2021 Tour Changes??

I think now would be a good time to discuss the 2021 tour. I do want to tighten up the rules for waiting on people to join leagues especially for the semifinals. What other ideas do you have?? We also have to decide between the actual stat set and the projected one. My guess is the strong preference will be the actual. I also think that a final decision on that is better made after we see the sets but want to get as much input as possible

I am also toying with the idea of a more formal board to assist me and maybe replace me.

At this point I look forward to as many ideas as possible. While nothing is sacred in my mind I am reluctant to make big changes unless there is a clear preference but that isn’t set in stone either.

Let the suggestions begin!!!

My main suggestion would be -not- to allow a league in event 5 that starts one or two weeks after all the rest. This necessitates everyone waiting for an additional 1-2 weeks after event 5 is finished. We want to avoid that.
My vote would be to use the actual stats for the 2020 season. Will they include the post-season ABs? (If yes, I want to see Arozarena's card...).

No big changes needed, use actual stats.

Thank you, MR. BASEBALL WORLD, for making my first Players' Championship a very enjoyable experience. I especially liked how you allowed us to pick DH or non DH leagues. I know it is a lot of work, and the only pay is a bunch of complaints.

First of all I want to thank you for all your efforts to make the Player's Championship a Wonderful Tournament again this year! I know it takes time, effort, patience and wisdom to keep this going so well!

However, I do want to point out an issue I have with the Semi-Finals. I just finished dead last in my division and the league as a whole. I think I may have tied my career worst record ever. Nevertheless, this isn't Sour Grapes, because I have also benefited from this (unfairly I believe in past seasons). I' just don't understand why we give such a huge advantage to higher ranked teams in the Finals, but little to no advantage (A disadvantage I contend!) in the Semi-Finals.

It seems by the time 12 teams get to the Finals there should be as small an advantage as possible, but in the Semi's there should be some reward for doing well in the regular season. We set this up just the opposite it seems to me!

* Having the Top teams in each division disclose their Stadiums before the Draft, then having the other 3 teams in each division pick a stadium and design their team to defeat the top ranked team is not helpful to the top teams. Below is data another player gathered and shared with me. I think it is similar to this most years:

Of the 12 teams in the finals, 4 came from the top 10 in regular standings - Moodysix- 8, Hendrix-2, and J-pav-9, Bob-7.

Out of the top 5, including myself - Me, Crisco, and scumby all finished last in our divisions. Mochadog is second, but 2g over .500 with 6 to go, so conceivably, he could also finish with a losing record. (He has an outside chance of upsetting Milleram for WC too.)

So The NUMBER 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 10th ranked teams who were the Best over 5 Seasons will not make the Finals! Why?

It looks like half of the teams in the finals finished 17th or lower in regular season standings!
Why is this the case? Then we give top Teams that are left a HUGE Advantage with all the top picks in the Finals - Why? It makes no sense to me...

* Why don't we reverse this or at least make the Semi's and Finals closer to the same rules?
For instance we could give the top finishers the first 3 rounds of picks if they have to disclose their stadiums before everyone else... and do something similar in the Finals.

Anyway this is how I've seen it every year I've been in this Tournament...

A couple of thoughts, responding to Gilbo’s post.

The Barnstormers solution to this is to have nine teams NOT have to play a semifinals, and advance straight to the finals. I think that’s a terrible idea, for reasons I won’t list here.

If picking a stadium first in the semis is a big disadvantage, you can either do away with the stadium draft (no big deal if you still keep stadium use to one time only), or allow teams to “draft” for the stadium draft (top seed can elect to pick anywhere from first to last). Cumbersome, but do-able. Personally, I kinda sorta agree with Gilbo on this, however, having said that, I could care less what stadium anyone else takes. I do not believe anyone designs their team to thwart a higher ranked team specifically with the benefit of knowing their ballpark.

Now, as to why the top ranked teams aren’t advancing to the finals. My contention has always been that if you make the top 36, you are a deserving Tour Champion caliber manager. I don’t think there is a “more superior” skill level clearly defined above that line (and this of course begs the question about manager #37, and so on). There are just a lot of great managers in 200x, and I think that’s what differentiates this tournament from the others.

If half the teams in the finals finished 17th and lower, doesn’t this equate to half the teams finishing 17th or HIGHER? What is wrong with a distribution like that?? If the argument is that a Top 10 manager is somehow “better” than the other managers, I would need to understand more why someone would think that might be.

1)I agree that the true season stats should used.
2) A change may be to look at random invites to fill leagues that the BS Tourney put in place.
3) Hate the BS rule of giving the top 9 a bye to the Finals. The Mystery Tourney's lack of Semis is a deal breaker.
4) Gilbo and J-Pav make great points. Perhaps there should be a limited non-serpentine Semi-Final seeded player draft (3 or 4 players?). Believe me no sour grapes here, but the draft was my downfall. Getting first waiver pick was a death sentence against this level of competition. We all know there is some if not a lot of luck involved in an auto draft The limited player draft would at least remove some of this element of luck.

I dont see why a live draft in the semis is impossible. Is a couple of hours too much of an investment?

The reasom you have a semifinal is that the finalists should have to prove themselves against a higher level of competition
And you imagine that any cherrypicking or discrepancies in competition in the first round would be largely missing in the semifinal round. Also, it's just funner to play against players who have earned a certain reputarion. It's inexplicable to me why Barnstormers still does it.

The top 3 Regular Season Finishers Won 8 Finals While the bottom 3, #s 34-36 Won only 1.

8 Championships to 1 - I think I'd take that bet any day, yet 6 of the Top Ten teams didn't even make the playoffs in the Semi's...

...6 of the Top Ten teams didn't even make the playoffs in the Semi's...

So?

Cristano, with a bunch of qualifying rings, had a division of 1, 18, 19 and 36 in his division. He was disadvantaged how again? Because he took Coors first and the others leveraged that against him?

What if...

There is just such a strong field of managers that it’s just hard to see through the parity? If cristano had finished 36th instead of first, would anyone be surprised if he had won the division? Seeding is used largely because that’s how big tournaments work. But if we used a randomizer, would anyone really see any differences?

Because the manager skill level is so strong, there’s no getting around how much luck is involved in the tour playoffs. There just aren’t enough “fairness” fixes to account for that simple reality.