Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

Is it too early to start thinking about next year’s Players Championship?

This year’s is only the third one I’ve been in. I participated back in 2009 (with the 2008 card set) and again last year.

I’m not sure what the tradition is with regard to rotating commissioner duties.

I thought gbrookes did a great job keeping things on schedule last year. I know that this year he’s posted about being away for extended periods at (I think) a couple of points during the championship and I thought he might appreciate someone taking over the duties for next year so that he can just enjoy participating in the championship like the rest of us.

I don’t know J-Pav other than reading his thoughtful posts, but I think he would make a good commissioner for next year if he would be willing to take on the volunteer duties.

Again, apologies if there is some pre-established method for passing on commissioner duties of which I am unaware. If not, I would like to “nominate” J-Pav.

A change could be a good thing; nobody should, or should have to, run our Player's Championship every year. GBrookes has done an excellent job in past years. However, the Event 5 two-round draft gimmick was definitely a "Charlie Foxtrot," as J-Pav put it. It didn't attract extra interest, as GBrookes had hoped; no new or average player is going to be particularly "interested" in a setup most favoring experienced veteran players. It has also led to unneeded confusion about the final event and unneeded delays in filling it.

I have no problem with J-Pav as eventual commissioner; he's obviously an excellent player. However, he has expressed opinions strongly in the past, although there's nothing wrong with that. So, I would like to be sure he would be willing to work with and accept input from others who disagreed with him before we hand him the Commissioner's seat. That would apply to any nominee for the post.

I think the best approach, would be to appoint some kind of board like the Barnstormer's tour has had. Fill it with respected tourney vets like Visick, Jeepdriver, and Keyzick; and respected non-tourney vets like Radagast Brown and let them decide on a commissioner. He could then work with them, and all other players on the forum, on deciding the rules and events for next year's tourney. I, myself, would hope they avoid gimmicks and return the tourney to representing the 20xx SOM most of us actually play.

I don't play (or not play) based on the Commissioner or governance structure.

I am no fan of conducting a draft on the discussion boards, so that will be a factor for me in the future. The other is my discontent with the standings board, but I do not know if that is a Commissioner thing or a SOM issue (although it may be different from the start, since I quit checking it).

I any event, there appears a decent number of people who do play, so whether I play or not is hardly a big deal.

blue turtle wrote:I don't play (or not play) based on the Commissioner or governance structure.

I am no fan of conducting a draft on the discussion boards, so that will be a factor for me in the future. The other is my discontent with the standings board, but I do not know if that is a Commissioner thing or a SOM issue (although it may be different from the start, since I quit checking it).

I'm pretty sure nobody (including myself) "plays or doesn't play" based on such matters, Turtle. Whether or not we would play, dependent on commissioner, is not the topic of discussion. Whether or not, and how, we should change commissioners is. Al proposed a change of commissioner, I seconded the notion and added a suggestion of how we should change it. Nobody mentioned not playing.

On your second point, I completely agree. These extraneous, gimmicky drafts have nothing to do with how most players play 20xx SOM. We mostly play 12 team/80m, we sometimes play 12 team/100M, we almost never play public 24 team 20xx leagues, and we certainly almost never have two-round drafts preceding our autodrafts. The championship should reflect and represent regular SOM play, not the gimmicks or whimsical anomalies of theme leagues. As to the standings, I'm pretty sure that's not GBrookes' fault. I believe SOM takes care of that, and he has usually been diligent in monitoring it.

Why don't you do it?

Oh, no. The only extra time I have on my plate is for fun stuff. Organizing and running a Player's Championship just doesn't qualify.

Just for the record: I have no gripe with the two-round draft on the discussion board or the 24-team leagues. (I think I might have initially contributed both ideas, in fact.) In retrospect, I think making it a two-round snake draft with the player with the least Event 1 wins going first might have alleviated a lot of the concerns raised about it.

I will say that there are usually several drafts happening on the Individual League board at any time, so I don't think they are unusual. The Players Championship leagues are, in fact, the only ones I compete in where the entire roster is autodrafted.

Since JPav was mentioned to start the thread, I'd second that nomination.

Speaking of commissioners...anybody hear anything from gbrookes? He's been MIA since he posted last week that he was going to start event 5. And we've all had to start and organize it on our own since then...hope evertyhings ok.

Al Hogg wrote:Just for the record: I have no gripe with the two-round draft on the discussion board or the 24-team leagues. (I think I might have initially contributed both ideas, in fact.) In retrospect, I think making it a two-round snake draft with the player with the least Event 1 wins going first might have alleviated a lot of the concerns raised about it.

I will say that there are usually several drafts happening on the Individual League board at any time, so I don't think they are unusual. The Players Championship leagues are, in fact, the only ones I compete in where the entire roster is autodrafted.

Whether you have a gripe or not isn't the issue, Al. The two round draft idea was a bad idea for the reasons I stated in my two posts above. J-Pav added to that by correctly calling it a "Charlie Foxtrot." 24-team leagues are bad ideas as well. Firstly, since most players don't play in 24-team 20xx leagues, those leagues are not accurate representations of actual 20xx league play. Secondly, look how difficult it has been to fill the fifth league. It might take a month or months to fill it, if it ever fills at all. We do not want be in that situation next year.

Secondly, the pre-drafts may occur on individual league boards, but they are certainly not common on the larger regular league boards where most 20xx players play. I, myself, have played for 13 years, in over 300 leagues, and I have only had a pre-draft twice. This is the 20xx Players Tournament, not the theme league and/or keeper league tournament. So, we should avoid the gimmicks--such as two-round drafts--endemic to theme and/or keeper leagues that do not reflect regular 20xx play for most players.

I get that you contributed these ideas, but they were not (no offense) good or successful ones. They did not enhance the competition and they caused problems for the tournament and its competitors. It's not your fault, however, that they were unfortunately implemented. So, we need ideas that represent regular 20xx play. We need ideas that attract SOM and tournament newbies to the tournament and don't scare them off. Mostly, we need ideas that improve the tournament and do not diminish it.


P.s. Letting the player with the least wins in Event 1 pick first in Event 5 wouldn't have worked either. We should avoid gimmicks adding penalties to players finishing poorly in a league. However, we certainly don't want to reward players for doing so.

A couple of thoughts on the Tour Championship from here and going forward...

I remember getting flamed for missing a tour draft pick several (7-8) years ago. As a board regular, sometimes your fellow competitors can get pretty impatient with you pretty quickly, esp when as a regular you have created an "expectation" of being there. As it turned out, I had a true family emergency and my draft pick was about the last thing on my mind for a couple of days. I try and remember that when I lose my own patience now.

I expect gbrookes to be back on the boards at any time. He's been an enthusiastic player and I'm sure whatever is keeping him away is only temporary. Hopefully, in the larger scheme of things, it's also only minor.

If gbrookes wants to keep the role of commissioner going forward, I have no problem with that. If he wants to pass the torch, I have no problem with any other veteran player taking over the role. If no one else wants it and no one objects, I will try and do it for one season.

My first action would be this: If I am to take the role as commissioner, I will not participate in the tour events (thus my reason for only doing it for one season). Also, my take on the job is the role of a "good umpire". The less you see or hear from me, then the better things should be going. We had many tour events commissioner and board-free for many years. Part of me wishes it could be run that way again, and part of me recognizes that no one will create Event 1 League 1 without some sort of guiding hand.

The problems with things like this year's Event 5 (or the 24 team event) is logistics. I like gbrookes' enthusiasm for trying out some new ideas, but my personal take is that simpler is probably better when you have to coordinate 100+ players being involved. I think the standard five events with a top 36 cut-off is the best compromise between competitiveness and inclusiveness (keeping players involved longer).

Anyway, here's hoping someone will jump up and down saying "Pick me! Pick me!" or that Geoff will return to form. However it works out, I'll try and help any way I can.