|
Post by Spencer on May 29, 2007 0:32:02 GMT -5
If you're not going to actually fire anyone after more than 3 years of sucking then there is no point to the Direction Board. If you get rid of it, it will allow teams to sit on their picks for 3, 4, 5 years in order to accumulate talent. If that is acceptable, then it's not an issue. But im pretty sure it will happen since it seems plenty of GM's would rather tank for consecutive years than try to improve their teams through trades, FA. Well being part of the Direction board committee, do you forse someone getting fired soon? Do you think it could be done differently?
|
|
|
Post by aaron2344 on May 29, 2007 0:32:17 GMT -5
Lumley isnt the best example of bad GMing. Hes done a decent job. i'm trying to say you don't have to be an amazing gm, but you can still keep the job....lumley fits that description
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on May 29, 2007 0:33:35 GMT -5
If you're not going to actually fire anyone after more than 3 years of sucking then there is no point to the Direction Board. If you get rid of it, it will allow teams to sit on their picks for 3, 4, 5 years in order to accumulate talent. If that is acceptable, then it's not an issue. But im pretty sure it will happen since it seems plenty of GM's would rather tank for consecutive years than try to improve their teams through trades, FA. What team would ever do that DJ??
|
|
|
Post by djmyte on May 29, 2007 0:33:38 GMT -5
Another thing that happens, is teams will make lopsided deals where they give up an established player for little in return because starting over and tanking would be easier than trying to build a contender any other way.
They also avoid signing any FAs that could help them win a few more games.
|
|
|
Post by jahallstar on May 29, 2007 0:34:40 GMT -5
If you're not going to actually fire anyone after more than 3 years of sucking then there is no point to the Direction Board. If you get rid of it, it will allow teams to sit on their picks for 3, 4, 5 years in order to accumulate talent. If that is acceptable, then it's not an issue. But im pretty sure it will happen since it seems plenty of GM's would rather tank for consecutive years than try to improve their teams through trades, FA. Who would tank for many years to get talent? I couldn't imagine anyone doing that
|
|
|
Post by jahallstar on May 29, 2007 0:35:16 GMT -5
If you're not going to actually fire anyone after more than 3 years of sucking then there is no point to the Direction Board. If you get rid of it, it will allow teams to sit on their picks for 3, 4, 5 years in order to accumulate talent. If that is acceptable, then it's not an issue. But im pretty sure it will happen since it seems plenty of GM's would rather tank for consecutive years than try to improve their teams through trades, FA. What team would ever do that DJ?? lol beat me to it.
|
|
|
Post by manasrai on May 29, 2007 0:36:01 GMT -5
Actually looking at the history every team has made it to the playoffs at least twice except for the Cavs.....Thats not bad. Ya, and Scott was one of the better Gms in the first BBS and just happened to make 1 horrible trade that set him back alot in this BBS. He's definately made up for it by trading for 2/3 of those guys back in Wallace and Barbosa. There's no trade I regret more than trading Barbosa.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on May 29, 2007 0:38:25 GMT -5
Ya, and Scott was one of the better Gms in the first BBS and just happened to make 1 horrible trade that set him back alot in this BBS. He's definately made up for it by trading for 2/3 of those guys back in Wallace and Barbosa. There's no trade I regret more than trading Barbosa. Ya, I wish I woulda told you to keep barbosa. Oh wait, I did.
|
|
|
Post by djmyte on May 29, 2007 0:38:30 GMT -5
If you're not going to actually fire anyone after more than 3 years of sucking then there is no point to the Direction Board. If you get rid of it, it will allow teams to sit on their picks for 3, 4, 5 years in order to accumulate talent. If that is acceptable, then it's not an issue. But im pretty sure it will happen since it seems plenty of GM's would rather tank for consecutive years than try to improve their teams through trades, FA. Well being part of the Direction board committee, do you forse someone getting fired soon? Do you think it could be done differently? Not at the moment. But if you get rid of the direction board, there is no penalty for sitting and waiting. Like I said, if you dont mind that than it isnt an issue.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on May 29, 2007 0:40:18 GMT -5
Im just not sure there isnt a better, easier way to police it.
|
|
|
Post by nybombers3 on May 29, 2007 0:42:15 GMT -5
I think it depends. Some teams have actual directions and haven't been in rebuilding mode for the whole leagues existence. Other GM's have bad teams, no picks, mediocre youth and no legit direction. Also, looking at the draft files, it shouldn't take GM's 4 to 5 seasons to build a borderline playoff team.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on May 29, 2007 0:42:34 GMT -5
hey manas try responding to a pm every once and while i know you saw the pm i sent you just an hour ago
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on May 29, 2007 0:43:07 GMT -5
I think it depends. Some teams have actual directions and haven't been in rebuilding mode for the whole leagues existence. Other GM's have bad teams, no picks, mediocre youth and no legit direction. Also, looking at the draft files, it shouldn't take GM's 4 to 5 seasons to build a borderline playoff team. agreed
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on May 29, 2007 0:46:28 GMT -5
I dont know, hopefully some new inforation will come to light.
|
|
|
Post by djmyte on May 29, 2007 0:48:02 GMT -5
Keep track of playoff appearances? Each team has to make the playoffs at least once every 4-5 seasons, for example. Dont have to worry about "direction". But again, if a GM fails to do so, what is the punishment? If there isnt any, then still no point.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on May 29, 2007 0:52:13 GMT -5
There needs to be a playoff appearance at least once in 4 years maybe? Or 2 times in 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on May 29, 2007 0:56:29 GMT -5
i think the direction board is good. It does show what teams are trying to accomplish whether that be winning or losing at least you know whats going on in their head. I think the 1 in 4 is a good rule
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on May 29, 2007 1:00:56 GMT -5
I just think the direction board is kinda hard to monitor
|
|
|
Post by aigatdula on May 29, 2007 1:13:11 GMT -5
yeah, it does seems hard to monitor but it was one of the things that we came up with to minimize massive tanking... i can't think of anything more right now to minimize it...
|
|
|
Post by Lumley316 on May 29, 2007 1:15:49 GMT -5
Some of the guys that would get cut are guys that really are great gys that just dont get how to win. And that would be unfortunate. take everything into account...activity, current positioning of the team, outlook for the future, skills, liked so someone like lumley has a good chance to stay in, even though he isn't the best gm, since he is active and well liked just throwing ideas out Hey what the fuck is this bringing my name up, thanks Dave and Spencer for sticking up. I made the playoffs in the start like 4 straight seasons and had one of the top winning %s. I couldnt win it all so I changed my teams direction.
|
|
|
Post by duce on May 29, 2007 2:15:38 GMT -5
My view on the team direction board is this:
It encourages and pressures teams to rebuild in x amount of time. And that is it. It doesn't do a damn thing about "tanking" within that given time. And that's not a bad thing, it's great.
But here are the problems:
1) As some have said, there can never be an incentive for a rebuilding team who owns their own pick to try to win. You don't have real life factors such as ticket sales and all that stuff. You can afford to trade a franchise player with no consequence.
2) There is no rule that says once a team has obtained a team that is proven to be capable of winning to be forced to continue to field a winner. Nor is there a rule saying that you have to keep an already existing winner. Again, there are simply no consequences.
So I suggest... and I haven't really thought it out yet cuz it's like 100 degrees and 3 AM in the morning... that we come up with rules to stop people from throwing away their successful teams without a plausible explanation on why what they're doing is best for their franchise.
Because the fact is we've already done everything we can to stop tanking, but it just can't be done apparently. So either we give every GM full freedom or we find a way to make rebuilding something that GMs have to think hard about.
Sorry for the long post but, hopefully it helps.
|
|
|
Post by GP on May 29, 2007 2:38:59 GMT -5
keep the direction board and make a consequence if you cant make the playoffs in four seasons or less...
|
|
Scott
Starter
Cincinnati Reds
BBSBL-Cincinnati Reds
Posts: 1,022
|
Post by Scott on May 29, 2007 4:34:54 GMT -5
Yea, what can I say...my trade with Manas (Howard for 3 1sts) at the beginning of the league killed me until the end of the 2003 season. For the first couple seasons, I was a borderline playoff team (missing it by like 2-4 games each of the first few) and then I started to see the light and realized that Howard was never gonna be the player I hoped him to be.
Since missing my 01, 02, and 03 picks, I turned it around with last year's lotto pick. I started to set myself up for rebuilding by acquiring some expiring contracts for the future (Nazr Mohammed), traded for young talent (Eddie Griffin), and got rid of Howard (for a 1st even). I feel like we're in the right direction now after one year of having my own pick back. I love Barbosa and Wallace, and Gordon is still up in the air but has a lot of potential. Robinson, Griffin, and Lafrentz should be some nice other pieces to help me. I'm hoping to start being a playoff contender either this season of hopefully definitely next year.
My activity really sucked at the beginning, but once I started to actually have my own picks again I had a reason to be active. Plus, I don't make a lot of the random posts that some of the guys make. Usually whenever I post, I am posting on a trade block, posting a trade, posting a team move, or commenting on the sims. I don't comment on draft picks and make a lot of the post pads that some people make. Not sure if that can be mistaken for a lack of activity, but I usually only post whenever I feel a reason to.
|
|
|
Post by aaronjh on May 29, 2007 9:19:38 GMT -5
There's one guy who pretty much needs to be fired, and he's exactly the kind of guy the team direction board was created in order to weed out. The key thing is that we use discretion about whether a guy should be fired, but I think the whole format would have more credibility if we just fired the guy everyone knows should go by now. I like D2A, but he has no place in the league if the team direction board is to be upheld.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on May 29, 2007 9:40:33 GMT -5
There's one guy who pretty much needs to be fired, and he's exactly the kind of guy the team direction board was created in order to weed out. The key thing is that we use discretion about whether a guy should be fired, but I think the whole format would have more credibility if we just fired the guy everyone knows should go by now. I like D2A, but he has no place in the league if the team direction board is to be upheld.
|
|