6/21/2013 10:30 PM
And the two "dreadful" teams you spoke of had 74 and 75 wins the season before, respectively.  And you made them worse for multiple seasons before you made them better.  
6/21/2013 10:33 PM
Posted by boogerlips on 6/21/2013 8:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/19/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/19/2013 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by rangerup on 6/19/2013 1:46:00 PM (view original):
I did have a true knuckleballer, and he won multiple Cy Young Awards, thank you. 

The Big three can certainly make up for 45-65 splits, I have done it.  Of course you need to consider all things, catcher, ballpark, defense, offense.  Those that make knee jerk assumptions based on ratings are bound to continue to hover around the .500 mark and never win a WS like teccywrg.  Who knows, he might not be astute enough to put a great team together, or he may just be having fun and not care much about winning it all.  No biggie.

Having been in over a dozen World Series in 40 completed seasons tends to speak for itself if you are paying attention.

Which player? Show your work.
Here, I'll show another.  This guy isn't exactly lighting it up, despite high numbers in the "Big Three."  And he's been in pitchers parks his whole career.

whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx
Its pretty hard to light it up when  Horacio Martin is doing the catching.
Fair.  But his career catching ERA is 4.29, so he's not killing every pitcher he catches.

The point is, ranger is giving the impression you can ignore splits if you have good numbers in ratings that are by and large, not very important.  It's bad advice.  Splits, pitches (not just 1) and control are by far, MUCH more important than velo and GB rating.  And claiming your WS titles are evidence of knowing what you're talking about, when you're taking teams that are already championship caliber, is untrue.
6/27/2013 9:17 AM
I'm not one to normally make negative comments on another owner, but rangerup came into our league (Lets Play Two), took that 99 win team, traded its younger players for older players with long term contracts, made the team more of a win at all costs now version, and then bailed after he won the WS with the excuse he was tired of playing HBD.  As I said to him then, and I'll say now, he's the poster boy for the type of owner we wish to never have again.  

Anyone who values the idea of  "Dynasty" in Hardball Dynasty should ignore any advice rangerup has to offer.



6/27/2013 12:10 PM
I'll echo billpitt's sentiments.
6/27/2013 10:20 PM
i'll third billpitt's sentiments. 
6/28/2013 8:00 AM
I think most people familiar with rangerup knows he's a foolish tool.
6/28/2013 9:00 AM
Unfortunately we didn't do our due diligence before allowing him to come on board, which was my fault as the commish.  Lesson learned there.
6/28/2013 9:11 AM
It happens.  I'm sure most commishes have at least one "WTF was I thinking?" owner.
6/28/2013 4:44 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/21/2013 9:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by rangerup on 6/21/2013 5:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 1:54:00 PM (view original):
I suppose if I hopped from world to world, looking for the low hanging fruit that would give me a handful of cheap trophies, I'd have a resume similar to rangers, and I would come here and give bad advice to others who are trying to figure out how the ratings work.

Unfortunately for me, I do neither.
I have taken two dreadful teams and spent multiple seasons with them, and built them both into division winners for the next decade with WS appearances.  I just find it awfully tedious and boring.  You would figure with so many seasons invested in some of your worlds teccywrgger you would have at last figured out how to plan for a good team, but looking at your card that has not happened.  Never fear, one of these days you are bound to squeak in as a wild card and with any luck, win a ring.  But judging from your record I highly doubt you will ever run a world dominant team.  Not that that is anything wrong with that.
Let's review your four trophies.

1)  Glavine300 - you took over a team that won the WS the season before you joined, and won a WS in your second season there.

2)  Let's Play Two - you took over a team that won 99 games the season before, and won a WS in your only season there.

3)  No Trade Clause - you took over a team that won 80 games the season before and won a WS in your second season there

4)  Parks - you took over a team that won 94 games the season before and won a WS in your first season there

Yep, that sure seems like you put in a lot of hard work to build winners.

Dumbass.
I know right!  Oddly enough the couple of teams I actually toiled to develop went on to several WS appearances between the two of them but they never won one!
6/28/2013 4:50 PM
rangerup reminds me of snake_p from the GD days.
6/28/2013 5:20 PM (edited)
Posted by billpitt on 6/27/2013 9:17:00 AM (view original):
I'm not one to normally make negative comments on another owner, but rangerup came into our league (Lets Play Two), took that 99 win team, traded its younger players for older players with long term contracts, made the team more of a win at all costs now version, and then bailed after he won the WS with the excuse he was tired of playing HBD.  As I said to him then, and I'll say now, he's the poster boy for the type of owner we wish to never have again.  

Anyone who values the idea of  "Dynasty" in Hardball Dynasty should ignore any advice rangerup has to offer.



It was unfortunate when you threw a fit Bill.  While I did in fact only play one season and 'bail' I did decide to quit HBD, and presently only have one team as I got a free season for tearing up your world.  Contrary to what you just said though, that team I took over for that one season had 5 SS types on the roster, all fairly good, but you cannot win a WS with 5 SS types.  Teccywirg listen up.  So what I did, was take 3 of those guys and trade them for pieces that would win, and none of those pieces were old, big contract guys.  None of them.  In fact all of them are still under reasonable contracts with that club and are not presently digressing.  Had I stayed in that world, I would have in all likelihood won a couple more WS with that team.  I left it in better shape than when I got it, made no bad trades, inked no crazy contracts.  Wait a minute, I did sign one free agent pitcher, one of the best ever in HBD to what is not a crazy contract, but he did all of a sudden start digressing during the season.  That rankled me a little.  But he is still very viable.

Bill was mainly upset because a newcomer came in, and swept the field.  Had I wanted to continue playing HBD I would have stayed, but I got bored with the game somewhat.  There are only so many ways to skin a cat and I have tried them all.  If the new guy runs that team right, they are in the WS for the next 3-5 years.

What is somewhat touching is Bill is now hollering "look at me!' on his own world message board after he puts a post up here.  I did not know I had that much of an effect on him.  And said team sits at 54-20something in the division lead.  He seemed like a nice guy until I politely (as he asked) told him I would be leaving due to losing interest in the game, then his true personality came out.  Unsettling.  When he signed me up he asked no questions and I told him I would not, and have never, ruined a franchise, not my style.  That team was poised to win at the ML level, just won 99 the year before even though that owner did not run things right.  The present owner is making mistakes by my book as well with guys playing in positions they should not be.  That may cost him a title. 

On a side note, I never said (did I?) to ignore splits.  I also never said (no?) that velocity and groundball are all important either.  What I said was, you don't have to have splits at 75+ on both L and R....if you can find 45-60 splits and have velocity, groundball and P1 (all three teccywirg, all three, together, as one) at 85+ you have yourself a pitcher that will perform like the guy with 75+ splits.  I have done it, I have looked for it, I have made trades that made my teams better doing it and gotten the better deal because other owners never figured this out.  There are other groupings of ratings (both pitchers and position players) that perform better than the core ratings owners already drool over, I have discovered and exploited them and that is the reason I have been in 15+ WS in 40 seasons, regardless of whether I pick up good teams or not.  But hell make fun of me, get mad at me...learn at your own peril.

Some guys play to socialize
Some guys play to always develop their own
Some guys play just because they find it fun
Some guys play to win at the ML level

It's all good as long as you don't aggressively ruin a franchise to the detriment of the world, which I have never done.

6/28/2013 7:11 PM
Too long.
6/29/2013 4:32 PM
 George Ford is a pitcher with vel, gb/fb and p1 all at 85+.  Look at those stunning numbers that he's putting up in AAA
6/29/2013 4:58 PM
Posted by shobob on 6/29/2013 4:32:00 PM (view original):
 George Ford is a pitcher with vel, gb/fb and p1 all at 85+.  Look at those stunning numbers that he's putting up in AAA
While I do not have a side in the forum vs rangerup, and certainly do not have the resume of some, Ford's issues appear to be more Control related -- if it were 78+, I think his results would be much different
6/29/2013 5:35 PM
"...that is the reason I have been in 15+ WS in 40 seasons..."

No. It's because you only take teams that are world series contenders.
of 6

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.