2015 Tour Debrief

I see your awesome Red Sox post isn't getting you any attention.

I'm looking forward to his thread on how to fix the 1920 Yankees!

Strether, you keep posting that playoff achievements are significantly more than regular season wins. I strongly disagree with this statement.

As has been proven many times in MLB and SOM that the playoffs are a crap shoot. A hot WC team in MLB (last years Royals) made it to the World Series. SOM probably has more variation that real life since it's a dice game and we, as managers, have only a minor impact compared to HAL for the play of each game so it's inconceivable to say one manager is better than the other because their team won a series.

This discussion has been about how to determine the 36 managers who qualify for the championship round. I would like to see it be the 36 managers who can consistently build a winning team over the different league scenarios in the tournament. Total wins (season & playoffs) seems like a very fair way to recognize this with out over-compensating teams for winning the crap shoot a short series may be.

Strether, you keep posting that playoff achievements are significantly more than regular season wins. I strongly disagree with this statement.

As has been proven many times in MLB and SOM that the playoffs are a crap shoot. A hot WC team in MLB (last years Royals) made it to the World Series. SOM probably has more variation that real life since it's a dice game and we, as managers, have only a minor impact compared to HAL for the play of each game so it's inconceivable to say one manager is better than the other because their team won a series.

Firstly, Stoney, thanks for addressing the topic. After the last few troll posts, I appreciate you and Keyzick politely staying on topic. Secondly, it certainly hasn't been proven that MLB and SOM playoffs are a crap shoot. If it has, please show me the proof. The superior team and/or superior manager in both MLB and SOM often (if not usually) use that superiority to win the playoffs and/or finals. Also, if you mistakenly think a Title victory is a crapshoot, you certainly have to think that about a regular season win. So, why should we award that.

So, even if luck is involved, playoff achievements are not just "crapshoots" and deserve more reward than the lesser achievement of a regular season win. The great majority of us don't play just for regular wins, we play to win the Title.

This discussion has been about how to determine the 36 managers who qualify for the championship round. I would like to see it be the 36 managers who can consistently build a winning team over the different league scenarios in the tournament. Total wins (season & playoffs) seems like a very fair way to recognize this with out over-compensating teams for winning the crap shoot a short series may be.

Again, MLB doesn't play its season to determine the best teams--the recent Giants have never been--it determines who has played the best all the way to the title win. Also, this isn't the "consistency" competition; it's the SOM tourney that should reflect and reward the most important achievements in SOM. And part of putting together winning teams is putting together playoff and title teams. So, those achievements should be amply rewarded and represented in the point total.

I will say this now, though. If the majority clearly wants the current system, I will play with that system. I really think we should debate this later, when more are involved. But until then, I'm apparently the playoff points guy, since others who are pro bonus points are not here to argue for them.

The only one who needs help is you, Jeffrey. You've made that clear with your errratic, trolling posts like the one you just made. And saying a win=a win does not mean all wins are equal. it just means it only has its own objective value. I am so not surprised you didn't get that.

And it is so obvious you use a ratings guide. The fact you're backpedaling on it now is precious...


I'll be back when you settle down and are ready to discuss the topic.

Here we go again on the ratings guide from someone who says does not use one nor has ever had one, but can shoot his big ass mouth off about one saying it gives an advantage. PROVE IT BIG GUY, show us all where the advantage is. I have stated many times and you have yet to muster up any facts regarding this.

L.duchy you are such a coward, when the going gets tough, l.duchy goes and doesn't come. Also, do feed us this BS about red lining and reading posts, you have already shot your foot on that one, we all know you see all the posts and you even admitted that you read "some" (how is thst even possible?, please show us how you can read only some posts when you see them all.

I had written and thought I had posted a piece of brilliance, but it looks like it got lost in cyberspace.

I thought l.strether had some good points on the initial post-commentary about the value of regular season play vs. championships. Of course, a lot has transpired since then, but I agree that championships should have more value than 1-4 points more than the loser of the finals. The finals winner accomplished the goal, nobody else did. That being said, I am at peace with whatever system is set up. Just tell me the rules, I will try to craft a strategy to win under those rules.

As for Stoney's point about a team getting hot in the playoffs and winning, of course it does happen. But they were near enough the top to actually make the playoffs, generally they were the 4th or 5th best team in the league (which is more impressive in real life MLB than it is here), not just some lucky qualifier.

Some people are traditionalists regarding the DH; I am a traditionalist of having the League Champs be the team with the best regular season record and skip all the playoff games, but I sure ain't making up the loss of TV dollars for it.

The one thing I think would improve the Players Championship is adding email communication to the communication in the Forums. Mighty Moose does this for the Barnstormers Tour. I find that email makes it less likely (for me at least) to miss important communications and deadlines.

Thank you for everything you have done to make 2015 fun and exciting.

There is actually an email: TourCommissioner2015@yahoo.com. I still check it from time to time. I don't know why this works for Moose, or how he keeps his mailing lists and why, etc etc.

For us here, many managers expressed a preference for NOT giving out their email addresses. Also, I'm only doing this for this year, and it would be quite a chore to take on for me personally.

All things considered, I leave it to the players to mark their calendars, set reminders and check the boards. All the deadlines are clearly laid out in the rules thread and they are also posted to the tour home page. Plus there is a "reminder" post in the Players Championship forum counting down the days to the next event. Event 5 opens on August 8th!

Get your team ready now!

Thx -

What is Strat-O-Matic Baseball Online?

Strat-O-Matic Baseball Online is an exciting breed of fantasy baseball where you not only play as GM of your team, drafting and trading your players, but you also play as Manager, deciding your starting lineups, pitching rotations, and player strategies and playing actual simulated baseball games on your way to the Pennant! No more "fantasy points" or abstract units of measurement... you have one simple baseball goal - to win games.


http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/help/rules

Actually, you have many baseball goals...and one of them is to win the title. That's part of the reason SOM rewards you for it and MLB teams play for it. That's also why players would rather win 89 (and even 80 or less) games and a title than win 90+ games and not win one. If the goal was to just win games, there would be no playoffs; we would just have a regular season. And as I noted before, points for playoff achievements aren't "fantasy points;" they're points rewarding achievements just like points for regular season wins.

One regular season win does not automatically equal one point; it can equal any number: 10, 30. or 10,000. The tournament just sensibly subjectively decided on 1. The tournament did the same last year by assigning a 3-2-3 playoff point system. So all point systems are somewhat subjective and abstract. That shouldn't keep us from having them.
And since the main purpose of an SOM season is competing to win the title, not winning the most regular season games, we should definitely have one for playoff achievements.

Marc - I've actually found myself rooting for your teams in the TC...you've been dismantling the competition, and it's been fascinating to see.

Funny, but I don't feel dismantled.

Seriously though, my win over Marc in Event 1 is highly relevant to this thread. Marc's team won 96 games in that league, and my team (same division) won 86 to secure the wildcard. My 'inferior' team beat Marc's in 6 games to win the crown.

I've known luckyman for a long time, and I know how good he is. I also exclude him from what I'm about to say, because I know he disagrees with the current point system, and he is obviously a winner.

In my opinion, all that matters is winning the ring. Any chat to the contrary makes me chuckle. I can't help but feel that the tone of this thread smacks of sour grapes. What I'm hearing is a handful of managers who reckon they are the 'elite' circling the wagons, making sure they don't lose their place to the undeserving underclasses.

Winners count their rings. Losers count their regular season wins. Dan Duquette anyone?

Hooray I won a ring which makes me a winner and no longer a loser. My grapes are sweet,yet I still favor the current point system. We supporters believe it is fairer to all players.

http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/te ... on/1403183