|
|
| 89 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Thomas Austad |
Re: The future (history?) of Pre-Smiley |
| 90 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: Re: The future (history?) of Pre-Smiley |
| 91 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
RE: [PreSmiley] votes and 1966+ draft order |
| 92 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] votes and 1966+ draft order |
| 93 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
RE: [PreSmiley] votes and 1966+ draft order |
| 94 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] votes and 1966+ draft order |
| 95 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Thomas Austad |
Re: The future (history?) of Pre-Smiley |
| 96 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Rescigno takes PHN |
| 97 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
PHN selects Lee Bales, the switch-hitter from Los Angeles, CA |
| 98 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
but seriously folks.... |
| 99 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] but seriously folks.... |
| 100 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: but seriously folks.... |
| 101 |
Sep 6, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
Poll |
| 102 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Deeper Draft? Fact or Fiction? |
| 103 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Barry Davis |
Re: [PreSmiley] Deeper Draft? Fact or Fiction? |
| 104 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Draft Order Ideas |
| 105 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Deeper Draft? Fact or Fiction? |
| 106 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Barry Davis |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: Deeper Draft? Fact or Fiction? |
| 107 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
BTW |
| 108 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
the team draft continues (eventually) |
| 109 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Gary Dewing |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: Where's RESCIGNO? |
| 110 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Serpentine Dratt? |
| 111 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
RE: [PreSmiley] Serpentine Dratt? |
| 112 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Serpentine Dratt? |
| 113 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
RE: [PreSmiley] Re: Serpentine Dratt? |
| 114 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Serpentine Dratt? |
| 115 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
RE: [PreSmiley] Re: Serpentine Dratt? |
| 116 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Serpentine Dratt? |
| 117 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
RE: [PreSmiley] Re: Serpentine Dratt? |
| 118 |
Sep 7, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
test |
| 119 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
team draft continues.... now |
| 120 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Jonathan Fellows |
Jon Fellows picks the Chicago White Sox |
| 121 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] Jon Fellows picks the Chicago White Sox |
| 122 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Gary Dewing |
Re: [PreSmiley] Jon Fellows picks the Chicago White Sox |
| 123 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Tom Austad is now up |
| 124 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
PreSmiley@yahoogroups.com |
New poll for PreSmiley |
| 125 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Alan, please check your e-mail |
| 126 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
relievers & HAL |
| 127 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Jonathan Fellows |
Re: New poll for PreSmiley |
| 128 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] Alan, please check your e-mail |
| 129 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: New poll for PreSmiley |
| 130 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Thomas Austad |
Re: Tom Austad is now up |
| 131 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
SteveD takes DETROIT |
| 132 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Thomas Austad |
Re: [PreSmiley] SteveD takes DETROIT |
| 133 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Here's the complete list |
| 134 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
web page updated |
| 135 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Jonathan Fellows |
Re: web page updated |
| 136 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: web page updated |
| 137 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Rick Ramacier |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: Tom Austad is now up |
| 138 |
Sep 8, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Cubs fringe cuts |
| 139 |
Sep 9, 2003 |
Gary Dewing |
Re: [PreSmiley] Cubs fringe cuts - Orioles |
| 140 |
Sep 9, 2003 |
Larry Cupp |
Redleg cuts. |
| 141 |
Sep 9, 2003 |
Michael Tomeo |
RE: [PreSmiley] A's cuts |
| 142 |
Sep 9, 2003 |
Rick Ramacier |
Re: [PreSmiley] Twins fringe cuts |
| 143 |
Sep 9, 2003 |
Barry Davis |
Atlanta Fringe Players |
| 144 |
Sep 10, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Can we decide draft tie-breakers now? |
| 145 |
Sep 10, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] Can we decide draft tie-breakers now? |
| 146 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
1967 files have been updated |
| 147 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Jonathan Fellows |
Re: 1967 files have been updated |
| 148 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: 1967 files have been updated |
| 149 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
another scheduling issue |
| 150 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Jonathan Fellows |
White Sox cuts |
| 151 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Thomas Austad |
Draft |
| 152 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Gary Dewing |
Re: [PreSmiley] Draft |
| 153 |
Sep 11, 2003 |
Dennis Van Langen |
Pirates cuts |
| 154 |
Sep 12, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
DETROIT cuts |
| 155 |
Sep 12, 2003 |
Larry Cupp |
No cuts |
| 156 |
Sep 12, 2003 |
Darren Dawson |
SF fringe cuts |
| 157 |
Sep 13, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] No cuts |
| 158 |
Sep 13, 2003 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [PreSmiley] No cuts |
| 159 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Michael Rescigno |
Cardinals Cuts |
| 160 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
1967 fringe cuts |
| 161 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
votes are still open |
| 162 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Jonathan Fellows |
Questions regarding two-carded players |
| 163 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Questions regarding two-carded players |
| 164 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
If I were the NY Mets GM/owner... |
| 165 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Christopher Colucci |
Mets Pick |
| 166 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Mets Pick |
| 167 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Dennis Van Langen |
draft order list |
| 168 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: draft order list |
| 169 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
draft order ties in subsequent rounds |
| 170 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
computer manager lineup question |
| 171 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] draft order ties in subsequent rounds |
| 172 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] computer manager lineup question |
| 173 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] Questions regarding two-carded players |
| 174 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: Mets Pick |
| 175 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Mets Pick |
| 176 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: Mets Pick |
| 177 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Re: Mets Pick |
| 178 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [PreSmiley] Re: Mets Pick |
| 179 |
Sep 14, 2003 |
Steve Bivens |
Washington Senator Fringe cuts |
| 180 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Michael Tomeo |
Kansas City picks.... |
| 181 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Where's Billy Vanson????? |
| 182 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Billy Vanson |
Re: [PreSmiley] Where's Billy Vanson????? |
| 183 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
1967 files updated |
| 184 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
draft page is up |
| 185 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: NY Yankees selection |
| 186 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Billy Vanson |
NY Yankees selection |
| 187 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Steve Dewing |
Where's Dave Jackson???? |
| 188 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Larry Cupp |
Re: [PreSmiley] draft page is up |
| 189 |
Sep 15, 2003 |
Alan Boodman |
Re: [PreSmiley] draft page is up |
|
|
Previous message
Next message
Message #: 89
Message from: Thomas Austad
Sent: Sep 6, 2003
Subject: Re: The future (history?) of Pre-Smiley
Alan, I guess it's just the idea that we are going backward in time,
so players aren't actually rookies with the teams that get them
as "rookies" anyway. Add that to the fact that they probably played
their best seasons for a team other than the team they will be
a "rookie" for and we are very far away from resembling the actual
teams, much farther than SMILEY. I understand your degrees of
resemblance. A majority of teams will have close to no resemblance to
their real teams with the "rookies" they will receieve in our league.
Guys will rarely play with the team they made their mark on except in
the case of Mantles and Koufax's. I'm in either way, but I just see
this as making the division of teams even more significant. I also
agree that the draft's will be deeper, so teams will have more of an
opportunity to build. Just wanted to clarify my point of view.
Tom
--- In PreSmiley@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Boodman" <alan.boodman@v...>
wrote:
> Tom,
>
> Since the idea here (as in SMILEY) is to have the teams *somewhat*
resemble the real teams, doing away with the "rookies" is not an
option.
>
> Resemblance is clearly not an all-or-nothing choice. We could have
done a straight replay, and had the rosters be exactly what they
really were, or we could have thrown all players into the pool and
done away with team identity altogether (there's no shortage of
leagues like that). So it's simply a matter of the DEGREE of
resemblance.
>
> I have reason to believe our drafts will be deeper than what we are
used to in SMILEY, but whether that is because we don't allow claims
remains to be seen. Allowing claims will do little to address the
imbalance between the dynasty and non-dynasty teams, because the
Yankees and Dodgers have more players to claim than do the A's. It's
rather obvious: the better teams had more good players.
>
> In short, I think that allowing claims will detract from the drafts
(that much is obvious), but also make the leagues more unbalanced and
less competitive.
>
> Given that rookies are automatic (and they are), it is true that
teams like the Yankees & Dodgers, do come out ahead when they get the
Mantles & Koufaxes of the world - those teams have better "rookies"
just like they have better claimable players. I suspect we may have
seen that fact taken into consideration during this team selection
process.
>
> Some teams may never get anyone of the caliber of Koufax or Mantle
automatically, but we can try to see to it that the less fortunate
teams have a chance to get similar players in the draft. The primary
purpose of not having claims is to make sure the Yankees & Dodgers
don't get the added benefit of the Ruths, Marises, Sniders, etc...,
and any draft (or draft lottery, anyway) with guys like those in it
HAS to be pretty exciting, so that's a benefit too.
>
> Alan
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: counselordude2000
> To: PreSmiley@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 12:46 PM
> Subject: [PreSmiley] The future (history?) of Pre-Smiley
>
>
> We are not using cliams in PreSmiley as we do in Smiley to help
keep
> dynasties from ruling as they did during the era we are going to
> play. I popose that we do not use "future rookies" as well and
throw
> them all into the draft. A few reasons:
> -Teams are going to be nearly unidentifyable to their real life
teams
> with a few seasons anyway, as we are actually getting players
that
> finished their careers with the team. Very few players started
and
> finished. The Yankees have several, and most other teams are
lucky to
> have a couple. Some don't have any. So this kind of goes along
with
> the same reasoning as to why we aren't using claims.
> -With the random selection of draft picks, there still would be
no
> tanking to get the superstars. Everyone would have a chance at
them.
>
> In short, I just think that undoing the claims but not the future
> rookies leaves us in the same predicament with the elite teams of
the
> time having benefit. I believe we should do it one way or the
other,
> either trying to keep teams similar to how they were during the
era,
> or not at all. I am in favor of either, but the way we have it
now
> leaves some teams to be similar to how they were, but not others.
> Hope this is something we can consider.
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> PreSmiley-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ |
