1976 Off-season Thread (Opening Day File is up!)

[ekcut]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Looking forward to when we can name the Pitcher of the Year award after a legend of the first generation of FOOL. Right now, I'd say it's between Gabe Prado, Joe Morris, Tom Williams or that odd-ball Pete McKeane (a strange morph of Rick Aguilera and Dennis Eckersley for FOOL) with 200+ career saves and 100+ career wins.

Every youngster can dream of growing up, making the Big Leagues and winning the Prado, Patrick or Tanaka Awards!

[muns]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Looking forward to when we can name the Pitcher of the Year award after a legend of the first generation of FOOL. Right now, I'd say it's between Gabe Prado, Joe Morris, Tom Williams or that odd-ball Pete McKeane (a strange morph of Rick Aguilera and Dennis Eckersley for FOOL) with 200+ career saves and 100+ career wins.

That is damn cool. Looking forward to seeing that as well

[Young Drachma]

MVP (Tanaka)
POY (Prado)
ROY (Spindola)

The Spindola thing is a no-brainer. He'll be the first guy to log 400 home runs and has been a dominant force in the league since he was a kid. The MVP thing, I dunno. Tanaka seems to be "the guy" but I know I could make a case for Rick Inman too.

Pitcher of the Year, will be an interesting debate. Prado seems the odd-on favorite though. Morris might have more wins, but I dunno that anyone has been more dominant in his career than Prado. Though I like the idea of naming it after McKeane, just for the oddness of what he's done. That might not be sexy 20 years from now if some guy comes along with more wins/saves than him and given the trend, that's possible.

[Young Drachma]

Of course, I say that and then look again and realize that Spindola had more strikeouts than anyone ever. Make Inman ought to be the ROY guy.

[kaosfere]

How far into the league's history are we considering the "first generation"? Would someone who started anywhere in, say, the first decade be in?

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Looking forward to when we can name the Pitcher of the Year award after a legend of the first generation of FOOL. Right now, I'd say it's between Gabe Prado, Joe Morris, Tom Williams or that odd-ball Pete McKeane (a strange morph of Rick Aguilera and Dennis Eckersley for FOOL) with 200+ career saves and 100+ career wins.

I'll try to come across as not too annoying in my reply


I think it would be ultimately cheesy to name the pitching award after someone who already has been surpassed in many of the games single-season and career pitching records, and was one of many other "superstars" of their era. Sure Prado is probably the best career of any pitcher thus far, but he's also pretty much had the longest of any productive all-star caliber pitcher thus far. Prado's career isn't -that- much better than Morris or Williams or even Benny Myers.... and by the time someone is decided upon to name the award after, I would not be suprised at all to see Barajas or Carlos Gonzales bypass all of them.


In MLB, The best pitcher receives the "Cy Young" award, because those accomplishments likely will never be achieved again. He had almost 100 more wins than any other pitcher, and nearly 150 more than #3 or #4 on the list. He had 200+ more wins than what is considered now a "Hall of Fame" career... It was simply in-human...

In the MLB, the MVP award is named after a non-player who had a similar dominating effect on the game..

I think I'd rather hold off on naming them after someone until we find that super-human dominating force that doesn't necessarily come down with unreachable stats, but at least so far above the others that it seems unlikely to be reached...

Of course I'm likely just being the stick int he mud like normal

[Alan T]

Now Tanaka as the MVP I think is a much better case. Tanaka has been dominating (He and Inman have combined for almost half of the MVP awards in the league's history), and his stats are a decent bit better ahead of others. Even then still I think I'd rather hold off and see if anyone could top them..

I think ROY award named after Inman is kind of silly since he never won the award... I would think that would be better named after someone who has a Fred Lynn type season (wins Rookie of the year and MVP in same year)

[Young Drachma]

I knew Alan would talk me down.

I don't imagine we'd ever get a vote to pass to name any of the awards after anyone, but it's a fun debate to fire up for the next 50 years.

[Young Drachma]

On realignment:

With expansion permanently on hold, I'm thinking it might be time for another vote on realignment. I think that the narrow vote to realign to two divisions to expand the playoffs, might be rethought now that we have a group of owners who weren't here when we voted on it before.

Anyone's thoughts on this? I'll solicit feedback for a few days before posting a new poll if necessary. If the consensus seems acute, then that won't even be necessary.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

I knew Alan would talk me down.

I don't imagine we'd ever get a vote to pass to name any of the awards after anyone, but it's a fun debate to fire up for the next 50 years.

Well don't get me wrong, I'm all for naming the awards after someone, but yeah I think 30-40 years down the road is best when you have a good perspective of the playing field and know who truly was great in a way that stands through time.

I thought the suggestion of Tanaka is a great one knowing what I do now.. Tanaka arguably has had 3 of the best 5- 10 seasons of any single player in FOOL history '66, '68, '70 and he also has held all-star quality of play over an entire career of play similar to a Hank Aaron type (with less power and more getting on base.

I think it is clear that Tanaka has been the best player of the first 15 years, even if Inman is up there, Tanaka did it for several years longer at the same or better level. The thing though is when naming awards that last forever, will we still say the same about Tanaka in 30 more seasons? Rasmussen could be even better for instance, but he still has to do it for another 8-10 years to compare with Tanaka.. but he very well may be able to.

I think on the pitching side, it is an even easier arguement to wait though. While Prado has been great.. it is mostly due to the Don Sutton effect of him pitching for 16 seasons to accomplish that. Prado arguably might not even have one of the best top 10 seasons for any pitcher ever and all of his awards have been due to longevity.

I think in 30 years, we'll look at Prado in the same light that people in the MLB looked at Rube Waddell.. who was an excellent pitcher in his time.. but you don't see a Rube Waddell award anywhere these days.

I guess the good thing is 30 years in FOOL is only a little over 6 months in Real time... In most OOTP leagues that would be maybe 1 - 1 1/2 seasons tops.. so it is not like we have to wait too too long.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

On realignment:

With expansion permanently on hold, I'm thinking it might be time for another vote on realignment. I think that the narrow vote to realign to two divisions to expand the playoffs, might be rethought now that we have a group of owners who weren't here when we voted on it before.

Anyone's thoughts on this? I'll solicit feedback for a few days before posting a new poll if necessary. If the consensus seems acute, then that won't even be necessary.

Do you want my thoughts on realignment? Not sure if you know where I stand on it...

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I guess the good thing is 30 years in FOOL is only a little over 6 months in Real time... In most OOTP leagues that would be maybe 1 - 1 1/2 seasons tops.. so it is not like we have to wait too too long.

That's a hilarious, but very smart assessment, kind sir.

Just the dichotomy is hilarious. We do fly around here. But I love it. I never knew it was possible, but I'm so glad it exists.

Good point.

[ekcut]

We should really save time and just name it the Artie Wiley Award for the best pitcher. 2 seasons in, and he is already a legand!

[Young Drachma]

Prado should retire. I wonder if he will, though. He's pushing up against 40 and his ratings are toast.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Prado should retire. I wonder if he will, though. He's pushing up against 40 and his ratings are toast.

I don't see any reason for Chief to not use him this year since Atlanta is rebuilding anyways. No sense trying to find another stop gap solution, when you have Prado as one anyways.

[kaosfere]

Originally Posted by ekcut

We should really save time and just name it the Artie Wiley Award for the best pitcher. 2 seasons in, and he is already a legand!

HUSH, you. I don't want anyone jinxing him at this point in his career!

[Young Drachma]

Also, based on the calculation of 60 seasons a year at the current pace, FOOL and FOBL will play the 2035 season at the same time next year.

They do about 4 seasons a year. I think that is...hilarious. Sometimes, I don't realize how fast this league is...then I hear stuff like that and shake my head.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Also, based on the calculation of 60 seasons a year at the current pace, FOOL and FOBL will play the 2035 season at the same time next year.

They do about 4 seasons a year. I think that is...hilarious.

I'm guessing we'll be closer to 50 seasons in a year than 60 seasons in a year..

Speaking of which.. what are the longer term plans for Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks? I pretty much usually have internet access anywhere I go because of my job, so not a huge deal to me even with traveling.. but figure others might not be as lucky.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I'm guessing we'll be closer to 50 seasons in a year than 60 seasons in a year..

Speaking of which.. what are the longer term plans for Thanksgiving and Christmas weeks? I pretty much usually have internet access anywhere I go because of my job, so not a huge deal to me even with traveling.. but figure others might not be as lucky.

Yeah, my fingers don't count well. Sorry.

Anyway...

I'm guessing that we can probably shut down for a Christmas break, maybe have an extended trade/FA period. Thanksgiving, we can just have an abbreviated season or something.

It'd be somewhat funny -- to me -- to have a strike-shortened season each year during those holidays, complete with abbreviated signing period and strange playoff scenarios.

But...I realize that's the gamemaster in me that's saying that.

But yeah, seems like breaks would be the way to go. Anyone else?

[graygoose12]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Tien apparently developed some starters endurance. I was gonna use him in that experimental role too. But glad someone else is gonna do it and pay him..in the other league.

When I signed Tien last offseason the plan was to use him as a starter. His endurance was 44, up to 45 by the start of the season. I didn't want to risk it though, but maybe I should have tried.

[kaosfere]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

It'd be somewhat funny -- to me -- to have a strike-shortened season each year during those holidays, complete with abbreviated signing period and strange playoff scenarios.

That... is just about the most awesomest thing I have ever heard.

I vote for this option.

(Failing that, yeah. I could similarly play during the holidays, most likely, but definitely don't think people should feel compelled to. Perhaps for Thanksgiving week, a single-day FA period, run spring training on Wednesday night, skip Thursday and Friday, sim the season on Saturday, and do the Classic on Sunday? Taking the whole week off for Christmas might be better, though, since people often go away for longer, then.)

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

That... is just about the most awesomest thing I have ever heard.

I vote for this option.

(Failing that, yeah. I could similarly play during the holidays, most likely, but definitely don't think people should feel compelled to. Perhaps for Thanksgiving week, a single-day FA period, run spring training on Wednesday night, skip Thursday and Friday, sim the season on Saturday, and do the Classic on Sunday? Taking the whole week off for Christmas might be better, though, since people often go away for longer, then.)

Your Thanksgiving schedule is an intriguing one, kind sir.

For the wacky playoff scenario for Christmas, I'm thinking something like what MLB did in 1981. Or something crazier like Top 4 teams in each league in the playoffs.

[Anthony]

wow, i didn't realize there was this much chitter chatter on this league. glad i didn't let my hot head get the best of me and make me quit. there's a lot of history already in this league, that's awesome. i'm still trying to get the handle on my own guys before i worry about the who's who of the league. so far i know my guy John Hill (i think that's his name), my monster OF - is a force.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Anthony

wow, i didn't realize there was this much chitter chatter on this league. glad i didn't let my hot head get the best of me and make me quit. there's a lot of history already in this league, that's awesome. i'm still trying to get the handle on my own guys before i worry about the who's who of the league. so far i know my guy John Hill (i think that's his name), my monster OF - is a force.

Your team are like the Cubs of FOOL when they were in Boston. They were always the "team that should've made it" the past few years and have always just had the worst luck ever. The year they should've made it to the FOOL Classic for the first time was in '73, when they managed to be the first team in history to TIE for the league title with another team (Colorado). We decided years ago that a tie for the pennant would be decided in a best-of-five game series (like the old days in real life) and Boston managed to lose Game 5 of that playoff, so they missed the playoffs again.

They're perpetually close, though. You've got the tools to make something happen over there.

And yes, John Hunt is a beast.

[kaosfere]

If Boston are the Cubs of FOOL, what were Toronto? The Twins? The Padres?

Valdosta is clearly the Yankees.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

If Boston are the Cubs of FOOL, what were Toronto? The Twins? The Padres?

Valdosta is clearly the Yankees.

I would like to think of us more of the St.Louis Cardinals of FOOL.

We wern't the early dynasty of FOOL, and we didn't do it through trades or high priced free agents.. Most of our guys were home grown... So we had a good run of it, but now that our dynasty is done, we'll end up fading away and whomever the true "Yankees" of FOOL are, will be ready to dominate for much longer soon.

[Young Drachma]

I'm with Alan. Valdosta are the Cardinals. Had St. Louis stayed around, they'd have been the Yankees.

Ann Arbor are the Twins in my estimation.

Toronto? I dunno, still hard to peg you yet. I'd say maybe the Mets, if things evolve as you hope.

Hartford? Now there's a team to try to peg...like Oakland, maybe. Only, they spend money.

[kaosfere]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I would like to think of us more of the St.Louis Cardinals of FOOL.

Hmm. This is a fair point.

Of course, with the salary cap what it is, we're unlikely to see a *true* Yankees-of-FOOL, I suspect.

[Alan T]

So would Colorado be the Braves?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

Hmm. This is a fair point.

Of course, with the salary cap what it is, we're unlikely to see a *true* Yankees-of-FOOL, I suspect.

Someday, there will be a cap increase. Though it'd be interesting if the experiment could go on for 50 or so years at the same level. I'd be fine with it, but it'd be interesting.

I'm surprised no one has asked for it yet.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Someday, there will be a cap increase. Though it'd be interesting if the experiment could go on for 50 or so years at the same level. I'd be fine with it, but it'd be interesting.

I'm surprised no one has asked for it yet.

I figured most people had seen recently just how incredibly useful having the salary cap where it is was and have come around to my way of thinking on it. Unless anyone really wanted to see that 1970 Valdosta team stay together for 10 years

[kaosfere]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

I'm surprised no one has asked for it yet.

Let's see if Higgins is interested in re-signing with me next year.

If so, we can bring it up then.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Alan T

So would Colorado be the Braves?

Maybe like the Dodgers, because they've never been really bad and have always been in the mix and have more than one title.

I think Chicago/Quad City is more like the Braves, to be honest. Bad team that got good, grew home grown talent and made trades and FA signings to acquire the rest of the squad. It's early to say, but...that's my peg.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Maybe like the Dodgers, because they've never been really bad and have always been in the mix and have more than one title.

I think Chicago/Quad City is more like the Braves, to be honest. Bad team that got good, grew home grown talent and made trades and FA signings to acquire the rest of the squad. It's early to say, but...that's my peg.

I didn't mean it in the bad sense I guess... Remember I'm a life long Braves fan, so that was kind of a compliment

I meant it more that Colorado won their division for the most part many many years in a row and was always in the mix through a combination of young guys, free agents and trades which is pretty similar to the Braves in the 90s.

[kaosfere]

Speaking of caps... I don't have the precise math, but this latest trade with Valdosta may put me 100k or so over cap. I've definitely got a bottom feeder or two I can trim before the season starts. There's no penalty as long as I'm below cap by then, right?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I figured most people had seen recently just how incredibly useful having the salary cap where it is was and have come around to my way of thinking on it. Unless anyone really wanted to see that 1970 Valdosta team stay together for 10 years

I have no incentive to see it increase. I'm just figuring that if we get the bottom half of the league owners to spend, it might get to a point where folks start to wonder about it. It's not even an issue so much of us "wanting it" as much as our players are getting to the place where talentwise, we let great players sit because they can't respond to the marketplace.

I'm thinking $5-10 million over a period of time, wouldn't be the worst idea in the world. Especially if it's incremental, say $1.25 million a year over 8 years or something.

[Alan T]

Dola...

And I grew up hating the dodgers.. I'd only insult teams I didn't like by comparing them to the Dodgers...

For instance if your team had a manager that loved pasta balls more than coaching.. you might qualify! (Tommy Lasorda reference, not a Torre reference btw)

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

Speaking of caps... I don't have the precise math, but this latest trade with Valdosta may put me 100k or so over cap. I've definitely got a bottom feeder or two I can trim before the season starts. There's no penalty as long as I'm below cap by then, right?

Yeah, the only cap check is on opening day. So you're fine up until then.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

Speaking of caps... I don't have the precise math, but this latest trade with Valdosta may put me 100k or so over cap. I've definitely got a bottom feeder or two I can trim before the season starts. There's no penalty as long as I'm below cap by then, right?

You can be over it as much as you want until the start of the regular season. If you aren't under cap then, you'll be forced to be under cap even if it means releasing players you don't want to see go.

You can be as much over it as you want any time before that. (For instance I was in some trade talks the last few days that would have temporarily put me close to 80 million in salary in some cases)

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I didn't mean it in the bad sense I guess... Remember I'm a life long Braves fan, so that was kind of a compliment

I meant it more that Colorado won their division for the most part many many years in a row and was always in the mix through a combination of young guys, free agents and trades which is pretty similar to the Braves in the 90s.

No, it made sense as a parallel. Now that you say it, it makes even more sense than I realized. Colorado's main strength was the pitching they managed to develop over those years and that was what the Braves did so well too for so long.

They did do it well for a sustainably long period of time. I mean, winning in the 60s when it wasn't a forgone conclusion that you'd win and then competing with you in the 70s for dominance is a pretty remarkable feat.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Alan T

You can be over it as much as you want until the start of the regular season. If you aren't under cap then, you'll be forced to be under cap even if it means releasing players you don't want to see go.

You can be as much over it as you want any time before that. (For instance I was in some trade talks the last few days that would have temporarily put me close to 80 million in salary in some cases)

Word.

For visitors who might read that and wonder, "why is that allowed?" It's pretty simple. It's a fast-sim league, you don't have a lot of time to move players around and in a league like this, if there is no player movement, it'd be pretty boring and it wouldn't last long.

So it's imperative for us to have rules that foster interaction and player movement. Ironically, the $65 million cap also does this. It's a perfect number in that way. And back when we came up with it, there was no reason for that arbitrary of a number since contracts were minuscule. But it's turned out to be a masterstroke.

:: pats self on back ::

[muns]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Yeah, my fingers don't count well. Sorry.

Anyway...

I'm guessing that we can probably shut down for a Christmas break, maybe have an extended trade/FA period. Thanksgiving, we can just have an abbreviated season or something.

It'd be somewhat funny -- to me -- to have a strike-shortened season each year during those holidays, complete with abbreviated signing period and strange playoff scenarios.

But...I realize that's the gamemaster in me that's saying that.

But yeah, seems like breaks would be the way to go. Anyone else?

Id be good with a mini christmas break. Especially since I was in Phoenix Arizona last year for basketball with no net access. This year we will be in Dallas Texas, with no net, and im not exactly sure when the dates are yet.

So id be good with it.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Word.

For visitors who might read that and wonder, "why is that allowed?" It's pretty simple. It's a fast-sim league, you don't have a lot of time to move players around and in a league like this, if there is no player movement, it'd be pretty boring and it wouldn't last long.

So it's imperative for us to have rules that foster interaction and player movement. Ironically, the $65 million cap also does this. It's a perfect number in that way. And back when we came up with it, there was no reason for that arbitrary of a number since contracts were minuscule. But it's turned out to be a masterstroke.

:: pats self on back ::

I find in any league with a cap, eventually salaries will form around what the cap is.. As long as it is a reasonable setting along with what the player expected contract settings are set for in the league settings. The more money teams will have, the more they will spend and more money players will make. We don't have $20mil a year players because the cap prevents that. A higher cap would simply mean the superstars just make more money since it doesn't impact minor league contracts.

The real beauty of our cap is that it doesn't change and that forces owners to make decisions on players. Often tough decisions, sometimes ones you regret... (I hated letting Heath Palmer go.. and didn't like letting Edguardo Reyes go either very much not even for how good they were as players, but because of how loyal I had grown to them.)

[Anthony]

the problem i'm running into is that i see some really great prospects in my AAA team that should probably be brought up to the big club, but there just isn't room. i promoted one of my uber pitching prospects though, i like his ratings and his minor league stats. no sense waiting for the second coming of Jesus to bring him up.

i wouldn't mind trimming some payroll, we seem to be a bit too bloated unnecessarily. that's my initial diagnosis on the team so far.

[kaosfere]

Remember that your budget is likely to be a good bit higher than the cap amount. You could cut quite a few dollar-suckers without getting into much trouble financially even if you had to carry them for a few years.

I'd be interested in thinking about adding a little more financial strategy to the league... perhaps cutting down the marketing income? It seems a little weak to me that I can sign a guy to a 3 year, 45 million dollar contract and then shrug my way out of it after a year without it really hurting the bottom line.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Anthony

the problem i'm running into is that i see some really great prospects in my AAA team that should probably be brought up to the big club, but there just isn't room. i promoted one of my uber pitching prospects though, i like his ratings and his minor league stats. no sense waiting for the second coming of Jesus to bring him up.

i wouldn't mind trimming some payroll, we seem to be a bit too bloated unnecessarily. that's my initial diagnosis on the team so far.

HA, only big suggestion I would make for you is to take a year to look closely at your team before making any big moves. The ratings in this league are wacked compared to any other OOTP league you've been in. Some guys that rating wise look like they should be a star are average joes in this league, or even minor league fodder.

More important than getting used to your team is getting used to the league's rating scale. In the end it is all relative, but you just have to go into it knowing what is and is not good. ie: in one of my other leagues a player with 60/60/60 pitching ratings would be a hall of famer. In this league they don't even get to the majors.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by kaosfere

Remember that your budget is likely to be a good bit higher than the cap amount. You could cut quite a few dollar-suckers without getting into much trouble financially even if you had to carry them for a few years.

I'd be interested in thinking about adding a little more financial strategy to the league... perhaps cutting down the marketing income? It seems a little weak to me that I can sign a guy to a 3 year, 45 million dollar contract and then shrug my way out of it after a year without it really hurting the bottom line.

One of the reasons (not the only reason) for the marketing figures to all be so high was early on in this league, it was supposed to feel more like an old time baseball league.. and none of these 70,000 seat monster stadiums designed just to max out money and such. (ie: I've sold out every seat for something like 10 years but don't think I've ever been first in attendence in the league)

[Young Drachma]

I have been debating ways to make "cash" count more in the league. Still plotting...

[Young Drachma]

At least we don't have these problems. Imagine if we played with scouts/managers?

Serious Scouting Flaw for On-Line Leagues - OOTP Developments Forums

[Alan T]

Scouting in OOTP has always been one of those really great ideas that just never got implemented well enough to use without it detracting from the game.