The Gilkey Incident - July 2000
From: Tojopa
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 10:25:03 EDT
Subject: I saw it coming
To: arc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Tony
I saw it coming and I feel responsible. When I gathered names to be drafted
for this past draft the thought came to mind of Bernard Gilkey who was
rumored to be ready to sign with the Red Sox. Being that I am almost
positive to be pulling off a blockbuster trade by the all star break and
Terrence Long would be included, I figured Gilkey would be a decent
replacement. I thought of using Jose Lima money or at least part of it.
Whether or not I would have spent as much as $10 on Gilkey is doubtful. But
when I read the reports of Gilkey, the story was that The Red Sox were
THINKING about signing him to a contract. I assumed that he was not yet a
member of the BOSOX so I did not bid.
I am sure if the draft bidding was done the old way via e mail... I would
have mentioned "What I thought to be ineligibility of Gilkey". When I
noticed a $10 bid for him and at the time I thought it was Addison who bid on
him I just shrugged my shoulders and said "Well that's Addison." I looked
again this AM and saw that it was not Addison buy The Trick Dicks better
known these days as Austin A's. Although it does not matter to me that much
but Doodles called complaining that he also was going to bid on him but
didn't because he was not official a Red Sox Player at that time. I am sure
if Gilkey went 0-6 yesterday nothing would have been said. But after Gilkey
went wild with his awesome day at the plate there seems to be a few annoyed
people. Like I said "I should have brought up the suggestion about Gilkeys
eligibility before the draft" but I failed to do so. Truthfully I think you
overpaid for him and in the end he may even hurt your team. But I was asked
to write a letter to you explaining what and how people think about the
situation. I assume there is an explanation awaiting the world from our
commissioner but like I said, it doesn't matter to me. In the end Gilkey is
a bum and definatly not worth $10.
From: Chezdood
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 12:43:32 EDT
Subject: Re: New stats
To: arc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I have to assume in your never ending pursuit of roto supremecy that you
overlooked th fact that B Gilkey was not a member of any particpating NGRL
teams . I am confident that the "Commish" will rule that he was not eligble
and thus not on the A's team and that as in the past he is not responsible
for anyones knowledge or lack of please a quick and just resolution must be
handed down. Yours Truly "Cheese Doodles"
From: arc
Reply-To: arc
To: roto
Subject: The Gilkey Incident
FCC: ~/Mail/cc/email_cc
--text follows this line--
Yes, most interesting how this becomes a major issue *after* the man
gets 4 RBIs. Where were the protests on Sunday night or Monday
morning? Would there be an uproar if he went 0 for 5?
Now, despite my cynical view of this over-reaction, the fact does
appear to be that he was not signed until after the draft. However,
this is pure hind-sight by those people that immediately jump on some
big underhanded conspiracy theory. Since many new source reported
that Gilkey was with the Red Sox on Friday, and since none of us
personally have access to the Red Sox front office, it was a very
natural assumption to think he was signed. So natural in fact, that I
was not the only person to bid on Gilkey. It wasn't like I tried to
sneak him through with a $1 bid even, but of course, none of this
looked all that underhanded on Sunday night now did it?
Anyway, because the facts have come to light now, and the rule does in
fact say that the player has to be signed with the team or one of its
affliliated minor league teams, Mr. Gilkey was not eligble to be
drafted. I will adjust the transactions accordingly.
-Tony