Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling
It seems to me that we are rewarding negligence and penalizing the team that could pick him up in the draft if the original owner had played by the rules. It doesn't seem kosher that in an AL-only league you can have a National League player on your roster.
I am OK with leaving him on the current roster because it doesn't affect me one way or the other. I was just pointing it out as a curiosity. I am happy as long as the policy is clearly stated for the future.
I agree that these rosters were neglected overall, and the new managers have work to do as a result.
I don't remember there ever being a rule that you had to drop players on your roster who switched leagues. Maybe there was, but i can't find any reference to it. In an overall manner, it was not smart to tie up a roster spot on this type of speculation. There was much more overall damage than benefit to their teams from this neglect. But since it was not required to drop players who moved to the NL, I would leave things as is.
For the future, I have no problem having a rule that says if a player is dropped off the active 40 man roster for all AL teams, that player must be dropped. Then, if he re-enters the league later, he goes through the waiver process. Other people's thoughts on this?
"I think he'd be unbelievable. He's as organized as anyone in the game, he holds people accountable... He doesn't buy into stereotypical things in the game... Price looks at evidence. He's a freaking smart guy, he makes his decision on reasonable evidence." Bronson Arroyo