Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

It doesn't seem that anyone has mentioned this yet on the ATG8 board.

Here's the link to the new Elections page in Garcia's blog:
http://forum.onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=637864&sid=e2f35e38d349cea65d093d3c5a3f64d3

I have to admit I've never heard of Ferdie Schupp (1916) or even Ed Seward (1888) and I'm only dimly aware of Harry Agganis (1955). I'm going to have to do some research before voting, and I'd be glad to hear the case for any of these guys.

Harry Agganis was nicknamed the Golden Greek. He was a star football player at Boston University, had a pretty average rookie season for the Red Sox in 54 and tragically died of a pulmonary embolism in June of 55 after having had pneumonia early in the season. The 1955 card up for vote is the season Agganis died, when he only played 25 games.

In a 9 year career, Schupp had only two seasons of any consequence, pitching over 200 IP in only those two seasons.

Ed Seward pitched 5 seasons in the American Association in the late 1880s. Threw over 300 IP in first three seasons, then fell off the face of the earth.

Thanks, Andy, for putting these three players into three separate nutshells.

Does anyone want to make a case for any of the other players--based on franchise league needs or whatever? Personally, I don't feel like I have a particular dog in this hunt.

19 players have double digit votes, so most of them are well on the way to election, for good or bad.

I am personally a fan of:
First and foremost--Adding players and cards from what I call the common era of MLB, 1901 into the 1990s, players we grew up watching and hearing about
Then--- add these recent cards
Never?--I'm not interested in pre-1900 cards when the rules were so different than today. I wonder if most of these are added not because of the historicity, but because "we" want more guys who batted .430 in 60 games who faced pitchers who threw underhanded, while the "batter" could request a high pitch or a low pitch.

I'm glad to see Zernial and Bouton getting some votes.
Orlando Cabrera would make those trying to form an Expos franchise squad happy
Would like to see Alex Fernandez get some more votes. The EXP White Sox are very weak.
Jake Peavy would probably be an improvement over what the Padres currently have as far as SPs
Ruben Sierra has been missing from the set for a while

andycummings65 wrote:19 players have double digit votes, so most of them are well on the way to election, for good or bad.

I am personally a fan of:
First and foremost--Adding players and cards from what I call the common era of MLB, 1901 into the 1990s, players we grew up watching and hearing about
Then--- add these recent cards
Never?--I'm not interested in pre-1900 cards when the rules were so different than today. I wonder if most of these are added not because of the historicity, but because "we" want more guys who batted .430 in 60 games who faced pitchers who threw underhanded, while the "batter" could request a high pitch or a low pitch.

I'm glad to see Zernial and Bouton getting some votes.
Orlando Cabrera would make those trying to form an Expos franchise squad happy
Would like to see Alex Fernandez get some more votes. The EXP White Sox are very weak.
Jake Peavy would probably be an improvement over what the Padres currently have as far as SPs

Strongly agree right down the line.

I really don't get why 90's players for the most part got overlooked in the nominations.

Buster Posey? How about Sandy Alomar, Javy Lopez, Don Slaught, Mike Stanley, Todd Hundley, Rick Wilkens, or Mike Macfarlane.
Clayton Kershaw? How about Ramon Martinez, Mike Hampton, Daryl Kile, Jim Abbott, Al Leiter, or Chuck Finley.

I could name a lot more. I feel like we have dropped the ball here. I know I nominated Zernial but that was because I really felt he deserved a card.

How are people not voting for Abreu, Finley and Fernandez? Are people that mad at the 90's? I would love to nominate 90's players but I know that a 1885 center fielder who batted .356 will get in before most 90's players.

I would like to know how many people knew what position Ed Seward played when his name was brought up.

Well I just looked and it turns out he is a pitcher.

Personally, I think that there are some very good names on this list and found it difficult to make choices. Unlike some (and whose opinion I respect), I have no problem adding players from the extreme chronological edges. For what it's worth, here are my choices. I would love to see how others voted (that being one of the more exciting parts of the process):

1/ Buster Posey. Yeah, I nominated him and I do understand you, djp_77. All the names on your list would make good, sometimes great, additions and I plan to nominate them in the coming rounds. But Posey's 2012 season is a world apart. MVP, Aaron award winner, batting champ, .336/.408/.549 slash line, 171 ops+, 7.3 WAR, a 2 as a catcher (3 as a 1B). Yes he is a 9L, but has more than enough against righties to do damage...and think about how well he would do as a platoon in 200 mil. Sure, the Giants have Dietz and Brenly (players that I loved when they were playing), but Buster is frankly a completely different player.

2/ Yadier Molina. The other 2012 catcher twin. If Buster hadn't had the season he had, Molina might have been the MVP. There's no denying his catching skills. .315/.373/.501 slash line. 6.9 WAR. Also plays 1B. Would give the Cards another catcher option than Simmons and McCarver.

3/ Adrian Beltre. I was torn between another pair of twins -- Beltre and Rolan. Both deserve to be there, but Beltre's year was phenomenal. .334/.388/.629 slash. 48 homers. Great defense. 163 ops+. 9.5 WAR. And if I voted for a Dodger, there must be a good reason!

4/ Pat Hentgen. Cy Young winner. Maybe not the most spectacular of numbers (20-10, 3.22 era -- 156 era+ -- 1.250 whip), but would be a great addition to the Toronto Blue Jays.

5/ Joe Cunningham. I've always been intrigued by this guy since I first saw him nominated a few years ago. His playing days were just before my first interest in baseball. A lefthanded hitter with not much power, but apparently a great eye as witness his 1959 slash line: .345/.453/.478 (leading the league in obp). 143 ops+. Probably destined for DH duties in small ball parks, given his probably not so great defense. He would be a great idiosyncratic choice.

Anyway, those are mine (and some of them won't make the cut this time round). You don't have to comment on them, but I think we woud all find it great to hear who you all chose.

Bill

Maybe we should have an 'unleashed' version of ATG 9 that allows players before an agreed upon point in time, say 1890, to be included in the set but only if the league commissioner/founder designates it as 'unleashed.' I want to have guys like Cap Anson who had great careers but I have no interest in Candy Cummings, for example. I think the greatest players should have the best cards and am disappointed that this guy will probably get a 9+M card.

My first TBA tournament was in 1987 on Long Island. The number one pick in pretty much every draft was David Valle!? Great card, but... another reason for the 'unleashed' versions to be used.

The guys I voted for were:

Adrian Beltre. Well, I did nominate him.

Clayton Kershaw. Best pitcher in baseball and a great card.

Bobby Abreau. Always wondered why he didn't have a card, and RF needs help. Should be a robust addition in the 8M range.

Buster Posey. Great lifetime OPS+, HOF-like start to his career and he is certainly useful vs lefties at 999.

Luis Gonzalez. Solid career, great season.

I wanted to vote for Bouton and would have if not limited to five votes. Wanted to vote for Rolen and Zernial too.

Not particularly happy that we are restricted this time to only players with no current cards in ATG, but that's SOM for you.

So...

I think we have competing forces for card nomination-
Most common though:

1)Needed for Franchise guys;
Primary use would be in Franchise based leagues.

2)Cards needed for Most Caps
Primary use 100 and up

Im sure the guys that play Franchise leagues desperately want to have better choices, so not begrudging them.
If I played, would want that too.

Having said that, I tried to vote for 2bs and Cs that 'might' have a card that can be used in the second category.
Just don't think we need more OFs and 1Bs- we've got a lot of em in the set to choose from at any cap.

translation:
Pedroia, Hoiles, Beltre (more 3bs are good too) the other C etc...

Also, the unleashed idea for ATG is great- and would have actually been a good way to avoid the controversy on the Cuban/Japanese cards. (not that Im advocating for em)

Agree with both Druid and Salty.

Maybe we should have an 'unleashed' version of ATG 9 that allows players before an agreed upon point in time, say 1890, to be included in the set but only if the league commissioner/founder designates it as 'unleashed.' I want to have guys like Cap Anson who had great careers but I have no interest in Candy Cummings, for example. I think the greatest players should have the best cards and am disappointed that this guy will probably get a 9+M card.

I would LOVE to have an option like Bruce mentioned. The rules are so different in the 1870s-mid 1890s. I'm also not interested in adding Cuban, Japanese, Mexican League cards. I wish there could be an MLB-only option starting with 1894, when the rules solidified to pretty much modern equivalents. No NeL, no anything else, other than MLB 1894-and up.

I also agree with Salty. Some nominations are for those who love to play 200m leagues, because those leagues still give managers the old ATG1-ATG3 rush of "either I got a good draft for my park or I am totally screwed."
I play a lot of different leagues, but my favorites by far are theme franchise leagues.
So we have differing strategies regarding nominations/voting.