Gents:
I've had a request to add a section on our spreadsheets for Utility players. I can do that, but it requires a lot of work to make the change consistent across the spreadsheets.
Would anyone object to me eliminating the DH section of the rosters and substitute a Utility section? Right now we have a total of 10 DHs signed to contracts (out of 14 total). I imagine we have a lot more guys who would be considered Utility players (I have two myself in Ian Happ and Adam Frazier).
David
I have no issue with it.
How many DH's are there who never play the field at all? It can't be many, if at all. I'd list the 'DH's' under whatever position they play the few times they are in the field.
I'd be in favor of UTIL eliminating a spot for DH. Same reasons you and Brendt mention.
I think that is a good idea. I have a player listed as a DH in JD Martinez he played a lot of outfield so I'd still consider him an outfielder.
On that note, from time to time I notice players are listed incorrectly by error (Ahmed listed as a 2b) or change in position from when they were drafted (Iglesias listed as a starter). I've avoided asking because I assume it would be some work for you all, but when you have some down time I'd like to request a change or two. Or if there is a way to self edit I would be happy to do that also.
Just let me know and I'll make the changes. It's not an issue. I'd prefer that the spreadsheet is accurate.
I'm in favor of the utility position addition.
Of course I have several players that fit the description of three or more positions.