SUPER SECRET Franchise "Progressive" Topic

JAMESA
Posts: 8331 (2)
Hall of Famer
727 15 16
Rookie
I inquired about opening a private forum for discussion to keep from further cluttering this thread, but wa told you need an active league going and private forum was automatic. We may need to use this thread for rest of hashing out incentives, etc--then open a new thread to fill league.

This thread has become pretty cluttered and alot to go through for potential new owners.
7/7/2012 5:19 PM
dannino
Posts: 3763 (0)
Hall of Famer
398 2 2 2 2 3
Rookie
Posted by cstrohmier on 7/7/2012 4:27:00 PM (view original):
dannino, I'd be willing to help with checking free agents and such...also, could keep records, but if it's set up as a progressive all numbers and leaders and such would already be readily available in the league office.
Didn't realize that, so thanks for that info.  And thanks for the help.
7/8/2012 1:45 AM
dannino
Posts: 3763 (0)
Hall of Famer
398 2 2 2 2 3
Rookie
I will be sending a sitemail to the remaining owners.  And JAMESA, I will probably start a new thread shortly.
7/8/2012 1:46 AM
JAMESA
Posts: 8331 (2)
Hall of Famer
727 15 16
Rookie
here are some approximate stats from 1967-2011

teams taken                                   # of seasons         win .pct         sub-.500      500+       .550+       .600+

Boston                                                 45                      .543                  6             39            21             3
Cincinnati                                            45                      .534                 19            26            18              7
LA Dodgers                                         45                      .530                 11            34            16             2
St Louis                                               45                      .525                 14            31            14             4
Atlanta                                                 45                      .515                 19            26            18             8
Baltimore                                             45                      .512                 21            24            17             8
SF                                                        45                      .510                 19            26            14             2
Houston                                               45                      .505                 17            28            11             1
Philadelphia                                         45                      .502                 22            23            13             3
LA Angels                                            45                      .500                 23            22            11             2
NY Mets                                               45                      .498                 22            23            11             4
Toronto/Arizona                                   49                      .497                 21            29            13             3
Minnesota                                            45                      .495                 22            23            11             1
Detroit                                                  45                      .492                 21            24            11             3
Chicago Cubs                                      45                      .485                 27            18             6              1
Wash/Montreal                                     43                     .477                 26            17             6              1

Teams Available

Oakland                                                45                     .515                 19            26            17             8
Chicago WS                                         45                     .500                  22           23              9              2
Pittsburgh                                             45                     .487                  27*           18            10             3        
Cleveland                                             45                     .485                  29           16              9              2
Texas                                                   45                     .485                  26            19             6              0
KC                                                        43                     .480                  25           18              9              1
Milwaukee                                            43                     .477                  28           15              8              0
Colorado/Florida                                  38                      .475                 25           13              4              0
SD                                                        43                     .463                  27           16              5              1
Seattle/Tampa                                     49                      .460                 34            15             8              1

* 19 straight sub-.500 season running
7/8/2012 4:30 PM (edited)
JAMESA
Posts: 8331 (2)
Hall of Famer
727 15 16
Rookie
you can see that some of these teams need a good bit of help-Oakland and CWS should stand on their own, but the rest need some incentive. 
before 1992 Pittsburgh was a top 5-6 team.

  • What if we drop the Yankee FA from all the better teams (dance with who you brung!!) and make the cuttoff at .485/.490. Meaning that all teams with winning pct under that would get a Yankee FA--this may draw potential owners to teams like Pittsburgh, KC, Milwaukee, Cleveland. That way you don'thave to go crazy overboard to draw new owners. Most of us joined w/o thinking we would be getting any extra players anyway.
  • If we decide to keep Yankee FA the way it is, we need to drop back from .600--there are only about 70 .600+ seasons out of nearly 1000 available teams; so nearly everyone will have an extra quality player added to their roster.
  • We need to also drop back to sub-.500 on our 1-in-5 season thing. Using a .520 team is hardly a drop-back vs some of the teams needing to be filled. This league will take about 10 years to complete, meaning that using a sub-.500 every 5 seasons will require 11 of these teams (55 seasons total). Only Boston doesn't have that many (only 6). After that Boston has (1).500 season (1).509, (2).512. It would just give some of the unfilled teams a bit better chance and us a better chance to fill 24 teams.
  •  
7/8/2012 5:07 PM (edited)
forte4him
Posts: 344 (0)
Hall of Famer
543 4
Prospect
I like JAMESA's idea's & would lean toward Yankee FA's only for teams with losing records. Maybe a franchise FA as well for teams with real life records under .400
7/9/2012 1:34 AM
grayfoxx
Posts: 6995 (2)
Hall of Famer
308 62 83
Prospect
Posted by JAMESA on 7/8/2012 5:07:00 PM (view original):
you can see that some of these teams need a good bit of help-Oakland and CWS should stand on their own, but the rest need some incentive. 
before 1992 Pittsburgh was a top 5-6 team.

  • What if we drop the Yankee FA from all the better teams (dance with who you brung!!) and make the cuttoff at .485/.490. Meaning that all teams with winning pct under that would get a Yankee FA--this may draw potential owners to teams like Pittsburgh, KC, Milwaukee, Cleveland. That way you don'thave to go crazy overboard to draw new owners. Most of us joined w/o thinking we would be getting any extra players anyway.
  • If we decide to keep Yankee FA the way it is, we need to drop back from .600--there are only about 70 .600+ seasons out of nearly 1000 available teams; so nearly everyone will have an extra quality player added to their roster.
  • We need to also drop back to sub-.500 on our 1-in-5 season thing. Using a .520 team is hardly a drop-back vs some of the teams needing to be filled. This league will take about 10 years to complete, meaning that using a sub-.500 every 5 seasons will require 11 of these teams (55 seasons total). Only Boston doesn't have that many (only 6). After that Boston has (1).500 season (1).509, (2).512. It would just give some of the unfilled teams a bit better chance and us a better chance to fill 24 teams.
  •  
**Most of us joined w/o thinking we would be getting any extra players anyway**

That is because the people who have already joined did so by taking the top teams. (They didnt need extra players)
What if we release all of the teams // try to get up to 24 // then have a draft to see who gets what team??
Would the owners who signed up early be willing to stay in the league using SanDiego, Milwaukee, or Pittsburgh??
We could probably get more owners if we gave them a chance to get  Boston, St.Louis, or Cincy.
7/10/2012 12:24 PM
dn3524
Posts: 9138 (0)
Hall of Famer
1554 7
Rookie
disagree with the 'already took the top teams knowing they wouldn't need players'...............many seasons even the good teams won't be strong in WIS.   Many Cardinal teams of the last decade had decent pitching but not great.   they won in an easier division so weren't as great as say...AL East teams.   So no guarantee they are good in WIS.
7/10/2012 12:27 PM
grayfoxx
Posts: 6995 (2)
Hall of Famer
308 62 83
Prospect
But they are a top team when compared to the remaining unclaimed teams
7/10/2012 12:31 PM
crazyjoe02
Posts: 8548 (2)
Hall of Famer
365 4 22 64 48
Pro
I am considering joining but had a thought. I hate the Yankees, so what if instead of taking a Yankee we could twist one of our players on the roster for the chosen season? Also I live in Florida so would you allow me to switch a combo to take the Marlins and Rays?
7/10/2012 12:48 PM
dn3524
Posts: 9138 (0)
Hall of Famer
1554 7
Rookie
My initial thought was it is still odd to delete the Yankees from history....so forcing a star to play for someone else is a nice way to get Yankee presence.  Plus...instead of stealing stars from other teams it works in reverse
7/10/2012 1:37 PM
JAMESA
Posts: 8331 (2)
Hall of Famer
727 15 16
Rookie
Posted by crazyjoe02 on 7/10/2012 12:48:00 PM (view original):
I am considering joining but had a thought. I hate the Yankees, so what if instead of taking a Yankee we could twist one of our players on the roster for the chosen season? Also I live in Florida so would you allow me to switch a combo to take the Marlins and Rays?
combining these 2 teams would only give you about 33 seasons, compared to 45-ish rest of us have.
7/10/2012 7:05 PM
JAMESA
Posts: 8331 (2)
Hall of Famer
727 15 16
Rookie
Posted by grayfoxx on 7/10/2012 12:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by JAMESA on 7/8/2012 5:07:00 PM (view original):
you can see that some of these teams need a good bit of help-Oakland and CWS should stand on their own, but the rest need some incentive. 
before 1992 Pittsburgh was a top 5-6 team.

  • What if we drop the Yankee FA from all the better teams (dance with who you brung!!) and make the cuttoff at .485/.490. Meaning that all teams with winning pct under that would get a Yankee FA--this may draw potential owners to teams like Pittsburgh, KC, Milwaukee, Cleveland. That way you don'thave to go crazy overboard to draw new owners. Most of us joined w/o thinking we would be getting any extra players anyway.
  • If we decide to keep Yankee FA the way it is, we need to drop back from .600--there are only about 70 .600+ seasons out of nearly 1000 available teams; so nearly everyone will have an extra quality player added to their roster.
  • We need to also drop back to sub-.500 on our 1-in-5 season thing. Using a .520 team is hardly a drop-back vs some of the teams needing to be filled. This league will take about 10 years to complete, meaning that using a sub-.500 every 5 seasons will require 11 of these teams (55 seasons total). Only Boston doesn't have that many (only 6). After that Boston has (1).500 season (1).509, (2).512. It would just give some of the unfilled teams a bit better chance and us a better chance to fill 24 teams.
  •  
**Most of us joined w/o thinking we would be getting any extra players anyway**

That is because the people who have already joined did so by taking the top teams. (They didnt need extra players)
What if we release all of the teams // try to get up to 24 // then have a draft to see who gets what team??
Would the owners who signed up early be willing to stay in the league using SanDiego, Milwaukee, or Pittsburgh??
We could probably get more owners if we gave them a chance to get  Boston, St.Louis, or Cincy.
this is what I meant-most of us joined before discussion of extra players. The teams we chose really don't need the extra guy to compete most seasons. I was suggesting the teams like SD, Mlwaukee and Pittsburgh etc should be the teams that get the Yankee FA.
7/10/2012 7:15 PM
crazyjoe02
Posts: 8548 (2)
Hall of Famer
365 4 22 64 48
Pro

Counting 2012 the Rays/Marlins have 35 seasons. There are 46 seasons from 1967-2012 for teams that have all seasons. Do we really think that this league will go past 30+ seasons? I've yet to be in a progressive that has been going that long. Plus I'd get two more seasons added for every season as they're added to the DB.

7/10/2012 7:21 PM
JAMESA
Posts: 8331 (2)
Hall of Famer
727 15 16
Rookie
I run a progressive that started in 2004 (RL) and is in season 41, but thats a long time. I think that a potential commish, when drawing things up, ultimately plan for a league to "finish". In this case, about 55-ish seasons.
7/10/2012 9:52 PM
◂ Prev 1...9|10|11|12 Next ▸
SUPER SECRET Franchise "Progressive" Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.