>> happy with 12 teams. But if 10 is the consensus, then so be it.
>>>>
>>>> Rick
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Brad Jansen"<bljansen at gmail.com>
>>>> To: "USML Announcements"<announce at usml.net>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 9:53:58 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] USML - Draft Day 2011 and related
>>> information
>>>> Size matters. That's my comment.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 9:30 AM,<springkerb at aol.com> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks. I just felt obligated to offer my usual comments on the
>> size
>>>>> issue.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> announce mailing list
>>>> announce at usml.net
>>>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> announce mailing list
>>>> announce at usml.net
>>>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> announce mailing list
>>> announce at usml.net
>>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>>
>>>>
>> ---
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>> ----------------------------
>>> 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> announce mailing list
>>> announce at usml.net
>>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> announce mailing list
>>> announce at usml.net
>>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> announce mailing list
>> announce at usml.net
>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> announce mailing list
>> announce at usml.net
>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce

STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY, ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE & DISCLAIMER

The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential information, protected by the attorney-client privilege and intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or e-mail and delete the message.  Thank you.

Although this e-mail and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer systems into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility by Harris?Winick LLP for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.