Removing the pre-season position eligibility addition

[blurred]

The TL;DR – Under our current rules, each GM is allowed a one-off addition of position eligibility to a player ahead of the start of Spring Training – adding 2B or 3B eligibility to a player who is SS only, or adding 1B to a player who is 3B eligible only. This helps with roster balance and position scarcity.

The proposal is that this extra eligibility move is removed, and would take effect from the 2025 season.

The detail:

This rule helps mimic real life where players can move down the defensive spectrum – typically shortstops are able to cover at 2B and 3B, and 1B is an easier corner infield position to field than 3B.

The fact that it is done ahead of Spring Training and not just at any point in the season also reflects that a player may be asked to play at a new position ahead of the season, due to a change in personnel due to trade, promotion of a prospect or similar.

This allows for a small bit of roster flexibility in a league as deep as BTL, and to counter any position scarcity issues. 

The argument against this is, I suppose, that it is an atypical rule to have in fantasy baseball, where a player’s eligibility is almost always uniquely determined by the number of games they play at a position in real life.

[blurred]

This was proposed in both the suggestion thread and Slack, I think, but I will be voting against.

I think the limited extra eligibility is a nice thing to have, and helps teams field complete and competitive rosters more easily in a deep league such as ours.

[SoonerorLitigator]

I've never liked this rule. I think it actually hurts roster depth. People can hoard players at prime positions like 3B and SS which makes it harder for teams to field competitive lineups.

Cynically, one could wonder why this was ever made a rule in the first place.

[PiratesGM (BTL)]

I've never liked this rule. I think it actually hurts roster depth. People can hoard players at prime positions like 3B and SS which makes it harder for teams to field competitive lineups.

Cynically, one could wonder why this was ever made a rule in the first place.

Agreed 100%  I’ve never come across it before.

[Ryan5794]

I like the rule but think it should be moved to opening day so people can add a position to a FA signing

[SandlotLinC25]

Sooner brings up a good point... now that I look closer at it, there is a lot of truth to why this was designed in the first place and who benefits from it.

While it is a cool real-life quirk, it does allow those who have a deep well of prospects and players at certain positions to be able to play them elsewhere at the expense of others who do not have anyone of quality to start at those positions and then have to trade even more to acquire them.

I am switching my vote to removing this rule.

[Scalious]

I've never liked this rule. I think it actually hurts roster depth. People can hoard players at prime positions like 3B and SS which makes it harder for teams to field competitive lineups.

Cynically, one could wonder why this was ever made a rule in the first place.

1B and 2B were artifically scarce in the early days of this league. Logically any SS can play 2B and any 3B can play 1B. So what you are talking about was kinda the point. To mimic how RL teams actually work and give more value to the ones that are higher on the defensive spectrum.

We would just go back to hording 1B again and lots of teams having trouble filling that position then. Since would often be the UT bat for a lot of teams who had more the one good one. I really don't want to go back to that. Remember this a 6x6 and not a 5x5. So the fact most 1B don't steal doesn't dock them as much here.

[thepetis]

I’m still hoarding 1B!

[SandlotLinC25]

#FreeFlores ^

[Scalious]

I’m still hoarding 1B!

Yup and now more people get can get 1B eligibility.