Welcome to 2013, Event 1

Barnstormers 2013 starts with an unprecedented event. The most spectacular kickoff to a Barnstormers Tournament EVER !!

Event #1 will be our first to use the 24-team format, AND our first to use the new SHUFFLE THE DECK feature. Also, we will use the new scramble the divisions feature, so you wont know what division you will be in until the league has drated.

Our shuffle parameters are very conservative, 2000 Players and all stadiums. We will have 5 - 24-team leagues with each league having a different shuffle. Event 1 will be a 100 Mil CAP, with a DH.

As soon as SOM creates the leagues for us, I will send out e-mails to all players with the password and further instructions.

Barnstormers is proud to kickoff the first event with over 120 players !!

Mighty Moose, Barnstormers 2013 Commissioner

Thanks, Moose.

How will the points work for 24-team leagues? Intuitively, it seems like you should get more points for winning (or making the finals) of a 24-team league as compared to a 12-team league. As far as the bonus for making the playoffs, it's more difficult to win the division in a 24-team league, but there are more wild card spots available, so the proportion of teams making the playoffs is the same either way (8 of 24 as compared to 4 of 12). Will there be a bonus for winning the quarterfinals round but losing in the semis?

As far as the shuffle goes -- I'm a big fan of shuffle leagues, and I'm glad that they are included in the 2013 tournaments. In addition to the smaller player pool, I find that the reduced number of ballparks generally leads to less reliance on extreme parks. I would prefer to see some limit on the ballparks for this round- either a 40 or 50-park set. Just a suggestion.

Dukie,

This is the first time testing both options, so our experiences here and the feedback I get will determine if this will be a regular feature on the tour. I've wanted to try a 24-team event for some time, but never had the membership numbers. With the obvious dropouts, Event 2 could wind up being under 120 players, so now is the time.

Yes, points will be affected slightly, but it's the same for everyone so it's still a level playing field. I'm not going down the road of awarding more points or bonuses for the 24-team event THIS TIME, but may look at it after we experience it.

We always innovate and incorporate the improvements into the tournament. For the shuffle, since this is ALSO new, I wanted to go conservative for the first one. Maximum number of players and all stadiums. If this is well received and it goes without a hitch, I will look at variations on using the shuffle.

I hope that SOM gets my leagues created tomorrow morning so I can get the announcement out and the loading going.

Thanks

Moose

We have launched. Please find the league password in your personal e-mails.

Still not to late to join, send me an e-mail to moose@sirmightymoose.com

Thanks

Good call starting us off with a 24-team shuffle, Moose. It should make for an unpredictable 1st league and keep it interesting for everyone. I'm a huge fan of shuffle leagues.

BDWard asked.

1. Since winning a 24 team league will (in theory) be twice as hard as winning a 12 team league, will twice as many points as a 12 team league be awarded to the winner and runner up?

I had not planned any changes to the points for Event 1. It's possible that I may if we have future 24 team events, this could be reconsidered. I will also post this question to the Board of Directors and if a vote overrules this decision, a change will be made and directed to SOM to handle before the end of event #1. My thought is that we are all in the same boat, can all earn the same points. Anytime you make a change and SOM has to get involved, they are either VERY SLOW to do it or they dont do it correctly. But with that being said, if the board does want to have more points for the 24 team format, it will be done.

2. I was pleased to see a 24 team league, but surprised to see it combined with a 2000 player random shuffle. That is the equivalent of diluting the talent by more than a factor of 4 compared to the usual 12 team leagues. Why were these two new features combined into one league? Wouldn't it have been better to run them separately?

Since I have 120+ players and my goal back when I had only 90+ players was to reach a place where we could finally have a multiple of 24 to do the 24 team event, I was pleased when we reached that level. It's due to SOM's advertising that we have reached a level of 132 as of now. This doesn't mean that everyone will actually show up, and I still have 31 people yet to enter a team in Event 1. The shuffle for Event 1 was decided some time ago and booked into the schedule. I felt that having them both launch at the same time was (as I have described) an "unprecedent" first event to heighten the "BUZZ" and stir up the excitement. I think it has worked. Choosing the most players (2000) and all stadiums make this particular shuffle the most conservative settings we could have. This is STILL only using 600 players (24 X 25 on a team) out of 2000 so there are enough players to go around. I will gauge the opinions of players on both shuffle and 24 team leagues and we will see if there is a place for them both in future events or years.

3. At last count, there were 132 participants. That's 5.5 24 team leagues. Assuming that everyone wants to play, what happens to the last 12 managers?

If all 132 players show up, plus myself - thats 13 overflow players. At the rate I continue to get signups, I may have enough (with fillers) to start another 24 team league. Worst case scenario, I create a 12 team final league. Getting 12 fillers would not be easy, and I dont care if I don't play a team. They dont do well anyway. See answer #6.

4. Will any of the other BSers 2013 events be 24 team leagues or use the shuffle?

Neither of these options is presently on the schedule for the rest of the tour. The event schedule is published on the main standings page.

5. If SOM creates a bug free live draft before the Finals, will it be used in any tourney events?

I'd like to, but it will need to be heavily tested and approved for use by the board before I will risk it.

6. How about a 24 team Finals league? I think the tournament should take a page from MLB (which saw dramatic attendance increases when it expanded the playoffs due to increased and prolonged interest) and use the 24 team league in the Championship round. More teams = more interest and fewer managers dropping out along the way, which has been a problem. In MLB, 10 of 30 teams make the playoffs and have a shot at a ring. In the NFL, 12 of 32 teams make the playoffs and have a shot at a ring. In the NBA & NHL, 16 of 30 teams make the playoffs and have a shot at a ring. All told, of the 4 major professional sports in the U.S., 54 of 122 teams make the playoffs, a playoff rate of roughly 44.3%. Even if the Finals league was expanded to 24 teams, that's a playoff rate of a paltry 18.2% for the current 132 teams in the tourney. A 24 team Finals league could use the top 18 plus the winners of 6 12 team semis leagues, meaning that 90 of the original participants would be involved in the post season. More post season teams would mean greater interest and greater participation, which would mean more money for SOM. In short, it would be a win-win situation. Heck, it might even give the Mighty Moose a shot at the post season!

It seems that SOM has programmed my teams to win between 70-80 games perpetually. In my past 15 teams, I have only made the playoffs once. I have no current teams playing. I just dont have the time. As far as changes to the BS tour, I tend to not make major changes and keep the core of it as it has always been. This can sometimes frustrate even my own board of directors. In the future I will make a mailing list available so you can send one e-mail and reach all of the board members - you can send your suggestions there. While I tend to make the final decision on major issues, if a board member wants something, asks for a vote and 3 out of the 4 of them vote yes on it, it will become a rule or a new rule.

The 2013 Board of Directors

Mr.Baseball World (Rick)
gkhd11a (Charlie)
BruceF (Bruce)
andycummings65 (Andy)
MightyMoose (Rick)

Rick: Thank you for your professional, prompt and courteous response to my questions. Although we may have differing views on some components of the tourney (there are likely as many opinions about how the tournament should be run as there are participants), overall you do a great job and your hard work has not gone unnoticed and is greatly appreciated. I was particularly impressed at how you shepherded the 2012 tourney through the transition disaster last year. A lesser man would have just walked away, put the tourney on hiatus for a year and blamed SOM.

I'm disappointed to hear that you have not entered a team in the tourney. In the two leagues that we've been in together, your teams were in the playoff chase down to the last day of the season and averaged about 87 wins, which isn't too shabby. 87 wins probably gets one into the playoffs close to 80% of the time. I hope that you find the time to enter a team.

As for the 6th league of round 1 (if necessary), hopefully there will be enough players and fillers to get to 24 teams, as it obviously is an advantage to have to beat only 11 other teams to get a ring compared to 23 other teams.

Best of luck in the 2013 tourney and keep up the good work. - Bernie

This is a great kickoff format.

The 24 team shuffle league really sharpens one's draft pencil and worksheets. It seems every player I wanted couldn't be found.

This is a great kickoff format.

The 24 team shuffle league really sharpens one's draft pencil and worksheets. It seems every player I wanted couldn't be found.

Same problem here as I suppose is the case for everyone else. Nothing like being thrown to the wolves!

I missed 13 out of 25 players I drafted, including 10 out of 15 position players.

Still, I'm 4th out of 24 in waiver draft priority, so I guess some people did even worse.

It will certainly be competitive, and waivers will be anything but blah--I've got to put a lot of thought into this one.