|
|
| 3993 |
Feb 24, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] SMILEY changes for 1971 |
| 3994 |
Feb 24, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
thanks for the reponses |
| 3995 |
Feb 24, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] Issues at hand |
| 3996 |
Feb 24, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
Re: [SmileyList] Issues at hand |
| 3997 |
Feb 24, 2002 |
Scott Campbell |
Re: [SmileyList] Issues at hand |
| 3998 |
Feb 24, 2002 |
Brandon Colvin |
Re: [SmileyList] SMILEY changes for 1971 |
| 3999 |
Feb 24, 2002 |
Scott Campbell |
Home/Road split |
| 4000 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Dave Jackson |
Cuts & Claims |
| 4001 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Draft update |
| 4002 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
1971 draft begins |
| 4003 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Bosslet |
RE: [SmileyList] Draft update |
| 4004 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [SmileyList] Home/Road split |
| 4005 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
RE: [SmileyList] Draft update |
| 4006 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
Round 1, pick 1 |
| 4007 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Cubs on the clock |
| 4008 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
RE: [SmileyList] Cubs on the clock |
| 4009 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Ray Cappocchi |
RE: [SmileyList] Cubs on the clock |
| 4010 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [SmileyList] Cubs on the clock |
| 4011 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Bob Lind |
Of playing positions |
| 4012 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [SmileyList] Of playing positions |
| 4013 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Bosslet |
Re: [SmileyList] Cubs on the clock |
| 4014 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Bob Lind |
Re: [SmileyList] Of playing positions |
| 4015 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [SmileyList] Of playing positions |
| 4016 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Cardinals on the clock |
| 4017 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
free agent list |
| 4018 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
RE: [SmileyList] free agent list |
| 4019 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Rick Ramacier |
Thoughts from Minnesota |
| 4020 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Bosslet |
RE: [SmileyList] Cubs on the clock |
| 4021 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Bob Lind |
Re: [SmileyList] Thoughts from Minnesota |
| 4022 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Rich Anderson |
Re: [SmileyList] Cardinals on the clock |
| 4023 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Padres on the clock |
| 4024 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] Padres on the clock |
| 4025 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Pirates on the clock |
| 4026 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
draft reminder |
| 4027 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] Of playing positions |
| 4028 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
SOM software help? |
| 4029 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
wrl1901 |
Team Saver kits |
| 4030 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] SOM software help? |
| 4031 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [SmileyList] SOM software help? |
| 4032 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
the next pick deadline |
| 4033 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] SOM software help? |
| 4034 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] SOM software help? |
| 4035 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] SOM software help? |
| 4036 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Dave Jackson |
Pirates select.............. |
| 4037 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] Pirates select.............. |
| 4038 |
Feb 25, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Washington Pick |
| 4039 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Royals on the clock |
| 4040 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Mike Rodriguez |
Re: [SmileyList] Royals on the clock |
| 4041 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
White Sox on the clock |
| 4042 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
White Sox pick, Cincinnati on the clock |
| 4043 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Cincinnati picks, Yankees are up |
| 4044 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Chris Kohlwes |
Yankees pick... |
| 4045 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Mets on the clock |
| 4046 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Ray Cappocchi |
Mets 1st first round pick |
| 4047 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
RE: [SmileyList] Mets 1st first round pick |
| 4048 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Ray Cappocchi |
Mets next pick |
| 4049 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
RE: [SmileyList] Mets next pick |
| 4050 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Milwaukee on the clock |
| 4051 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Frank Pennylegion |
Re: [SmileyList] Milwaukee on the clock |
| 4052 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
White Sox on the clock |
| 4053 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
White Sox pick |
| 4054 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Padres on the clock |
| 4055 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
RE: [SmileyList] Padres on the clock |
| 4056 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Bosslet |
I am geek! |
| 4057 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] Padres on the clock |
| 4058 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
St. Louis is on the clock |
| 4059 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Jeff Juenger |
Re: [SmileyList] St. Louis is on the clock |
| 4060 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Dodgers on the clock |
| 4061 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
League files updated |
| 4062 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Bosslet |
We are the world(everybody in SMILEY swaying back and forth with our arms around each other) |
| 4063 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Bosslet |
things that make you go hmmmm..... |
| 4064 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [SmileyList] things that make you go hmmmm..... |
| 4065 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] things that make you go hmmmm..... |
| 4066 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] things that make you go hmmmm..... |
| 4067 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Chris Kohlwes |
HAL for WAA |
| 4068 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Steve Bivens |
RE: [SmileyList] Royals on the clock |
| 4069 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] things that make you go hmmmm..... |
| 4070 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] HAL for WAA |
| 4071 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
Wayne Granger |
| 4072 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Michael Tomeo |
Re: [SmileyList] Wayne Granger |
| 4073 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Brandon Colvin |
Re: [SmileyList] things that make you go hmmmm..... |
| 4074 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [SmileyList] Wayne Granger |
| 4075 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Scott Campbell |
Re: [SmileyList] Dodgers on the clock |
| 4076 |
Feb 26, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Twins on the clock |
| 4077 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Alan Bosslet |
More proof I am a geek |
| 4078 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Rick Ramacier |
Twins Need help! |
| 4079 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Rick Ramacier |
Twins Select |
| 4080 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
White Sox on the clock |
| 4081 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
ALCS Game 1 |
| 4082 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Ben Lea |
The future is now in Chicagoland! |
| 4083 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Royals on the clock |
| 4084 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Mike Rodriguez |
Re: [SmileyList] Royals on the clock |
| 4085 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [SmileyList] Royals on the clock |
| 4086 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Senators on the clock |
| 4087 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Twins on the clock |
| 4088 |
Feb 27, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
draft update |
| 4089 |
Feb 28, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Twins, Reds pick; Yankees on the clock |
| 4090 |
Feb 28, 2002 |
Chris Kohlwes |
Re: [SmileyList] Twins, Reds pick; Yankees on the clock |
| 4091 |
Feb 28, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
Yankees pick; Mets on the clock |
| 4092 |
Feb 28, 2002 |
Ray Cappocchi |
Mets Pick |
| 4093 |
Feb 28, 2002 |
Alan Boodman |
White Sox on the clock |
|
|
Previous message
Next message
Message #: 3993
Message from: Larry Cupp
Sent: Feb 24, 2002
Subject: Re: [SmileyList] SMILEY changes for 1971
I like solution #2, I could never vote for #1 because
playing the game is the most fun for me. Maybe those
guys in question could show me how to play the games
better or perhaps I could show them how to program
their CMs better!!!
--- Alan Boodman <alan.boodman@...> wrote:
> For the moment, there's just one official change:
>
> Effective immediately, draft picks may no longer be
> traded. This restores us to SMILEY's original state
> (draft picks were not allowed to be traded until
> 1969), makes deals more difficult to obfuscate, and
> simplifies our overusage-penalty scheme, because no
> longer do we need to be concerned with traded draft
> picks.
>
>
>
> TRADING:
> ========
>
> The rule change mentioned above partially addresses
> one of two problems we believe we currently face in
> SMILEY. We are seriously considering other
> restrictions upon trading as well. At a minimum,
> from this point forward, all trades will be subject
> to greater scrutiny before being approved.
> Accordingly, any trade involving any of the
> Commissioners' teams will be subject to being
> evaluated and approved by a neutral third party.
>
> There have been instances of what we refer to as
> "pipeline" deals. That is two teams make several
> deals over a course of time that alternately help
> one team and then the other (and conveniently when
> those teams happen to be good). A hypothetical
> example of this would
> be for Boston to trade Carl Yastrzemski to Detroit
> for lesser value now and then for Detroit to turn
> around in 1976 and trade Mark Fidrych and Ron
> Leflore to Boston for lesser value to make up for
> it. Detroit comes out ahead now when they are good,
> and Boston comes out ahead later, when they are good
> (and Detroit would not be very good anyway). In the
> past, as long as both the Yaz & the Fidrych deals
> were not TOO bogus, they would have been approved
> according to the standards we've applied up to now.
>
> Because of the way SMILEY works in terms of
> Restricted players & future rookies, it is not only
> possible, but ridiculously easy, for two teams to
> work out deals YEARS in advance in order to rig
> pennant races for the forseeable future. With the
> exception of draftees, who account for only a small
> percentage of our rosters (currently), we all know
> exactly what players we'll have, exactly when we'll
> have them, and exactly how well they performed.
>
> Also we know that are cases of deals being done with
> another related deal already planned. In one case,
> apparently a team has traded a reliable "star"
> player and left a hole for 1970 with the
> understanding that another deal has already been
> agreed upon (with a different team) to get a player
> to fill that hole in 1971. There have been cases of
> "payback" deals meade in order to try to balance a
> trade from the year before.
>
> In 1970, we disallowed some trades (very few), and
> permitted nearly everything to go through. All
> deals from this point forward will be more heavily
> scrutinized, and we may even establish a "trade
> approval committee" if need be. If there is any
> hint of "payback", "pipeline", or any future deals
> whatsoever, the trade will stand an excellent chance
> of being denied. We regret having to make
> subjective decisions on each and every deal (or
> having a committee do so), because we are well aware
> of what will happen when trades are denied and that
> the participants will naturally disagree with us.
>
> The RFA issue (see below) is generally considered to
> be much more pressing than any concerns about
> trading, however we feel that these sorts of trades
> can have as much of an effect on pennant races as
> RFA.
>
>
> ROAD FIELD ADVANTAGE (RFA):
> ===========================
>
> Things have really gotten out of hand as far as
> home/road splits. In 1968 the visitors lost 10 more
> games than they won. In 1969, the visitors won 16
> more than they lost. In 1970, the visitors won 128
> more games than they lost. There are several teams
> that have won 10+ more road games than home games,
> and in some cases it approaches or exceeds 20 games.
> We have no handy explanation for this phenomena.
> Attached to this e-mail is a spreadsheet that
> documents road and home records, by owner, for all
> three SMILEY seasons. The spreadsheet is sorted by
> Lifetime Road Field Advantage (Column N). Owners
> are strongly encouraged to review this data.
>
> We are not accusing any owners of cheating. This
> issue is being raised (and has already been raised
> by some owners) because we are acknowledging the
> problem and looking for ways to address it. Keep in
> mind that one team's road record impacts another
> team's home record. In other words, one team having
> a "remarkable" RFA can cause other teams to look
> that way too. Also note that in some teams' cases
> there have been significant year-to-year swings
> (differentials that are bad one year, good the
> next).
>
> As one owner has pointed out, RFA can be caused by
> "ego" (or other reasons) rather than cheating.
> Regardless of the reason for it, RFA is a serious
> problem.
>
> Potential solutions we have so far include:
>
> 1. Require online play and/or autoplay for a
> significant portion of the schedule.
> 2. Require the above ONLY for teams whose
> differential (road vs home) exceeds some limit at
> any time during the season.
> 3. Penalize (somehow) owners whose differentials
> exceed some threshold, or conversely: reward owners
> who do better at home.
>
> We need to find a scheme that is effective in
> dealing with the problem (i.e., the penalties cannot
> be trivial), yet one that is not overly harsh
> (expulsion from the league in the absence of
> evidence of cheating).
>
> We are looking for a lot of input on this issue. I
> trust that nobody, the Commissioners included, wants
> to see a repeat of the imbalance we saw in 1970.
>
> Alan/Mike
>
>
>
>
> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/vnd.ms-excel
name=owners.xls
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com |
