***OFFICIAL*** FFA MLB Draft (1 Viewer)

[Doug B]

Did you know that not all the drafters going in knew that they could check third seasons on WIS.com?

I figured most would be intelligent enough to figure this relatively simple thing out. It wasn't a secret, but rather something which took time to research.

C'mon, it had nothing to do with intelligence. It had to do with differing goals for the drafters at the start. Why sim-fish third seasons for an FFA vote?

 

[10993]

Did you know that not all the drafters going in knew that they could check third seasons on WIS.com?

I figured most would be intelligent enough to figure this relatively simple thing out. It wasn't a secret, but rather something which took time to research.

C'mon, it had nothing to do with intelligence. It had to do with differing goals for the drafters at the start. Why sim-fish third seasons for an FFA vote?

Because Cappy said that the simulator would be WIS, and the sim would be run using players' 3rd best years?

 

[Not Nipsey's Alias]

There's 7 for batters and 7 for pitchers--so a total of 14 criteria on which players can be evaluated.

Yes, it's complex.

I can check any one player's eligibility by a glance at their baseball-reference.com entry. How is that complex?

Every time you make a pick, you're going to have to qualify each player on your draft list. Big pain in the ### if you ask me and entirely not necesarry. If someone wants to draft a one year wonder, WHY NOT LET THEM? We're talking about a single season sim anyway, aren't we? Why should some players be disallowed because of a lack great statistical longevity. What about the ####ty players that played for 20+ years. Are they banned from this thing as well? I don't understand how someone can disqualify a player for the entire draft based on what they think an "all-time great" is. The whole thing is based solely on personal opinion. I'm saying let everything fly and let guys do what they want. What's wrong with that?

 

[Capella]

There's 7 for batters and 7 for pitchers--so a total of 14 criteria on which players can be evaluated.

Yes, it's complex.

I can check any one player's eligibility by a glance at their baseball-reference.com entry. How is that complex?

Every time you make a pick, you're going to have to qualify each player on your draft list. Big pain in the ### if you ask me and entirely not necesarry. If someone wants to draft a one year wonder, WHY NOT LET THEM? We're talking about a single season sim anyway, aren't we? Why should some players be disallowed because of a lack great statistical longevity. What about the ####ty players that played for 20+ years. Are they banned from this thing as well? I don't understand how someone can disqualify a player for the entire draft based on what they think an "all-time great" is. The whole thing is based solely on personal opinion. I'm saying let everything fly and let guys do what they want. What's wrong with that?

*cough*lebron*cough*

 

[Kraft...]

Any limiting factors just tilt the edge back to the people that used limiting factors to their advantage before.

I don't agree. Everyone goes into the next draft aware of all the limiting factors will be.In the recently-passed draft, some drafters knew to sim-fish from the get-go, some didn't. In addition, the goal of the draft was muddled at the beginning -- first it was a vote, then a vote and a sim, then finally the sim. It wasn't like the people who sim-fished are smarter or better drafters than other folks.

So if we're doing this one specifically and only for a single season sim....why are we worrying about whether or not a player is an all time great? If we're not having a vote, who cares about player perception?

Why can't we do both Sim and Vote?

An FFA vote is a waste of time. The whole thing is a popularity contest and most of the people voting (all nine of them), are doing so because they know one of the participants. Big waste of time.

What if we just list the teams with no FBG names attached, number them instead, should eliminate cornhole voting to an extent.

 

[Doug B]

What's wrong with that?

Willing to put it to a binding vote?

 

[Bogart]

so anyways, what are we going to do about larry?

I'm over it. I'm fine with him participating in MLB II. However, I'm prepared to be outvoted.

While the guy did some creepy things, I think MLB II will be better with him, if for nothing but comic relief.

 

[Capella]

Did you know that not all the drafters going in knew that they could check third seasons on WIS.com?

I figured most would be intelligent enough to figure this relatively simple thing out. It wasn't a secret, but rather something which took time to research.

C'mon, it had nothing to do with intelligence. It had to do with differing goals for the drafters at the start. Why sim-fish third seasons for an FFA vote?

Because Cappy said that the simulator would be WIS, and the sim would be run using players' 3rd best years?

his point is, not everybody went into it with the shark-esque mentality of drafting strictly for that reason. you ruined the sim for a lot of people. shame on you.

 

[Not Nipsey's Alias]

There's 7 for batters and 7 for pitchers--so a total of 14 criteria on which players can be evaluated.

Yes, it's complex.

I can check any one player's eligibility by a glance at their baseball-reference.com entry. How is that complex?

Every time you make a pick, you're going to have to qualify each player on your draft list. Big pain in the ### if you ask me and entirely not necesarry. If someone wants to draft a one year wonder, WHY NOT LET THEM? We're talking about a single season sim anyway, aren't we? Why should some players be disallowed because of a lack great statistical longevity. What about the ####ty players that played for 20+ years. Are they banned from this thing as well? I don't understand how someone can disqualify a player for the entire draft based on what they think an "all-time great" is. The whole thing is based solely on personal opinion. I'm saying let everything fly and let guys do what they want. What's wrong with that?

*cough*lebron*cough*

THAT WAS A VOTE AND THIS IS A SIM. WE'VE BEEN BEEN OVER THAT.

 

[UCONN]

 

[shuke]

You guys still drafting?

 

[Doug B]

Because Cappy said that the simulator would be WIS, and the sim would be run using players' 3rd best years?

Yeah, but then you have know to set yourself up for a 10-game trial season so that you can see WIS stats. Joining the site was not sufficient.A lot of guys didn't even visit the WIS site for a while. Didn't think they needed to.

 

[Doug B]

so anyways, what are we going to do about larry?

I'm over it. I'm fine with him participating in MLB II. However, I'm prepared to be outvoted.

While the guy did some creepy things, I think MLB II will be better with him, if for nothing but comic relief.

You gotta have that team that everybody loves to hate, if nothing else.Plus, after his stellar showing in this sim, I'd think a lot of guys wold relish the chance to take him down.

 

[10993]

Official Odds for WIS Champion

Irish Cowboys 4-1

Mr. P's Big Owning Machine 5-1

Maranville Rabbits 7-1

Pumpnicks 8-1

Larry_Boy_44's Team 8-1

Cryogenics Rule 13-1

Kobayashi Maru 20-1

Bullucci's Bombers 40-1

 

[Capella]

There's 7 for batters and 7 for pitchers--so a total of 14 criteria on which players can be evaluated.

Yes, it's complex.

I can check any one player's eligibility by a glance at their baseball-reference.com entry. How is that complex?

Every time you make a pick, you're going to have to qualify each player on your draft list. Big pain in the ### if you ask me and entirely not necesarry. If someone wants to draft a one year wonder, WHY NOT LET THEM? We're talking about a single season sim anyway, aren't we? Why should some players be disallowed because of a lack great statistical longevity. What about the ####ty players that played for 20+ years. Are they banned from this thing as well? I don't understand how someone can disqualify a player for the entire draft based on what they think an "all-time great" is. The whole thing is based solely on personal opinion. I'm saying let everything fly and let guys do what they want. What's wrong with that?

*cough*lebron*cough*

THAT WAS A VOTE AND THIS IS A SIM. WE'VE BEEN BEEN OVER THAT.

Same ideals.

 

[Capella]

You guys still drafting?

We're about to go again..you want in?Lots of Reds still available.

 

[10993]

There's 7 for batters and 7 for pitchers--so a total of 14 criteria on which players can be evaluated.

Yes, it's complex.

I can check any one player's eligibility by a glance at their baseball-reference.com entry. How is that complex?

Every time you make a pick, you're going to have to qualify each player on your draft list. Big pain in the ### if you ask me and entirely not necesarry. If someone wants to draft a one year wonder, WHY NOT LET THEM? We're talking about a single season sim anyway, aren't we? Why should some players be disallowed because of a lack great statistical longevity. What about the ####ty players that played for 20+ years. Are they banned from this thing as well? I don't understand how someone can disqualify a player for the entire draft based on what they think an "all-time great" is. The whole thing is based solely on personal opinion. I'm saying let everything fly and let guys do what they want. What's wrong with that?

Exactly.That's the bottom line.

 

[Capella]

God, WE ARE BLASTING away to the magical mark.Hope I'm here for the celebration.

 

[Not Nipsey's Alias]

There's 7 for batters and 7 for pitchers--so a total of 14 criteria on which players can be evaluated.

Yes, it's complex.

I can check any one player's eligibility by a glance at their baseball-reference.com entry. How is that complex?

Every time you make a pick, you're going to have to qualify each player on your draft list. Big pain in the ### if you ask me and entirely not necesarry. If someone wants to draft a one year wonder, WHY NOT LET THEM? We're talking about a single season sim anyway, aren't we? Why should some players be disallowed because of a lack great statistical longevity. What about the ####ty players that played for 20+ years. Are they banned from this thing as well? I don't understand how someone can disqualify a player for the entire draft based on what they think an "all-time great" is. The whole thing is based solely on personal opinion. I'm saying let everything fly and let guys do what they want. What's wrong with that?

*cough*lebron*cough*

THAT WAS A VOTE AND THIS IS A SIM. WE'VE BEEN BEEN OVER THAT.

Same ideals.

and you know it.

 

[Kraft...]

his point is, not everybody went into it with the shark-esque mentality of drafting strictly for that reason.

I purposly avoided looking at Whatif. In my opinion I considered it cheating since everyone didn't have equal information from the start. I didn't think peeking at 3rd seasons was in the spirit of what the draft had set out to be.

 

[Capella]

There's 7 for batters and 7 for pitchers--so a total of 14 criteria on which players can be evaluated.

Yes, it's complex.

I can check any one player's eligibility by a glance at their baseball-reference.com entry. How is that complex?

Every time you make a pick, you're going to have to qualify each player on your draft list. Big pain in the ### if you ask me and entirely not necesarry. If someone wants to draft a one year wonder, WHY NOT LET THEM? We're talking about a single season sim anyway, aren't we? Why should some players be disallowed because of a lack great statistical longevity. What about the ####ty players that played for 20+ years. Are they banned from this thing as well? I don't understand how someone can disqualify a player for the entire draft based on what they think an "all-time great" is. The whole thing is based solely on personal opinion. I'm saying let everything fly and let guys do what they want. What's wrong with that?

*cough*lebron*cough*

THAT WAS A VOTE AND THIS IS A SIM. WE'VE BEEN BEEN OVER THAT.

Same ideals.

and you know it.

It's simfishers like you who ruined this for everybody. Shame on you.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Official Odds for WIS Champion

Irish Cowboys 4-1

Mr. P's Big Owning Machine 5-1

Maranville Rabbits 7-1

Pumpnicks 8-1

Larry_Boy_44's Team 8-1

Cryogenics Rule 13-1

Kobayashi Maru 20-1

Bullucci's Bombers 40-1

how does the team with the second best record have the 4th (5th) best odds? Seriously???care to explain?

 

[Capella]

:rotflmao: welcome back larry.

 

[10993]

Official Odds for WIS Champion

Irish Cowboys 4-1

Mr. P's Big Owning Machine 5-1

Maranville Rabbits 7-1

Pumpnicks 8-1

Larry_Boy_44's Team 8-1

Cryogenics Rule 13-1

Kobayashi Maru 20-1

Bullucci's Bombers 40-1

how does the team with the second best record have the 4th (5th) best odds? Seriously???care to explain?

Sure--your team has sucked a lot compared to the teams ahead of you ever since you lost your cheating player. Also, there are really only two teams with odds way better than yours.

 

[Bogart]

Official Odds for WIS Champion

Irish Cowboys 4-1

Mr. P's Big Owning Machine 5-1

Maranville Rabbits 7-1

Pumpnicks 8-1

Larry_Boy_44's Team 8-1

Cryogenics Rule 13-1

Kobayashi Maru 20-1

Bullucci's Bombers 40-1

I'm off to Vegas, selling the big rig (keeping the cool gas cap of course), and putting it all on the Rabbits.:slowlyturnscaparoundbackwards:

 

[10993]

Official Odds for WIS Champion

Irish Cowboys 4-1

Mr. P's Big Owning Machine 5-1

Maranville Rabbits 7-1

Pumpnicks 8-1

Larry_Boy_44's Team 8-1

Cryogenics Rule 13-1

Kobayashi Maru 20-1

Bullucci's Bombers 40-1

I'm off to Vegas, selling the big rig (keeping the cool gas cap of course), and putting it all on the Rabbits.:slowlyturnscaparoundbackwards:

You didn't exactly get great odds. One could say the bookmakers are giving your team more credit than the record deserves.

 

[Bogart]

Official Odds for WIS Champion

Irish Cowboys 4-1

Mr. P's Big Owning Machine 5-1

Maranville Rabbits 7-1

Pumpnicks 8-1

Larry_Boy_44's Team 8-1

Cryogenics Rule 13-1

Kobayashi Maru 20-1

Bullucci's Bombers 40-1

I'm off to Vegas, selling the big rig (keeping the cool gas cap of course), and putting it all on the Rabbits.:slowlyturnscaparoundbackwards:

You didn't exactly get great odds. One could say the bookmakers are giving your team more credit than the record deserves.

yeah, well look at who the bookmakers have at the top. How much do they know anyway.

 

[shuke]

You guys still drafting?

We're about to go again..you want in?Lots of Reds still available.

What do you mean "still"? Is it a supplemental draft or are you starting over?

 

[Not Nipsey's Alias]

his point is, not everybody went into it with the shark-esque mentality of drafting strictly for that reason.

I purposly avoided looking at Whatif. In my opinion I considered it cheating since everyone didn't have equal information from the start. I didn't think peeking at 3rd seasons was in the spirit of what the draft had set out to be.

Well then why are we trying to make the same mistake twice? Should we have two different drafts? One for guys who want to draft the best team they can? And the other who want to draft what they feel is the greatest "all-time" team they could? That's what this thing comes down to. If we're doing this for a WIS sim, and you don't want to look at the sim numbers to see how your guy will do, how is that the fault of other owners who don't feel the same was you do? Why do the sim at all? I don't understand the logic here of people who want to do an all time draft, but want to do a statistical sim based on single season numbers that are availbale at the click of a mouse. If winning the sim is not at all important to you, why stand in the way of people that do want to win? Why participate in the sim at all? Why should the owners who don't subscribe to your viewpoint be made to follow it? I'm saying let EVERYONE do what they want? If the sim isn't important, why care at all when guys who sim fished beat you? (Because the sim is more important than your letting on? Hmmm.)You: "I want a league of all-time greats only. No one year wonders or owners who sim fish."

Me: "OK, but not sure why that matters."

You: "Because this should be a draft for all-time great teams only."

Me: "Define "all-time great."

You: "Each player should meet a certain statistical criteria."

Me: "I thought you didn't want to make this about numbers?"

You: "I don't."

Me: "Ok. "

 

[Capella]

About 367 pages ago, somebody proposed the idea of not disclosing what year we use for the sim until the drafting is over. Come up with some third-party way to determine it (dice roll I imagine)..I sort of like that idea myself.SHUKE>we're starting anew. Everybody gets a clean slate.

 

[UCONN]

You can do it Rude Dude! Just beat Spock one more time. I believe in you. Can you say waiver wire...

 

[shuke]

SHUKE>we're starting anew. Everybody gets a clean slate.

Why?

 

[Not Nipsey's Alias]

About 367 pages ago, somebody proposed the idea of not disclosing what year we use for the sim until the drafting is over. Come up with some third-party way to determine it (dice roll I imagine)..I sort of like that idea myself.

SHUKE>we're starting anew. Everybody gets a clean slate.

So are entire (two month!) draft is coming down to a roll of the dice to determine who wins? What's the point of that?

 

[Capella]

SHUKE>we're starting anew. Everybody gets a clean slate.

Why?

What else are we going to do at work?

 

[UCONN]

About 367 pages ago, somebody proposed the idea of not disclosing what year we use for the sim until the drafting is over. Come up with some third-party way to determine it (dice roll I imagine)..I sort of like that idea myself.

SHUKE>we're starting anew. Everybody gets a clean slate.

So are entire (two month!) draft is coming down to a roll of the dice to determine who wins? What's the point of that?

Mexicans...

 

[Capella]

About 367 pages ago, somebody proposed the idea of not disclosing what year we use for the sim until the drafting is over. Come up with some third-party way to determine it (dice roll I imagine)..I sort of like that idea myself.

SHUKE>we're starting anew. Everybody gets a clean slate.

So are entire (two month!) draft is coming down to a roll of the dice to determine who wins? What's the point of that?

Who wins? No, it determines what year we use.Why is that different than coming up with the 3rd year?

 

[shuke]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

 

[Capella]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

Baseball: Catch the fever!

 

[UCONN]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

Most of my posts have been part of my quest for spiritual enlightenment. Don't you care about my soul? Larry Boy is a resource and I intend to use him.

 

[Bogart]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

Larry Boy isn't up there? I guess ignored posts don't count.

 

[Not Nipsey's Alias]

About 367 pages ago, somebody proposed the idea of not disclosing what year we use for the sim until the drafting is over. Come up with some third-party way to determine it (dice roll I imagine)..I sort of like that idea myself.

SHUKE>we're starting anew. Everybody gets a clean slate.

So are entire (two month!) draft is coming down to a roll of the dice to determine who wins? What's the point of that?

Who wins? No, it determines what year we use.Why is that different than coming up with the 3rd year?

Because then you'll have an accurate board off which to draft? Why is this such a bad thing if we're specifically drafting for a WIS sim?What you're proposing is like drafting different types of vehicles for a future race, then after the draft is over , rolling dice to determine what kind of fuel we're allowed to use. The dune buggy I drafted in the first round doesn't run on Diesel fuel!

 

[Mr. Pickles]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

Yet here you are.. worrying about it.

 

[Not Nipsey's Alias]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

I'd Nipsey would have more if not for the bannings.

 

[shuke]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

Yet here you are.. worrying about it.

:rotflmao: at "worrying"

 

[UCONN]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

I'd Nipsey would have more if not for the bannings.

:rotflmao: I'm sure you're actually leading this thing.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

You can do it Rude Dude! Just beat Spock one more time. I believe in you. Can you say waiver wire...

I'm playing Pickles.

 

[UCONN]

Number of posts in this thread alone.

Capella 2194

Nipsey 2006

Koya 1756

UCONN 1212

Mr. Pickles 1159

Funkley 1042

That's disgusting.

Yet here you are.. worrying about it.

:rotflmao: at "worrying"

Over half of Funkley's posts were links to porn. Does that make you feel any better?

 

[larry_boy_44]

:rotflmao: welcome back larry.

I figured I'd let you guys discuss season 2 and I'd be in if I was allowed in...I have opinions, but I won't say them until/if I"m allowed in... not worth my time... and not really worth clogging up the posts that are discussing what actually should be done if my thoughts are likely to be ignored...

 

[Capella]

Because then you'll have an accurate board off which to draft? Why is this such a bad thing if we're specifically drafting for a WIS sim?

BECAUSE THAT'S NOT EVERYBODY'S INTENT!

 

[UCONN]

You can do it Rude Dude!  Just beat Spock one more time.  I believe in you.  Can you say waiver wire...

I'm playing Pickles.

I thought you were the Lebron team. You were playing Spock if so.