2015 Tour Debrief

This has been the best Tour by far. Absolutely agree with, and love, the hard deadlines...and you really can't do more than those daily countdowns. The inevitable frustration of stragglers waiting 3-4 days to add there teams to a league has been somewhat alleviated by the overbooking, which is nice.

On a separate, but related note, SOM was extremely responsive and helpful in providing the prize for the 2014 tourney. I was lucky enough to win it, and kind of expected to just get some bleacher seats for game tickets. But I'm happy to say they promptly overnights me tickets to my stadium of choice (Fenway), and even checked with me first to make sure I'd be happy with the seats! Left field line, great seats...I'll be going in August. So yeah, for anyone who doubts their commitment and involvement, SOM is definitely participant-friendly!

Hi Best Friend Keyzick!! Let me know when I should book my flight to Boston.

Jeff, first I want to echo what people have said about what a fine job you've done. This has been the best Tour yet, just because it's organized. I think the narrow window for managers to enter has helped tremendously, though I say that while waiting for three days for one more team.

To reply:

1. I like the 5/10/20 drop anyway and it did seem to keep the problem of Salary dumping away.

2. I know you're passionate about this, but I feel your system undervalues making the playoffs and winning a Championship, which is really what we're supposed to be doing. I don't hold out injury players the last week on the Tour now because a win is a win. I think the old Bonus system went overboard, but I'd prefer something in between. I know this is a continuation of a longer argument on the board and probably should again be a separate topic.

3. Yes, I think the randomized league assignments work. Otherwise managers avoid leagues with Marc or you in them. And all the managers who are prepared will be in leagues 1 and 2 again and all the stragglers will play each other. And the pick and choosers will return although the randomized divisions alone has cut out a lot of that.

4. Overbooking leagues is a great idea as we get into the Tour and managers drop out.

5. The hard deadlines are necessary. Sometimes (I can think of a couple this year) it seems and probably is unfair. But without firm deadlines, this Tour drags on long past people caring.

6. I don't know how you can do more than the countdown to let managers know, unless we went back to emailing everybody, which adds to the commissioner's job probably unnecessarily.

Other comments:

1. I wouldn't have had a problem with you playing this year or any commissioner playing, especially since a conflict is going to come up so rarely. But what if we had someone else whose role would be to solve any conflicts that do occur? It could be a former commissioner.

2. Your excellent communication with online game support is another reason for this year's success. Results are updated every day; changes get made quickly. I hope you can pass that communication ability onto the next guy.

Thanks for a great job. I know it's been killing you not to play.

edge

Oh, and I hate the 24 team leagues for the Tour. It all comes down to the draft. If in a 24 team, 60M league, you get your picks, you'll win. In a 12 team league, there are plenty of options. Managers have drafted after everyone else and still won Championships. But not in a 24.

I also don't like the schedules, where one team will have a long long road trip. Or the lack of emphasis on the division, partly because the schedule isn't set up that way.

Just my opinion, though, and the only times I've played in 24 team leagues were on the Tour, so maybe Dr. Marc and other like-minded managers can convince me otherwise.

Thx for the feedback!

I hope more managers will keep chiming in while interest in this year's tour is now peaking.

A couple of thoughts/responses:

Regarding the 24 team leagues. Personally, I love them. As Commissioner, you have to hate them though. You need 120 committed managers to fill five leagues. If only 97 managers show up, as we're flirting with now on tour, you need to find 23 fillers to close that last league. I can barely find a handful of fillers for a 12 man league at this point. It's just too logistically unwieldy.

And although I like the 24 team leagues, I'm pretty sure for every manager who likes them, there is a counterpart who, like Edge, feels completely the opposite. Unless something like 75% of the pool is clamoring for a change, it doesn't seem reasonable to put out something that only pleases half (and maybe less than half) of the field.

Regarding the point system. The top five managers (currently) are:

1. Marc (had 6 Event 1 playoff wins)
2. Zen (3)
3. Edge (8)
4. Scumby (7)
5. Jeep (1)

So the top five managers won/earned an assortment of post-season "bonus points", from 1 semis win to one 8 point ring. The average was 5 additional points added to the regular season win total. Isn't this the middle ground you're suggesting??

Previously, if you won 90 games and missed the playoffs because you had a strong league, you finished with 90 points. But an 82 win wildcard team who won a ring was treated like a 97 win team after you "assigned" them 15 "bonus points". For the next event, the 90 win guy is already starting the next event 7 points in the hole to what should have been an 82 win manager. I'm here to say, that's a LOT of ground to make up over a season to a guy who was demonstrably inferior to begin with.

In my scoring method, an 82 win team who wins a ring is equal to a 90 win team who misses the playoffs. If that's not fair, then what should fair look like? Between no post-season points at all and 15 "bonus" points, I thought this year's method WAS the middle ground!

I wouldn't have had a problem with you playing this year or any commissioner playing, especially since a conflict is going to come up so rarely. But what if we had someone else whose role would be to solve any conflicts that do occur? It could be a former commissioner.

I agree with this point and think it's a great solution. I can't imagine running a tournament of this size without being able to participate. Having a neutral, experienced third party to act as sort of an ombudsman would resolve any conflict-of-interest issues fairly.

Yup...I'm convinced the current setup of each win counting as a point, rather than specific list season bonus points, is more equitable.

Without touching on the complicated issue of "fairness," I am in disagreement that a 90 win, 3rd place team is demonstrably superior to the 82-win division winner who wins a championship, or even that the 90 win team is equal. Hence, I like the bonus points system. It is not an issue that will determine my participation, mind you. Just offering my 2 cents, and will deal with whatever rules are finalized.

I love 24 team $60M leagues, but obviously it's near impossible to use them in a tourney. Disagree that they are about drafts and would suggest they are the easiest league for a skilled manager to build a winning team.

I love 24 team $60M leagues, but obviously it's near impossible to use them in a tourney. Disagree that they are about drafts and would suggest they are the easiest league for a skilled manager to build a winning team.

I love them too, and think the $60 or $65M limit helps solve some of the draft issue. But I sure would hate to miss the FA frenzy after the waivers claims are processed.

But yeah, the logistics for the tourney are pretty ugly. I'd say keep it to variations of the 12 team leagues.

edgecity wrote this

I know you're passionate about this, but I feel your system undervalues making the playoffs and winning a Championship, which is really what we're supposed to be doing. I don't hold out injury players the last week on the Tour now because a win is a win. I think the old Bonus system went overboard, but I'd prefer something in between. I know this is a continuation of a longer argument on the board and probably should again be a separate topic.

I must say that I agree with edgecity's reasoning. Goal should be winning a championship, not winning as many games. Edgecity mentions that he didn't hold out injury players for the Tour---I didn't too---but I also didn't hesitate to drop 15-game injured players just before game 144 believing it would pay off more in the season (15 games) than in the playoffs (between 3 games and 14 games).

There's two issues actually:
1)should we give bonus points for making the playoffs/winning the division
2)when playoffs start, should we settle for a 1win=1point formula or should we opt for a winner-takes-all formula for each series

Not sure of my opinion for 1), but I definitively prefer the winner-takes-all for 2).

About 24-team league, I love them too. Perhaps we could be inspired by what they do in ATG barns-tour: make an optional 5th Tour (which could be played in the middle of the summer, not necessarily at the end of the summer) that involve different formula (e.g. one involving a 24-team league, another involve a live-200M draft league---with the understanding that if not enough coaches show up at deadline, we just switch to a more orthodox 100M autodraft formula with fillers in).