Positions on fantrax

[KeithTorGM]

Players like Aranda and Vientos are listed as utility only even though they played a high percentage of their games in mlb at 3b and 1b respectively.  It seems that players that were in the minors for the majority of last year are being incorrectly placed at utility only positions because they did not hit the 20 game mark.  This does not seem equitable to me.

[Ian (Baltimore)]

I think it’s going based on what position they played most when it’s less than 20 games for a position. Both DH’d the most so being UTL makes sense. Vientos fell one game short of being 3B eligible with that 20 game mark. Hope that helps.

[WhiteSox]

Yeah they needed 20 games at a single position.if they don't meet that at any position they're defaulted to DH. I have that in another league as well

[Cincinnati Reds - Chris]

Is there something we're looking to change?

Because if we can alter a number to give Vientos & Aranda a position, it will affect every other player.

[KeithTorGM]

personally, I think it should be prorated for players less than 200 at bats that are rookies....like for Aranda especially it just seems inequitable

[St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew)]

The Fantrax rule is, any player who does not get 20 games at any position gets the one they played most at.

In Vientos case, it's sadly because he was 37 games at UT. Aranda was close too but made most of his appearances (12) at DH. I have the same with Hunter Goodman, 10 OF, 8 1B and 3 at DH, doesn't qualify at any of them so he got allocated the one he played most - OF.

I know there are going to be isolated incidents we don't like but I don't see a need to import a special rule, happy to keep with Fantrax way of doing it.

[BrewCrewGM]

yeah i’m in favor of keeping things the same

[Cincinnati Reds - Chris]

I'm not in favor of changing anything.

Funnily enough, FG has Aranda slotted in as their DH.

[KeithTorGM]

Yet in his mlb career so far Aranda has played more at both 1st and 2nd than DH. It should be pro-rated. To me it is common sense, but it is not being changed, so be it.

[Cincinnati Reds - Chris]

What would the recommended outcome be?

[WhiteSox]

Mar 4, 2024 10:21:49 GMT -5 KeithTorGM said:

Yet in his mlb career so far Aranda has played more at both 1st and 2nd than DH. It should be pro-rated. To me it is common sense, but it is not being changed, so be it.

I think he had one of those positions last year but because neither were his most played positions in the majors that's why he is UT

[BrewCrewGM]

don’t see the need to overhaul the system due to a few isolated cases

[Cincinnati Reds - Chris]

Mar 4, 2024 12:53:52 GMT -5 BrewCrewGM said:

don’t see the need to overhaul the system due to a few isolated cases

I agree.

My stance is if Keith gets his two DH's defensive positions. Then whatever the number of games at the position they needed would become the new normal and every player in the league would be entitled to get a POS qual at that minimal number of games.

[Houston Astros]

No need to change, I understand the thought of prorated, but, oh well

[Oakland - John]

Drives e crazy that McCutchen's been an outfielder all his life and is now only listed as UT. I can live with it though.

[tbrays]

It doesn't sound like there is big support for a change here, but it was something I would hope would get brought up at some point. The position requirements for this league are higher than any other league I am in. It does lead to some problems where it takes longer than usual, and perhaps necessary to get their position requirement. For example Soderstrom had 15 GP at catcher and 10 at 1B last year and doesn't have eligibility at any position. The rule is equally limiting to everyone, so I've never felt the need to bring it up. It's just a different rule to adapt to. If there was a vote I'd prefer the position elibility be 10/5 rather than 20/10, but if that never comes I can appreciate that is just the way this league runs.

[KeithTorGM]

I am of the same mind as Rays. For young players without a full year in majors it is unduly limiting. I hope some that are entrenched in the status quo change their mind eventually.

[brettgile04]

Agree with the Rays on that for sure like I have Arranda who played 11 at first and 12 at DH but only has util or Morel who played 19 at 2nd and is projected by fangraphs to be the cubs 3B. Think it’s limiting not sure what a perfect solution would be wether it be reduce a small amount or make is so say they play under like a 100 games make it so theyd have to play like 30% of there games there or something ik say someone plays a 140 games 20 games is like 15% idk if that would help with that at all but.

[St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew)]

I think it is too close to opening day this year to do anything for 2024 but I’m happy to open up a discussion / poll for 2025.

We have always gone with 20 games and they are Fantrax standard settings we use but I am happy to change them for 2025 if the majority think it necessary.

[Halejon/Nationals GM]

I think there's no way to change it on Fantrax -- but you can override them manually.

It leads to some stupid situations but has always landed in the "could definitely be better but would be more work for someone" category for me.