ATG 8 Player Addition #5 Nomination Thread

Personally, I wish we had a 10 year waiting period on adding players to ATG, kind of like HOF voting waits 5 years.

I agree. But until Strat makes this an official part of the nomination rules guess anyone is fair game.
On the 2015 Harper if they can produce the Harper card by the time these are added why couldn't they produce all the cards by then? And if they can why would they make us wait to release the set? Including the Harper card would in my opinion force them to answer those questions. So if I were them I would not do it and avoid those questions.

Can you imagine the firestorm if they threw together a card and then when the new set is put out it was not the same? I remember when the Lou Brock card was added I was really upset it was different from the one included in the newly purchased cdrom game I had.

To me, there are two schools of thought with regard to ATG. Some guys love the SOM numbers game. They just want as many cards as possible, 2015, 1880s, Japanese, Cuban, whatever. They just want good cards. Nothing wrong with that.

I, along with others, like to think of ATG as a "museum" of the past. It's an opportunity to play with cards representing the heroes of my childhood or greats who played before my time, players I have heard stories about all my life. This is why I'd prefer a waiting period on adding cards. Nothing against Harper or Kershaw, but they play now, in 20xx. I want better representations of some guys in ATG before adding current players. A representative Bill Buckner. Joe Carter. Lonnie Smith. Pete Runnels. Rusty Staub. Harlond Clift. I want players from the 1990s like Alex Fernandez. Jermaine Dye. Javy Lopez. Tino Martinez.

I nominated Deacon White 1876 because he played most of his games at catcher leading the NL in RBI's. The position the HOF recognizes his achievements best. 1877 was a better statistical year, but he only played about a third of his games as a catcher. If Strat would recognize him as a catcher in 1877, I would like his nomination for that year. (Good ?) Also, I am also in the camp that would like to have a restriction on newer players. Their are far too many greats from the past not included (Luke Easter). and it would be nice to have some of the players that are included to have better cards than the ones they do have. A better reflection on their careers and even positions.

Thanks, MC

Andy while I do not believe Japanese and Cuban players would be a good fit thank you for putting it so well. There are people who play this game for different reasons and they should all matter. It's why we vote. When adding 20 cards you'd think people would be ok with 1 or 2 that do not fit into their strict views of what makes a valid baseball player in strat or not.

While I no doubt want Harper because I think it will be a highly used card and improve general competition I also really want to see how it matches up against some of the greats because that season, to me, was one of the special ones. To have to wait 10 years to see how that would match up to me doesn't make this one of the all time greats card sets when you disqualify 10 years worth of potentially great seasons. If this went by just the overall player I'd understand the argument but this is season vs season for the players. So it doesn't matter what Harper does next year or past that. What he did at 22 will go down in history as one of the best behind only Ted Williams at that age. Even the most diehard baseball guys out there agree with that.

Considering it's very easy to create special sets that are 10 years back and so on I think that would be a more fair way to approach this issue. Allow people that play the game for different reasons to enjoy it. Or ask us to just not play and you can have your game however you want it.

Here is just one of dozens of articles that state that season as an "All time great" season

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2539309-bryce-harpers-all-time-2015-stands-alongside-babe-ruth-barry-bonds

I actually would like to see the Harper card as well;

Don't see using this as the same thing as adding the Cuban or Japanese players.

Personally-- think there are many examples of guys in the ATG set who are represented by one or two great seasons.
So, any seasons up through current would be great to add;

What I like less are the cards that are based off of too few ABs or IPs only b/c that doesn't really represent an entire season from someone.

Note that I fixed the broken link to the 1973 Darrell Evans player card found on page 3 of this thread. Here it is again:

http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/pl ... /1670/1/70

There are a number of years to choose from. Don't forget to click on the link for the 1973 card.

I too think of it as a museum of sorts that helps put historical performances in some perspective. But if we are going to have cards from the 1870s when rules and such were so different and 60 games with 320 ABs will get you a bulletproof card might as well have all the cards from each 200x season as well added.

Sadaharu Oh 1973

I too think of it as a museum of sorts that helps put historical performances in some perspective. But if we are going to have cards from the 1870s when rules and such were so different and 60 games with 320 ABs will get you a bulletproof card might as well have all the cards from each 200x season as well added.

Valen, I'm only mildly against 2013, 2014 etc cards, only because there are a lot of historical cards than can be added.
There is a big difference in how I feel about a 2015 card and how I feel about pre-1894 cards. I hate having the pre-1894 cards in the set.

Again, I hope that they will soon be releasing sets similar to the 20xx game--- a Historical MLB set and an Unleashed set. The unleashed set could include the Historical MLB set PLUS Sadaharu Oh, the small sample size Roger Freed type cards, Japanese cards, Cuban cards, pre-1894 cards, etc.
Everybody gets what they want that way. Players like me get an unadulterated historical MLB player set, while those who want it get Hurricane Hazle and Jennie Finch.

What timing! I didn't even look up and realize that an ATG 8 nomination thread was going on when I posted my thoughts around putting some wrappers around this process. Interested in your opinions to see if it has legs.

The post is Franchise / Era Ambassadors

R

TBH--
given the infrequent player additions-- and the fact that the last one was about franchise additions--
it would be really nice just to see 40-50 players added to the set--
or some combination of 20 out of 40 players plus 3-5 franchises;
this saves everyone from having to vote for a player to fill a franchise need.