The Yearly Franchise Theme League

Two (2) questions - when entering '73 Oakland A's I ran into a problem with too many Starters (7 allowed) account SP/RP excess and chose pitchers less than 1M to fill roster?? Is this ok ?

Question 2. What is password? I missed somewhere Along email chain.

Ulfie

This the REAL ATG in action.

Ulfie,
Exactly, the As have only 1 pure reliver, so you'll need to draft and carry two other pure relievers. And you'll have to pick the 8th starter after the draft.

Right now, we are waiting for the Cubs, the Pirates and the 1927 Yankees to fill in the East, and then the password will be passed on to the Central team.

If there is no objection to the 1909 Pirates, that would be the division assignment:

Team...Year...Roster after 500K fillers
(In parenthesis, team payroll and player numbers without fillers)
Yankees 1939 90.64 (88.64) (20) East
Mariners 2001 81.37 (81.37) (26) East
Cubs 1906 79.5 (77) (20) East
Yankees 1927 78.2 (76.7) (22) East
Dodgers 1953 77.71 (77.21) (24) Central
Pirates 1909 77.37 (73.87) (18) East
Athletics 1929 77.16 (76.16) (23) Central
Indians 1954 76.73 (76.73) (25) East
Giants 1962 71.66 (71.16) (24) Central
Tigers 1968 70.76 (68.26) (20) Central
Mets 1986 69.48 (69.48) (25) MidWest
RedSox 1946 66.49 (66.49) (26) Central
Yankees 1961 66.21 (65.21) (23) Central
Expos 1994 66.13 (65.63) (24) MidWest
Reds 1975 66.09 (65.09) (23) West
Braves 1957 65.75 (65.25) (24) MidWest
Cardinals 1942 65.65 (64.15) (22) West
Pirates 1927 64.9 (63.4) (22) MidWest
WhiteSox 1919 64.72 (62.22) (20) West
Orioles 1970 63.21 (61.21) (21) MidWest
Athletics 1990 62.46 (62.46) (26) West
Pirates 1960 59.35 (57.85) (22) MidWest
Athletics 1973 56.96 (55.96) (23) West
BlueJays 1985 53.54 (53.54) (25) West

Just curious as to why it wouldn't have been more equitable to just "divisionize" the teams in a sliding scale of cap?
As it is, my 1961 Yankees have to play against several teams in it's division with caps of 10M more? I originally thought the cap was going to be a uniform 55M for all teams - thought I saw that somewhere initially. I really enjoy this concept and in fact have researched in the past trying to come up with all time great teams to compete, but at a uniform cap. Anyway - just grousing.....because I can see another unsuccessful season in the making here.

But as most are commenting - this will be a fun league - and I agree. Just hope to be competitive. Possibly another divisional make up (for future reference) could be by eras so you have all the deadballers in one division (if there's enough possible teams for that) - the 20s and 30s in one division, and so on. Good luck to all.

Unfortunately Someone will be at the lower end of the cap, regardless of how organized. The 39 Yanks are 91 mil - if you go with the top 6 in payroll the bottom one would be a good 20 mil less I would think.

Just food for thought - perhaps allowing the teams under 91 mil to take half of their "underage" (i.e. a 71 mil team would get 10mil) and allow this to "upgrade" players to a better year, or if not an option even allow it for extra "free agent" cash, from the same franchise and hopefully similar time period as long as it did not take a player from another team.

This might help make it more competetive while maintaining some of the existing structure, though it might not be as pure.

Durantjerry: where are you?? We're waiting for you to get into the East!! I'll send the password to the Central teams right after!!

Ulfie: I now realized where I made a mistake about the pure relievers of your team. I had initially listed Paul Lindblad's 1970 card with the 1973 Oakland, which would have provided to your team with two pure relievers. While I realized that Lindbland 1970's card is better, the Oakland As have the next-to-last payroll, and will continue to have the next-to-last payroll with Lindblad's 1970 card. Since I made the mistake of leaving your team without two pure relievers from the As, I'll put my commissionner hat and assign to your team Paul Lindblad' 1970 card, instead of 1973.

Musial6, I certainly see your point, and indeed, a yearly franchise with a 60M cap would certainly be fun, but this is not what I was looking for when I shared with my idea. I really wanted full historic teams as much as possible. As for the reason why I propose a semi-randomization, it was simply to avoid having an owner at the end of the team selection cherry-picking a team that would be automatically put in a weaker division. That could be a possibility with the salaries and the team selection being publicly available. Perhaps I had a concern for a problem that was not a real issue.

This said, I think we might be surprised when we're gonna start to play out this season. As I wrote earlier, total payroll is one thing, salary structure is another. To take your team--the Yankees 1961--as an example, you have one of the best salary structure : pitching-wise your best starting pitcher is *SP, and the four other pitchers are regular (non*) SP, and you have one top reliever . Only three teams have 4 *SP---but some of these teams also carry a rather expensive 5th SP/RP that might be restrained to mop-up situations. Offensively, you have some highly-skewed cards (7R cards) that you can use in platoons.

In terms of effective payroll (that I calculate by downgrading the salaries of bench players, useless SP, or players out of positions), I believe that the 1953 Dodgers are at 65M, the 1929 As at 63M and the Yankees at 61M, so I think your team has a chance to be competitive. Not that I want to put pressure on your shoulders...

MARCPELLETIER - Good points on payroll not being everything. It's not just the total amount of payroll but how it is adjudicated.

All this cap talk is silly. You guys really think you can top the 1927 Pirates? Even withou Cuyler who played 85 games and had 330 PA they look like winners.

Like my dad always said. "Life ain't fair. Get over it"

Let's get loaded

YF

I will get in by 6PM

I will get in by 6PM

Excellent news!! Central teams, be prepared!!
1953 Dodgers
1929 Atheletics
1962 SFGiants
1968 Tigers
1946 RedSox
1961 Yankees

All this cap talk is silly. You guys really think you can top the 1927 Pirates? Even withou Cuyler who played 85 games and had 330 PA they look like winners.

Before setting the league, I had a rough look at most team rosters, to make sure that starters, but especially iconic players, were included in given team roster, players like Gary Carter--who doesn't have a card for the 1986 Mets despite being a key starter on that roster.

I set these criteria:
1-being a starter, (having 500 PA+, and being a key starter or reliever)
2-having a proximal card in terms of years (for example, Tom Seaver didn't make the 1986 RedSox list because we only had access to his 70's card)
3- having an avilable card that is of similar magnetude(for example, Ernie Broglio didn't make the 1964 Cards roster because the only card available is a 5.44 S8* card when in fact he pitched relatively poorly in 1964 (8 starts, whip of 1.38)

That's how I came to add Carter, Tug McGraw, Scott Sanderson to their respective rosters. Adding 1976' Briles to the 1977 Rangers might be pushing it a little (he had 15 starts), but the Rangers were highly in danger of losing starting pitchers---most of their starters--Blyleven, Perry, etc-- have other cards in other teams (and indeed, they would have lost Alexander had they entered in our league).

This said, I wasn't systematic in my search, and I might have missed starters in older teams since I know these teams much less than the 1970s-1980s teams.

I missed Cuyler, I must admit, but he would not have made the cut, since the three other outfielders (Waner' brothers and Barnhart) have more PAs than him.