2015 All-Time Franchise Tournament: WHITE SOX WIN!

[Norah]

We looked into it before and there were a bunch of downsides I scarcely remember.

[CopperTom]

if it gets us closer to playing 162, Im on board (4 game series! 2 home, 2 away!Whole Rotation!)

By 2018 we're just gonna have every franchise and play along with the actual MLB schedule.

We have 2 weeks to figure out how to make this happen in time for this year.

OUT

We should research the pay option. If it means better bullpen, pinch hitter control, I'd chip in. Stats would probably keep themselves too.

The amount of at bats my bullpen had really pissed me off.

I'm trying a trial league - 10 games. $80 million salary cap was tough. All these settings - my head is spinning.

Wow. The level of detail is sick. Pinch hitter hierarchies - vs L, vs. R - need power, need contact. Defensive hierarchies. Rest hierarchies. Baserunning aggressiveness. Pinch counts, Grady Little stats. $13

$13 is worth it for stat tracking alone.

[spike]

We looked into it before and there were a bunch of downsides I scarcely remember.

think of one

[CopperTom]

We looked into it before and there were a bunch of downsides I scarcely remember.

Fatigue?

[@SkitchP]

I like that spike and ct are basically low key wiersing our tournament.

[CopperTom]

I like that spike and ct are basically low key wiersing our tournament.

If you want 162, wouldn't the formal league make the most sense.

[@SkitchP]

I like that spike and ct are basically low key wiersing our tournament.

If you want 162, wouldn't the formal league make the most sense.

Nothing about any of this makes any sense. Why start now?

[spike]

I like that spike and ct are basically low key wiersing our tournament.

If you want 162, wouldn't the formal league make the most sense.

Nothing about any of this makes any sense. Why start now?

please calm down; you and chud can still compile your own stat sheets if you want.

[CopperTom]

I like that spike and ct are basically low key wiersing our tournament.

If you want 162, wouldn't the formal league make the most sense.

Nothing about any of this makes any sense. Why start now?

You posted about it last page.

[@SkitchP]

I like that spike and ct are basically low key wiersing our tournament.

If you want 162, wouldn't the formal league make the most sense.

Nothing about any of this makes any sense. Why start now?

You posted about it last page.

Nothing about me makes any sense. Why start now?

[numbers]

I like that spike and ct are basically low key wiersing our tournament.

I've noticed this as well, I think this is how the American League started.

[spike]

it's my tournament now too, skitch.

[numbers]

You aren't shit in this game until you've won something.

[E.H. Ruddock]

Keeping up with stats for 162 games would be a huge pain in the ass

[spike]

You aren't shit in this game until you've won something with chud's help.

ftfy

[Lament]

What are the candidates for next tournament?
Pre-1947?
Franchise Tournament v.3 (post-2016)?

Franchise 3 will be in October at the earliest. Live Ball Era (1920-1946) would be the next Era one chronologically, but if the interest in that is low, we can try to go a different direction in the next one. A few random ideas...

Decades: Each participant gets a different decade and can build his team from any season from said decade.

Dynasty: Each participant takes a different chunk of a franchise (say, ten years, though we could change that), and builds a team from that period. There'd be the potential for multiple representatives from each franchise (as long as there was no overlap, for example you could have a 1909-1918 Red Sox team as well as a 1999-2008 Red Sox team).

Era All-Stars: This would probably be better if we did it after doing the Live Ball (and possibly Dead Ball) tournament, but each participant would make a team comprised of any player who appeared on one of their previous Era teams.

Any other ideas?

[CopperTom]

What are the candidates for next tournament?
Pre-1947?
Franchise Tournament v.3 (post-2016)?

Franchise 3 will be in October at the earliest. Live Ball Era (1920-1946) would be the next Era one chronologically, but if the interest in that is low, we can try to go a different direction in the next one. A few random ideas...

Decades: Each participant gets a different decade and can build his team from any season from said decade.

Dynasty: Each participant takes a different chunk of a franchise (say, ten years, though we could change that), and builds a team from that period. There'd be the potential for multiple representatives from each franchise (as long as there was no overlap, for example you could have a 1909-1918 Red Sox team as well as a 1999-2008 Red Sox team).

Era All-Stars: This would probably be better if we did it after doing the Live Ball (and possibly Dead Ball) tournament, but each participant would make a team comprised of any player who appeared on one of their previous Era teams.

Any other ideas?

*Signs up for 1991-2000 Braves*

Decade would be fun. Were you thinking like 1960s AL, 1960s NL, etc.?

Another idea would be apply a salary cap to anything that you've already done.

[E.H. Ruddock]

Decades: Each participant gets a different decade and can build his team from any season from said decade.

I could see this causing problems. There are only a few of us on the board that understand that a decade is year 1 through 0, not 0 through 9.

[CopperTom]

Decades: Each participant gets a different decade and can build his team from any season from said decade.

I could see this causing problems. There are only a few of us on the board that understand that a decade is year 1 through 0, not 0 through 9.

I would have guessed the 80s were 1980 through 1989. You're saying that,s wrong?

[Norah]

Decades: Each participant gets a different decade and can build his team from any season from said decade.

I could see this causing problems. There are only a few of us on the board that understand that a decade is year 1 through 0, not 0 through 9.

A decade is simply a block of ten years, ruddo.