by GFDWARF07 » Sun Oct 02, 2011 9:49 pm
[quote:4d95658372="wrz25"]All right, time to bring back the insidious, twisted Shifting Sands theme. I don't think we've seen one since ATG 4. In a nutshell, each of the 12 managers, when signing up, introduces one theme that every one in the league must adhere to. So, there will be TWELVE themes that your teams will be built under. League rules are as follows:
1. $120m cap, w/ DH.
2. Your theme can take no more than 30 words to describe.
3. A theme can not circumvent or cancel a previous listed theme.
4. Be sure there are enough players, etc. to meet your theme before posting it.
That's it. Anything else goes. Themes can involve mlb teams, lefty/righty, parks, player names, lineups, defense, etc, etc.
NOTE: I've done about a half dozen of these. They are real fun, but can be devilish when constructing teams, and head ache inducing, at times. Shifting Sands is not for the faint of heart, or those who like to put together a team and go on auto pilot. You have been warned.
Signup below, with your theme (30 words or less):
1. Modmark. Theme = Each team must have three position player (not DH) platoons active at all times; injuries don't let you off the hook, so plan accordingly. (24 words).
2. wrz25: Theme = Your SS, 2B, and CF must have a combined fielding rating of 7 or higher. (e.g. SS 2, 2B 2 and CF 3, or SS 1, 2B 3, CF 3, etc)
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.[/quote:4d95658372]
Ok, I am being pulled toward this light against all logic. Relatively sure it is simply a bug zapper, but I am still intrigued.
A question: What if an injury, for example, make compliance with one or more requirements impossible? I am guessing you must assure that this cannot become the case. So in planning accordingly, per Mark's post above, to keep compliance with wrz's theme, you would likely have to assure that if you had a 2 at SS, a 2 at 2B and a 3 in CF, you would also have to assure that all of your potential back-ups (and/or platoons) at these positions had the same defensive range. Or that if they didn't that your backups collectively still added up to 7. For example, if in the scenario above one starter was injured, if you didn't have the same number back-ups, you would potentially have to place back-ups at all three positions until that starter was back, to stay in compliance. Is that correct?
That was probably the least efficient way possible to ask that question....