2014 set sleepers

Annnnnnd, like clockwork, another thread goes to pot.

Indeed. I have his posts blocked, but it's not much of a leap to know that he's on his anti-ratings guide BS again

Annnnnnd, like clockwork, another thread goes to pot.

Seems like most threads 5 pages or more (that aren't drafts for leagues) end up the same.

I am beginning to wonder if he's an l.employee of SOM trying to build up traffic on the boards, kind of like buying Facebook likes and Twitter followers (this is sarcasm in case it is not l.apparent)

As for ratings books users vs non ratings books users, there's no right or wrong. Each person defines their experience in the leagues and their styles on their own. Whatever a manager prefers is what's best for them.

Annnnnnd, like clockwork, another thread goes to pot.

Seems like most threads 5 pages or more (that aren't drafts for leagues) end up the same.

I am beginning to wonder if he's an l.employee of SOM trying to build up traffic on the boards, kind of like buying Facebook likes and Twitter followers (this is sarcasm in case it is not l.apparent)

That's funny, until TN, Steve, and Robby came along with their troll droppings, the thread was doing just fine. It's funny how trolls complain about posters discussing SOM, when they themselves bring nothing but antagonism.

Like always, Robby takes personal shots without making any reference to any specific posts. That's the kind of man he is. I can't fully blame him. In our last debate--over Tom Brady--he got his panties in such a bunch that he ran home shouting in all-caps...and he didn't come back for three months.

As to using ratings guides, nobody--including me--said there was anything wrong with using them. So, Robby didn't read very well. Secondly, the only dispute was whether or not ratings guides were a tool. It's clear some of us feel they are, and some feel they aren't. We each have our reasons, and the dispute seems settled. So, it would be nice if people stopped trolling and started talking about SOM again. Unless they just want to build up traffic on the boards...

Annnnnnd, like clockwork, another thread goes to pot.

Seems like most threads 5 pages or more (that aren't drafts for leagues) end up the same.

I am beginning to wonder if he's an l.employee of SOM trying to build up traffic on the boards, kind of like buying Facebook likes and Twitter followers (this is sarcasm in case it is not l.apparent)

I got to admit I was thinking the same thing. It could be just an act.

As a relatively new player, I use the ratings guide to extract the numbers of hits, homeruns, etc. that are clearly shown on the card. This is a huge time savings for me compared to using a tool like a spreadsheet to help me count cards. However, I do not see how that is getting advice. It is a way of quickly getting the numbers which I could get more slowly and tediously myself.

With the large number of available players, the lists of numbers in the rating guide (and available disk) are a helpful compilation of a lot of raw data. I am curious how one could keep track of all the players otherwise. For example, does experienced reading of the cards result in an accurate numerical assessment, qualitative categories, both, or other? Are these assessments recorded in some way or are they kept in memory? That could be helpful advice.

I have found that I lose just fine without the Ratings book.

Yep, another thread down the drain.

I've sent several emails to Strat complaining about this troll, and received no response. Apparently they don't care too much what goes on in their forums.

With the large number of available players, the lists of numbers in the rating guide (and available disk) are a helpful compilation of a lot of raw data. I am curious how one could keep track of all the players otherwise. For example, does experienced reading of the cards result in an accurate numerical assessment, qualitative categories, both, or other? Are these assessments recorded in some way or are they kept in memory? That could be helpful advice.

I'm certain my method of visually reading/interpreting the cards does not result in an entirely accurate numerical assessment of them. There's no way I could get it perfect that way. However, I am a pretty successful manager using that method. So, I do attain a solid degree of accuracy.

As far as recording my assessments, I do so purely by memory, and I'm sure my recordings are not entirely accurate either. I pretty much keep a solid account of the best players/SP's/best deals, best platoon players, and best relievers for whom I would actually spend. As for the rest of the players, I keep a workable account, mostly info I gather from playing.

Judging from other managers' comments, I'm not as serious about SOM as other managers are. It's an excellent break from writing and grading papers for me, so the level of effort I put into it suits me just fine. Also, since evaluating players has always been my favorite part of the game, I truly enjoy doing it entirely on my own. If you would like a more detailed account of how I read the cards and/or how you could do so, I would be glad to do so. Otherwise, it seems like the ratings guides are doing you just fine.