Where is the sim?

Rich wrote:sorry - sick kid

bigrevkev55 wrote:

Rich wrote:sorry - sick kid

Hope all is well!  

At this point of the pre-season we can have non-roster invitees right?

Pete_Keegan_Denver_GM wrote:Player movement? We're frozen here. WTF is stocking players in a league where the salary cap is so low you can barely afford to keep a meager list of ML active players over age 26? I was forced to turn down a decent trade because of this goddamn low salary cap. All this does is make a standard of "out with the old & in with the new." Regardless how well older guys may be playing. A ridiculous bias against older players: unrealistic.

You should change the name of the league to Logan's Run.

bigrevkev55 wrote:

Rich wrote:sorry - sick kid

Hope all is well!  

At this point of the pre-season we can have non-roster invitees right?

Rich wrote:

bigrevkev55 wrote:

Rich wrote:sorry - sick kid

Hope all is well!  

At this point of the pre-season we can have non-roster invitees right?

yes although I never did it or know how?  

Also, I also get a few emails on this.  The last sim the game will force promote players to the major league roster.  You can leave them there, trade them, move them down, or waive them if they are out of options.  I believe its the guy on the 40 man roster with a certain amount of experience.  Its normal and apart of the game to keep team from stocking players and encourage player movement.

WhoDat wrote:The majority of my major league talent is over 26 (in fact my average age last year was 27+) and I still have $4mil cap space. So holding onto older talent can be done.

Without a cap I would have been able to hold onto Castro, Laurent, Dennis, Tatonio and Santos the last 2 off-seasons.  $95 mil is adequate to maintain a productive lineup (if managed well and with a bit of luck) while preventing teams from locking guys up for all their productive years.   Seems to me the cap is doing what it is supposed to do, forcing some turnover of some pretty good players so teams have a chance to improve their teams.

The challenge is that you have to make tough decisions (Castro, Laurent, Tatonio) and plan for not only the present but the future.

Edit: At this point half the league has $10 mil plus cap space.  Doesn't seem that there is a huge issue with teams not having money to spend.  I also don't see star players sitting in the FA pool because teams can't sign them.

WhoDat wrote:"IMO you shouldn't have to deal with that challenge. It limits your opportunities to make trades. Keeping all five of those players would not necessarily "lock them down" into your roster. You would realize that you have a surplus & this would open up your thinking about trading for specific players to fill specific managing ideas."


But I like the challenge of making those tough decisions.  I like trading but I like the other options too.  The game isn't all about trading, it is about building a consistent, successful franchise.  And you do that with a combination of the draft, trades and free agency.


A leagues shouldn't have "a surplus of good players to go around". That wouldn't make things fun or realistic.  If there were "a surplus of good players to go around" teams wouldn't have needs to fill.  Some teams would still make trades but not out of need but because they like making trades.

you seem to really like to make trades but to me that is only one part of the game.  You mention that you "I make about a half dozen trades including good players", while that may be fun for you it isn't realistic nor the only way to have fun and enjoy the league.

You keep throwing out there that this and that isn't realistic.  It isn't so much that it isn't realistic it just isn't how you like to play.  Your way is fine, it is a fine way to play, but it isn't necessarily realistic or anymore realistic than how the NABL works.


You keep referring to the salary cap as low but over half the league has $10 mil + room under the cap with no older players in the FA pool that that they want to sign.  The cap is fine unless you don't like managing your roster to play within the cap.  If your goal is to sign a bunch of guys and then make a bunch of trades and not worry about a cap then, yes, the cap is too low.


So it just comes down to how you like to play, what type of league you want.  There is nothing wrong with the way the NABL is set up or with the cap, it just isn't how you want to play.  Again, your way is fine where you want to make a ton of trades but that is no better than having to manage the cap along with making some trades.  To each their own.


You talk about pitcher usage in ST, not using lesser players in long relief situations and using them in key situations and throwing away games.  Well the game manages the rosters differently for ST.  Starters go 4 innings and it uses you full bullpen to get players work.  ST isn't about winning games, it is about evaluating players and knocking off the rust.  I can see how it would drive you nuts if you want to manage ST games to win.


I agree that the game has issues with managing defensive substitutions and such but that doesn't stop you from building a team based on defense and pitching.  That is in fact how I usually do it, it can be done.  I don't like to build 'slugging teams' and I generally don't and I have plenty of success.


Again, to each their own.

Bumstead wrote:

WhoDat wrote:"IMO you shouldn't have to deal with that challenge. It limits your opportunities to make trades. Keeping all five of those players would not necessarily "lock them down" into your roster. You would realize that you have a surplus & this would open up your thinking about trading for specific players to fill specific managing ideas."


But I like the challenge of making those tough decisions.  I like trading but I like the other options too.  The game isn't all about trading, it is about building a consistent, successful franchise.  And you do that with a combination of the draft, trades and free agency.


A leagues shouldn't have "a surplus of good players to go around". That wouldn't make things fun or realistic.  If there were "a surplus of good players to go around" teams wouldn't have needs to fill.  Some teams would still make trades but not out of need but because they like making trades.

you seem to really like to make trades but to me that is only one part of the game.  You mention that you "I make about a half dozen trades including good players", while that may be fun for you it isn't realistic nor the only way to have fun and enjoy the league.

You keep throwing out there that this and that isn't realistic.  It isn't so much that it isn't realistic it just isn't how you like to play.  Your way is fine, it is a fine way to play, but it isn't necessarily realistic or anymore realistic than how the NABL works.


You keep referring to the salary cap as low but over half the league has $10 mil + room under the cap with no older players in the FA pool that that they want to sign.  The cap is fine unless you don't like managing your roster to play within the cap.  If your goal is to sign a bunch of guys and then make a bunch of trades and not worry about a cap then, yes, the cap is too low.


So it just comes down to how you like to play, what type of league you want.  There is nothing wrong with the way the NABL is set up or with the cap, it just isn't how you want to play.  Again, your way is fine where you want to make a ton of trades but that is no better than having to manage the cap along with making some trades.  To each their own.


You talk about pitcher usage in ST, not using lesser players in long relief situations and using them in key situations and throwing away games.  Well the game manages the rosters differently for ST.  Starters go 4 innings and it uses you full bullpen to get players work.  ST isn't about winning games, it is about evaluating players and knocking off the rust.  I can see how it would drive you nuts if you want to manage ST games to win.


I agree that the game has issues with managing defensive substitutions and such but that doesn't stop you from building a team based on defense and pitching.  That is in fact how I usually do it, it can be done.  I don't like to build 'slugging teams' and I generally don't and I have plenty of success.


Again, to each their own.

That's an ugly avatar...

Maybe we should make the league completely without challenge. Let's just wipe out salaries altogether and you can just keep whoever you want for as long as you want...wouldn't that be fun...hey, let's also give all players the same ratings and fine any teams that don't finish 81-81...

Oh, sorry, just dreaming again.  Carry on.  I would have Stanley Miller available except my owner wants a hometown player, so now he has one.  That's the only reason I signed him.  Plus, somehow I managed to put together a solid team that had cap room that wasn't otherwise going to be used; and my 1B/Dh that used to challenge for the batting title and had a  .900 OPS got hurt again and is probably now just an injury waiting to happen...Sorry, I won't start complaining about real OOTP issues, like where a guy gets a torn fingernail and is then he naturally becomes an injury waiting to happen...

That is still an ugly ass avatar though.

Bum

Rich wrote:

Bumstead wrote:

WhoDat wrote:"IMO you shouldn't have to deal with that challenge. It limits your opportunities to make trades. Keeping all five of those players would not necessarily "lock them down" into your roster. You would realize that you have a surplus & this would open up your thinking about trading for specific players to fill specific managing ideas."


But I like the challenge of making those tough decisions.  I like trading but I like the other options too.  The game isn't all about trading, it is about building a consistent, successful franchise.  And you do that with a combination of the draft, trades and free agency.


A leagues shouldn't have "a surplus of good players to go around". That wouldn't make things fun or realistic.  If there were "a surplus of good players to go around" teams wouldn't have needs to fill.  Some teams would still make trades but not out of need but because they like making trades.

you seem to really like to make trades but to me that is only one part of the game.  You mention that you "I make about a half dozen trades including good players", while that may be fun for you it isn't realistic nor the only way to have fun and enjoy the league.

You keep throwing out there that this and that isn't realistic.  It isn't so much that it isn't realistic it just isn't how you like to play.  Your way is fine, it is a fine way to play, but it isn't necessarily realistic or anymore realistic than how the NABL works.


You keep referring to the salary cap as low but over half the league has $10 mil + room under the cap with no older players in the FA pool that that they want to sign.  The cap is fine unless you don't like managing your roster to play within the cap.  If your goal is to sign a bunch of guys and then make a bunch of trades and not worry about a cap then, yes, the cap is too low.


So it just comes down to how you like to play, what type of league you want.  There is nothing wrong with the way the NABL is set up or with the cap, it just isn't how you want to play.  Again, your way is fine where you want to make a ton of trades but that is no better than having to manage the cap along with making some trades.  To each their own.


You talk about pitcher usage in ST, not using lesser players in long relief situations and using them in key situations and throwing away games.  Well the game manages the rosters differently for ST.  Starters go 4 innings and it uses you full bullpen to get players work.  ST isn't about winning games, it is about evaluating players and knocking off the rust.  I can see how it would drive you nuts if you want to manage ST games to win.


I agree that the game has issues with managing defensive substitutions and such but that doesn't stop you from building a team based on defense and pitching.  That is in fact how I usually do it, it can be done.  I don't like to build 'slugging teams' and I generally don't and I have plenty of success.


Again, to each their own.

That's an ugly avatar...

Maybe we should make the league completely without challenge. Let's just wipe out salaries altogether and you can just keep whoever you want for as long as you want...wouldn't that be fun...hey, let's also give all players the same ratings and fine any teams that don't finish 81-81...

Oh, sorry, just dreaming again.  Carry on.  I would have Stanley Miller available except my owner wants a hometown player, so now he has one.  That's the only reason I signed him.  Plus, somehow I managed to put together a solid team that had cap room that wasn't otherwise going to be used; and my 1B/Dh that used to challenge for the batting title and had a  .900 OPS got hurt again and is probably now just an injury waiting to happen...Sorry, I won't start complaining about real OOTP issues, like where a guy gets a torn fingernail and is then he naturally becomes an injury waiting to happen...

That is still an ugly ass avatar though.

Bum

hey you sound like Bernie Sanders - sorry didn't want to bring up politics.  LOL.  Enough of that crap on facebook.

Bumstead wrote:


That is still an ugly ass avatar though.

Bum

WhoDat wrote:

Bumstead wrote:


That is still an ugly ass avatar though.

Bum

I agree.  I have to stop drinking.

WhoDat wrote:

Bumstead wrote:


That is still an ugly ass avatar though.

Bum

I agree.  I have to stop drinking.

Rich wrote:

WhoDat wrote:

Bumstead wrote:


That is still an ugly ass avatar though.

Bum

I agree.  I have to stop drinking.

Keep working on it til you get one you like.   A+ for effort.

WhoDat wrote:


I think the uniform is coming along a bit better.

KMcBride wrote:Love it.  Looks great.  More trim on the lettering, though, to make them pop.  Black?