[quote:bcc5b46d93="jghein"]Most losses by a Team (117)
Most Hits Allowed (612) Buddy Groom, (493) Felix Heredia
Most Walks Allowed (312) Heredia, (259) Groom
Most ER Allowed (473) Groom, (431) Heredia, (196) Rocky Biddle
[url]http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/baseball/stratomatic/2005/playoffs/team_other.html?user_id=38841&stats=sim[/url][/quote:bcc5b46d93]
This type of team makes a mockery of the record books and is not a true representation of a well intentioned team. I will not accept any of these records as it almost takes over several categories and the numbers are too far out of proportion as to skewer the whole idea of the record books. If you disagree, you can take it up with TSN to get the decision reversed. Regardless, they won't go up on my private site, and your posting will eventually be deleted in it's original spot.
Official records posting thread - 2005 game
Re: Many records shattered by this team
by mighty moose » Sun Feb 05, 2006 10:20 am
- mighty moose
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
Mockery Team
by JOHNHEINLEIN » Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:38 pm
I just want to be clear in stating that this was a team in a league that I was in and it was not my team as I would never waste credits or money to do something like this.
With regard to you not counting this, that's fine if you think that this shouldn't be counted. I just posted it because it did in fact beat the "record" for those categories.
FWIW, your argument about this being a "mockery team" could probably apply more of the records you have posted that deal with futility. But you I'll leave it to you to be the arbiter of the records site.
BTW, thanks for keeping track of this stuff.
With regard to you not counting this, that's fine if you think that this shouldn't be counted. I just posted it because it did in fact beat the "record" for those categories.
FWIW, your argument about this being a "mockery team" could probably apply more of the records you have posted that deal with futility. But you I'll leave it to you to be the arbiter of the records site.
BTW, thanks for keeping track of this stuff.
- JOHNHEINLEIN
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by tersignf » Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:46 pm
you guys can have the records--most of them require special circumstances anyway and sometimes leagues are created with the express intent of scoring runs (.50 pitcher leagues etc) so doesn't matter to me--I'd rather win games.:lol:
But absolutely thanks to moose for maintaining--it keeps some folks coming back and interested at least
But absolutely thanks to moose for maintaining--it keeps some folks coming back and interested at least
- tersignf
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
Re: Mockery Team
by mighty moose » Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:00 pm
[quote:0f6ebdd361="jghein"]FWIW, your argument about this being a "mockery team" could probably apply more of the records you have posted that deal with futility.[/quote:0f6ebdd361]
Absolutely, categories like - Most Losses. The most recent record that went up was the 38 win team where player dumping was so obvious as to border on the riduculous. I almost kicked that one out as well. But then, the same could be said for a few of the other teams on the most losses list.
In this case, the records submitted here were not anywhere NEAR their counterpart existing records. And when it comes to trying to decide where to draw the line, that's as good a place as any.
Most people would probably agree that they care less about the futility records and would be fine if they were removed completely. But the fact that TSN covers them in the league stats section gives support to the fact that people MAY want to see them covered. It may lead to some kind of "assistance" for someone that may be considering a player for their roster if they knew that this player was involved in a futulity record and has a potential to get lit up in certain situations and parks.
I generally don't censor the record books but in this case I felt it was justified when it's causing 40% of the records to get rewritten in three different categories.
Thanks for your input. - MM :roll:
Absolutely, categories like - Most Losses. The most recent record that went up was the 38 win team where player dumping was so obvious as to border on the riduculous. I almost kicked that one out as well. But then, the same could be said for a few of the other teams on the most losses list.
In this case, the records submitted here were not anywhere NEAR their counterpart existing records. And when it comes to trying to decide where to draw the line, that's as good a place as any.
Most people would probably agree that they care less about the futility records and would be fine if they were removed completely. But the fact that TSN covers them in the league stats section gives support to the fact that people MAY want to see them covered. It may lead to some kind of "assistance" for someone that may be considering a player for their roster if they knew that this player was involved in a futulity record and has a potential to get lit up in certain situations and parks.
I generally don't censor the record books but in this case I felt it was justified when it's causing 40% of the records to get rewritten in three different categories.
Thanks for your input. - MM :roll:
- mighty moose
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by mighty moose » Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:02 pm
[quote:0db3b17da5="tersignf"]you guys can have the records--most of them require special circumstances anyway and sometimes leagues are created with the express intent of scoring runs (.50 pitcher leagues etc) so doesn't matter to me--I'd rather win games.[/quote:0db3b17da5]
It's spelled out that player pool limited theme leagues are ineligible for records. - If there is a record posted from such a league, people are encouraged to let me know about it. - MM :lol:
It's spelled out that player pool limited theme leagues are ineligible for records. - If there is a record posted from such a league, people are encouraged to let me know about it. - MM :lol:
- mighty moose
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by tersignf » Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:14 pm
8) I realize that but it's a fine line sometimes and it's good to see that you do make subjective calls vs just blindly accepting all posts.
I only wasted another post on your thread b/c I didn't want to come off as minimizing the records gig just because it ain't my fav thing to pursue--so: it's a cool thing and glad you're doing it
cheers
I only wasted another post on your thread b/c I didn't want to come off as minimizing the records gig just because it ain't my fav thing to pursue--so: it's a cool thing and glad you're doing it
cheers
- tersignf
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by mighty moose » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:47 am
[quote:a924f1a8d4="emart"]Had some fun watching this cast-
Team HR/SLG/Runs should all qualify.[/quote:a924f1a8d4]
Slg only. Doesn't qualify for HR/Runs. Top 5 only. - MM :o
Team HR/SLG/Runs should all qualify.[/quote:a924f1a8d4]
Slg only. Doesn't qualify for HR/Runs. Top 5 only. - MM :o
- mighty moose
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by mighty moose » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:56 am
I know I've been way behind on 2005 records for quite some time, mainly due to the gathering and posting process for the '69 game initial record set.
But, I am pleased that I should be caught up to date now on 2005 records. If I missed anything, let me know.
I should be able to stay current for a while.
MM :D :D
But, I am pleased that I should be caught up to date now on 2005 records. If I missed anything, let me know.
I should be able to stay current for a while.
MM :D :D
- mighty moose
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
Return to Strat-O-Matic Baseball Online 20xx
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests