Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 10:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jbohrman on 10/17/2019 10:21:00 AM (view original):
And the WISC-eligible exclusion only applies to the 2nd set of twists?

Can you clarify what you mean?

Maybe if I offer an example, this will cover his question.

The 1927 Yankees had a pitcher named Walter Beall who only worked 1 IP that year, though he has at least one other WIS-eligible season. Beall also pitched for the 1929 Senators, but just 7 IP there.

So, if your base team were the 1929 Senators, can you use Beall to twist to the 27 Yankees? Neither would be a WIS-eligible season.

Posted by redcped on 10/17/2019 11:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 10:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jbohrman on 10/17/2019 10:21:00 AM (view original):
And the WISC-eligible exclusion only applies to the 2nd set of twists?

Can you clarify what you mean?

Maybe if I offer an example, this will cover his question.

The 1927 Yankees had a pitcher named Walter Beall who only worked 1 IP that year, though he has at least one other WIS-eligible season. Beall also pitched for the 1929 Senators, but just 7 IP there.

So, if your base team were the 1929 Senators, can you use Beall to twist to the 27 Yankees? Neither would be a WIS-eligible season.

Actually, I think the question was “is it okay if Player C played with Player A in a year Player A didn’t have a WIS eligible season?”

So as an example, you start with the 2000 Tigers and twist Player A to the 1999 Padres. You twist Player B to the 2001 Orioles. Player C plays for the Orioles. Is it okay if he played with Player A in a season that wasn’t WIS eligible for Player A?

All connections need to be made with / based on WIS-eligible player-seasons so that I can verify the rosters.

redcped's example would be illegal. You wouldn't be able to use Beal either as a twisted player from the 1929 Senators or as a twisted player to the 1927 Yankees.

Jtpsops's example would be fine since it wasn't a WIS-eligible season.

OK. You might want to state it clearly in the rules then that the players to be twisted off the base team have to be WIS eligible in both the base season and the twisted season.

Good idea -- will update

Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 11:52:00 PM (view original):
Variable Cap: Plus X & Y
Your team's total salary cap will be 150M + x + y, as long as it does not go above 180M.

x = number of distinct seasons on your 25 man roster
y = number of distinct franchises on your 25 man roster

If x + y is greater than 30 (implying a cap above 180M) you will instead need to subtract 1M for each additional season or franchise.

Other Specifics
Seasons: All
DH: No
WW: No
AAA: No
Trades: No
Clones: No
Injuries: Turned On
Multi-team players: No restrictions (i.e., you can use partial or combined)
Ballpark: No restrictions, will be drafted
300K Exception: No
Team Name: Reference your salary cap
Division Alignment: Random

New high cap theme is posted

And alas this kills one of my links on the team I've been building. One of my linking players was only WIS eligible in his base team season. Shucks.

Well son of a *****, have to start over again now. Really wish that requirement was changed earlier.

Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 11:32:00 PM (view original):
All connections need to be made with / based on WIS-eligible player-seasons so that I can verify the rosters.

redcped's example would be illegal. You wouldn't be able to use Beal either as a twisted player from the 1929 Senators or as a twisted player to the 1927 Yankees.

Jtpsops's example would be fine since it wasn't a WIS-eligible season.

If we provide the five players twisted from the base team that shouldn’t be too difficult to verify using B-R, right? If that is the concern, I think it’s something we discuss.

I really don’t want to start over with the 110m team again.

Posted by jbohrman on 10/18/2019 2:10:00 AM (view original):
Well son of a *****, have to start over again now. Really wish that requirement was changed earlier.

Not changed, but my fault for not making it more clear. If your reading was a common one, I'm open to relaxing it as long as people submit their 5 players when they enter their team.

Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 11:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 11:52:00 PM (view original):
Variable Cap: Plus X & Y
Your team's total salary cap will be 150M + x + y, as long as it does not go above 180M.

x = number of distinct seasons on your 25 man roster
y = number of distinct franchises on your 25 man roster

If x + y is greater than 30 (implying a cap above 180M) you will instead need to subtract 1M for each additional season or franchise.

Other Specifics
Seasons: All
DH: No
WW: No
AAA: No
Trades: No
Clones: No
Injuries: Turned On
Multi-team players: No restrictions (i.e., you can use partial or combined)
Ballpark: No restrictions, will be drafted
300K Exception: No
Team Name: Reference your salary cap
Division Alignment: Random

New high cap theme is posted

So, if x+y=32, your cap is 178 or your cap is 118?

Posted by odalisgagne on 10/18/2019 6:01:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 11:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 10/17/2019 11:52:00 PM (view original):
Variable Cap: Plus X & Y
Your team's total salary cap will be 150M + x + y, as long as it does not go above 180M.

x = number of distinct seasons on your 25 man roster
y = number of distinct franchises on your 25 man roster

If x + y is greater than 30 (implying a cap above 180M) you will instead need to subtract 1M for each additional season or franchise.

Other Specifics
Seasons: All
DH: No
WW: No
AAA: No
Trades: No
Clones: No
Injuries: Turned On
Multi-team players: No restrictions (i.e., you can use partial or combined)
Ballpark: No restrictions, will be drafted
300K Exception: No
Team Name: Reference your salary cap
Division Alignment: Random

New high cap theme is posted

So, if x+y=32, your cap is 178 or your cap is 118?

178

118 would be pretty cruel lol

Posted by ozomatli on 10/18/2019 2:43:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jbohrman on 10/18/2019 2:10:00 AM (view original):
Well son of a *****, have to start over again now. Really wish that requirement was changed earlier.

Not changed, but my fault for not making it more clear. If your reading was a common one, I'm open to relaxing it as long as people submit their 5 players when they enter their team.

I read this the same way. They can’t have been WIS teammates in other years but just had to be on the base teams. Would think it would be fairly easy for everyone to “show their work” in a sense on the five guys however.

Posted by ozomatli on 10/18/2019 2:43:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jbohrman on 10/18/2019 2:10:00 AM (view original):
Well son of a *****, have to start over again now. Really wish that requirement was changed earlier.

Not changed, but my fault for not making it more clear. If your reading was a common one, I'm open to relaxing it as long as people submit their 5 players when they enter their team.

Okay. . . the more I think on this. . .

Ozo, aren't you going to have to use the Oracle tool to check for teammates for roster checking? and if so, isn't adding any "WIS-eligible" language going to make your job much harder, not easier, since the Oracle tool doesn't care about WIS eligibility?

Maybe I'm missing something regarding how you plan to verify rosters.

Posted by NebHusker on 10/18/2019 10:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 10/18/2019 2:43:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jbohrman on 10/18/2019 2:10:00 AM (view original):
Well son of a *****, have to start over again now. Really wish that requirement was changed earlier.

Not changed, but my fault for not making it more clear. If your reading was a common one, I'm open to relaxing it as long as people submit their 5 players when they enter their team.

Okay. . . the more I think on this. . .

Ozo, aren't you going to have to use the Oracle tool to check for teammates for roster checking? and if so, isn't adding any "WIS-eligible" language going to make your job much harder, not easier, since the Oracle tool doesn't care about WIS eligibility?

Maybe I'm missing something regarding how you plan to verify rosters.

He’s making some cool math nerd spreadsheet thing that does it for him.