Puresim Multiplayer League - Greatest All-Time Teams!

[SittingDuck]

The other thing I was thinking - and this could totally be rendered irrelevant soon - is league structure.

Initially I was thinking two separate leagues. However, if you are wanting to see which team does best, then you'd want them playing against all other teams and not just 3-5 teams. What is important is a spread of games against all teams. A WS, while nice, would just mean that half of the teams are never really a part of the test for a given team. So it would seem one massive league would be the way to go with a limited amount of teams.

OTOH, if we get enough guys interested (which brings up another problem), then there would certainly be enough competition to run a WS. That is pretty much up to everyone else, though.

Here's the other concern I mentioned - often when you get a bunch of people interested in a league, you'll have early attrition. So that is my concern - setting the league up for 'X' amount of teams and then after about 1-2 weeks having 3-4 teams have to go on CPU control. So I'd like everyone to give a lot of consideration as to whether they want to try to stick it out on this and not bonk out early. I'll keep everyone apprised of ideas/concerns/whatever so no one has to be taken aback by any changes or issues. There is a lot to work out from my end regarding FTP and stuff like sim arrangements and so forth. So that is all stuff to be thought out and relayed to the group.

[SittingDuck]

Woodruff, to answer your question in the other thread on AI teams, I was actually thinking last night that it might behoove us to set up a few AI teams for historical teams that have not been chosen in the end.  Like an A's team or whatever.  There are quite a few teams we could set up that way.  Not looking to have a massive league, but it would be nice to have some teams represented.  This would also give us a field of teams open for management should the league become desirable to other guys.  Which might occur, but then again, we might lose a few guys after some time.  So we can make a decision on that later.

[Nukester]

ORIGINAL: SittingDuck

Nuke, I'd really love to see either the Mets or Reds represented.  So I'll put you down for Reds until you mention something else.

Thats fine. Deltadog can have the Yankees

[Deltadog]

I hate to take a team that someone else had first.  If it had not been indicated that 2 Yankee teams would be ok provided that they were far enought apart, I would not have done so.  Since Nuke had them first, I can select another. 

[Paul Vebber]

NOte that if you are phonetically spelling things then THe Brewers are from 'Miwahhky', ast least on the South Side where I grew up...

[Nukester]

ORIGINAL: Deltadog

I hate to take a team that someone else had first.  If it had not been indicated that 2 Yankee teams would be ok provided that they were far enought apart, I would not have done so.  Since Nuke had them first, I can select another. 

Nah thats fine. However, if we go from "experimental" to "real" league in the future, I get 1st dibs on the Bombers [:)]

You know what ? The '75 Reds might be a better team, but I think Ill personally have more fun running the '86 Mets, since I know them very well, and they have a better pitching staff. Ill go with the '86 Mets

(sorry for changing my mind so many times)

[Nukester]

Some of these teams are very close in years, so you may still have to sift through the rosters to make sure there are no duplicates of the same guy on teams (if that the way you want to go). I havent checked, but there may be someone on both the '80's Phillies and the '82 Brewers, or the '85 Cardinals, etc....

Also, are the teams going to be normalized (if something like that can be done within the game), or is it "bring with you what you had at the time" (for example low Sb totals for '30's teams, high HR's for late '80's and '90's teams, etc....) ?

[Woodruff]

I can see why you might normalize.

However, that would essentially negate my reasoning for selecting the two teams I wanted (Royals and Cardinals), since I selected them specifically for dominating numbers of stolen bases (and stolen base percentages).

[SittingDuck]

All good points.

The 'player on two separate teams' things could be annoying. This is one reason I was thinking about using the Year-Suffix thing (Steve Carlton, 1980). Personally don't like it in my league, but this makes me see its value. Thoughts? Anyhow, I am going to have my hands full getting the FTP stuff and sim schedule/process (which we'll need to discuss) ironed out right now. Which makes me think I'd really like to be able to have polls.

On the normalizing, the only thing that really is a philosophical obstacle is where do you set the benchmark? What year or era? Thus, I tend to think it would be best to leave all settings at the current 'center mark' (ie., not adjusted negatively or positively), and by this I mean the sliders affected via the 'Options' menu. I won't like the HR totals at all, personally, but c'est la vie.

However, if we can agree to an era that is to our liking for the big things like ERA, HRs and such, then I can normalize it out via a few runnings of the association. Set it and then let it roll. Personally, I enjoy the pre-1969 stat levels because I see a relevance dating back to the 40's and perhaps even earlier. Not perfect, but not as skewed as it becomes later. I mean, 30-40 hrs should be, IMO, real power. And an ERA above 4.0 should not be considered #3 starter stuff, ya know? OK, this is getting philosophical and shows the difficulty of finding an era that everyone is content with. But if there is a majority consensus, then we can just go with that and be done with it. Because you really can't get it perfect because that is pretty undefinable.

At some point when the membership drive has reached a plateau, then I'll whip up the league and post it so guys can download it. It won't contain all of the historical parks, most likely, but that can be finished later. As well, if anyone has a particular logo, then we can use that. Or if you just want to use your own logos, whatever. Which is probably the right thing anyhow.

[SittingDuck]

It's OK on changing your mind, Nuke.  You can have all of them potentially until someone else steps up and grabs one.  Down for the Mets.  Someone will likely get the Reds and I hope, the A's.  My true competition, you see.  Which I want to prove inferior. [:-]

[SittingDuck]

Only missing one slacker at the moment. [;)]

Shaun, how about a league forum?

[Paul Vebber]

I took care of that...

[SittingDuck]

Sweet-O

[akcranker]

Sorry I've been gone for a few days.. any chance I can still get in on this?

[akcranker]

If I can get in on this.. I'll take the 1989 Oakland A's!!!

[SittingDuck]

Done. I was thinking someone would get the 70's A's team, but whatever.

We can always have that as a CPU team. Easier to destroy that way... [;)]

[akcranker]

Yea like I said in the other multiplayer thread.. I grew up in the 80's so I take teams that I know.

Plus you can't beat McGwire, Canseco, Ricky & Dave Henderson, Eckersley, Steinbach, Weiss etc etc

[akcranker]

So when do you plan on creating the league file and making it available to download?

[dneely]

The Brooklyn Dodgers circa 1953 are ready to roll. I think a 4 man rotation makes the most sense given the diversity of teams and I don't think the use of a DH is called for given the era for most of the teams selected.

Ready for the first file here in Phoenix.

David

[KG Erwin]

Is this finalized yet?   I'll take the 1971 Pirates.