17.1 Card Add process COMPLETED

If one doesn't follow this process closely, it is way too complex. And I think that the low vote totals on the two current polls reflect this. Just my two cents.

My apologies if that's the case, my goal with this was to be inclusive but avoid what was a first come free for all of nominated players that had zero vetting...but isn't this a little fun though? Maybe I'm just a geek but I dig looking up some of the players getting thrown around.

I do however have to agree that I'm a bit underwhelmed by the turnout in the voting and the Test Drive league I set up to play with all the new players. But it is the holiday season and this is a game afterall, so no biggie. If Monday rolls around and the votes are still lack luster we can reconsider the process going forward. I suppose we could just have 3-5 guys nominate all the cards if that's who's really into it.

Have a nice weekend and remember, go vote!
Cheers
Rosie

I just happened to stumble into one of the poll threads. Up until then, I wasn't even aware that we were voting again. I thought it was still just discussion

I think the process worked great for the last two adds. It seems a bit convoluted this time around with it split up into a bunch of small groups of cards to vote on.

I have seen the new cards getting a bunch of play already in several leagues...plenty of interest out there.

I'd like to see a return to a simpler nomination/voting process though. Everyone who is interested and following the threads gets to nominate one pitcher and one hitter, then we all vote on the two lists.

Thanks,
Bill

Group 2) 10 PPD Cards
Batters
-Elmer Flick, PHI 1900, Hank Sauer, CHC 1952 and George H Burns, CLV 1926 were the next highest non-EXP vote getters in 16.2, they're in.

Voted in are...
Harvey Keen, 1959 RF DET which is a much better card than currently in the set
Bibb Falk, 1926 LF/RF CHW, first card for 12 yr vet

Pitchers
-Ted Abernathy, CIN 1967 and Noodles Hahn, CIN 1902 were the next highest non-EXP vote getters in 16.2, they're in.
-We will vote to include three more from a list that includes; Garland Braxton, Hugh Casey and Turk Farrell. Need 7-13 more. Only restriction is no additional REDS.

Voted in are...
Dick Ellsworth 1963, SP CHC much better card, 1.02 whip
Turk Farrell 1963, SP HOU big fan of this addition, .93 whip and a SP card!

We have a tie for the 3rd spot but since we have 5 spots allocated to any players from the PPD ERAs we'll just use one of those spots and include both of these guys. Both of which are improvements over their current cards.
Russ Ford 1910, SP NYY
Camilo Pascual 1959, SP WAS

I'm thrilled at the Ellsworth and Farrell cards

I think the process worked great for the last two adds. It seems a bit convoluted this time around with it split up into a bunch of small groups of cards to vote on.

I have seen the new cards getting a bunch of play already in several leagues...plenty of interest out there.

I'd like to see a return to a simpler nomination/voting process though. Everyone who is interested and following the threads gets to nominate one pitcher and one hitter, then we all vote on the two lists.

Thanks,
Bill

The thinking for this round was we had the luxury of time before we will be adding this next batch so why not take more deliberate cadence with it. But that could be creating a lull in participation. We'll definitely go back to some form of the big vote next time so we see if there's an uptick.

How about William Van Winkle Wolf, aka Chicken Wolf. He had many excellent seasons in the 1880s.

We need more players named, "Whitey".

Most of us see this name and just see a name. Radagast obviously sees something else. I'll submit these players with interesting names that he may enjoy better:

Goldie Rapp - 3 perfectly average years for the A's 1921-23
Brownie Foreman - 1 completely average year in 1895
Jim Bluejacket - El cheapo pitching years 1914 or 1915

I kind of agree with thelastdruid. If nothing else, the process flies by and if you're not checking in to the right sub of sub of sub on the boards which are incredibly dead, you miss alot of the big process.

Another observation, if I may Rosie, why is the Result for New card stickied on the top of the ATG boards? This seems out of place and given too much due. Plus, it confuses the look of the board. I just hope Rosie doesn't become CaesarRosie in the final days of ATG online. New cards are good, but i'm now on board with alot of the grumblers, this game needs to evole, ADVERTISE, and find balanced player pools. Adding more cards is good, but we've long since jumped the shark with a uninspired player pool. errrrr---just advertise and standardize a huge and maybe rotating un-huge ATG set.


2004 Carlos Beltran
2003 Marlins

I'm against either a rotating set or a continual sliding salary structure as well. Any recurring leagues would be difficult with either of those scenarios. If folks like rotating sets, the 20xx sets change each year.

Also, Strat created the Shuffle system which created a smaller and different customized player set each time, and hardly anyone plays them.