Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

I am trying to figure out what is "unique" about some of the players that are sure to make the cut after the vote it over.
And yes, I am irked about some of them. Wow, we will now have 5 Ruth cards, 4 Lynn cards, 3 Cuyler and 3 Carter cards, etc, etc.

What is funny, pretty much all the cards these players have already are workable... but I guess there is never enough of a good thing.

Meanwhile, if I want to play Cecil Fielder, I have to use the high injury rating. I guess his one card is good enough. I am glad he has one card like Ray Oyler, Duke Sims, etc. Heck, even Danny Ainge has a card.

I guess I will have to wait until Babe Ruth and all the others get all their seasons in ATG's...

would like to second what DARRELLPICKELL just said

DARRELLPICKELL wrote:I am trying to figure out what is "unique" about some of the players that are sure to make the cut after the vote it over.
And yes, I am irked about some of them. Wow, we will now have 5 Ruth cards, 4 Lynn cards, 3 Cuyler and 3 Carter cards, etc, etc.

What is funny, pretty much all the cards these players have already are workable... but I guess there is never enough of a good thing.

Meanwhile, if I want to play Cecil Fielder, I have to use the high injury rating. I guess his one card is good enough. I am glad he has one card like Ray Oyler, Duke Sims, etc. Heck, even Danny Ainge has a card.

I guess I will have to wait until Babe Ruth and all the others get all their seasons in ATG's...

It's just like in other elections...I can never figure out for the life of me why anyone would even think about nominating, let alone voting for, the other guy

Considering what seems to be a win-win situation for most people here (increased community discussion, above all), I would imagine that the nomination/voting process will be renewed (and I'm pretty happy with the 40/20 ratio). My suggestion would be that the nomination process have limiting parameters put on it. For example, in the next round, only players without cards could be nominated. Other rounds might be limited to only pitchers (because very few people nominate pitchers without being pushed to do so ), or second basemen (or infielders or catchers) without worrying about double cards. It could be limited to nominating cards from 1923 to 1958 or 1985-2013 (or any other range). Or only from Tampa Bay/Miami/Arizona/Colorado. The possibilities are endless.

What do you all think?

There are some great cards coming this time round. If you haven't voted yet, there's still time.

Bill

PS Nothing wrong to my mind with having multiple Ruth years. After all, he was arguably the best player to play in Major League Baseball. Heck, you could even throw in the 1925 season, just to make him available to adventurous souls in lower cap leagues.

" in the next round, only players without cards could be nominated."

'zackly, I thought that was DARRELLPICKELL's point, or at least a significant component of it.

PATRICKCASSIDY wrote:" in the next round, only players without cards could be nominated."

'zackly, I thought that was DARRELLPICKELL's point, or at least a significant component of it.

I understood that, but I thought that I might formulate it as a helpful suggestion...

george barnard wrote:
Considering what seems to be a win-win situation for most people here (increased community discussion, above all), I would imagine that the nomination/voting process will be renewed (and I'm pretty happy with the 40/20 ratio). My suggestion would be that the nomination process have limiting parameters put on it. For example, in the next round, only players without cards could be nominated. Other rounds might be limited to only pitchers (because very few people nominate pitchers without being pushed to do so ), or second basemen (or infielders or catchers) without worrying about double cards. It could be limited to nominating cards from 1923 to 1958 or 1985-2013 (or any other range). Or only from Tampa Bay/Miami/Arizona/Colorado. The possibilities are endless.

What do you all think?

There are some great cards coming this time round. If you haven't voted yet, there's still time.

Bill

PS Nothing wrong to my mind with having multiple Ruth years. After all, he was arguably the best player to play in Major League Baseball. Heck, you could even throw in the 1925 season, just to make him available to adventurous souls in lower cap leagues.

Great ideas, Bill.

Agree with you on this, I do. (that was my best Yoda imitation- still not so good)

The only reason Id say maybe tweak it a bit is b/c we don't want to suddenly get 20 new 2Bs and nothing else for 3 months or however long.
Getting 10 new pitchers and 10 new catchers however would be pretty cool.

I do like the idea of targeting a group of cards that are ideally usable at most caps.

Felix Jose has a card...Green, Bautista etc do not. i fought for years on this site to always point out ATG having 3 Lee Lacy cards and zero ManRam cards at the time. i think we need to buff up some of the franchises.

My concern is these "cheap" cards of players with high cost cards. (Hugh Duffy, Earl Averill, Rico Carty, Mike Marshall, et.al) Their existence seems to serve as a way to draft the usable cards without burning up payroll.

ScumbyJr wrote:My concern is these "cheap" cards of players with high cost cards. (Hugh Duffy, Earl Averill, Rico Carty, Mike Marshall, et.al) Their existence seems to serve as a way to draft the usable cards without burning up payroll.

While I do agree that people use that as a strategy- I dont think that having a cheap version of a card is incredibly relevant to drafting strategy.
There is a consequence for listing a cheap card on your auto-draft; and that is simply that when you miss, instead of potentially getting a good replacement, you are almost always stuck with a non-usable one.

Consider if you listed the .95 Duffy anywhere near the top of your draft card and missed on him.
Your replacement will be another .90 player who does not have a better card- as opposed to say listing the 11 mill one and getting a Snider, Griffey, Dimaggio, etc. as the replacement.

You probably can get away with a couple of bad misses, but 4 or 5 low price misses- and your draft is most likely not in good shape.