|
|
Post by CSCommish on Oct 5, 2013 6:11:25 GMT -5
After looking at all of the players who would be taken out of the draft per the Franchise Player per Decade idea, and given that there is not overwhelming support to do so, the concept is new, different, has some support, but still needs to be flushed out. Therefore, I am asking you to identify your preferred alternative of the concept of a franchise player.
After this poll, I will determine which one we will do, and go from there.
|
|
bigmark
General Manager 
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,176
|
Post by bigmark on Oct 5, 2013 7:37:43 GMT -5
I would go with one player(hometown hero option) per team just to go with it....so the other gms can have their "fun" as they say. One choice wouldn't make things to crazy. especially with 60 years to choose from.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Oct 5, 2013 8:41:46 GMT -5
Wow you are the DEFINITION of a stick in the mud.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Oct 5, 2013 8:57:51 GMT -5
No offense but you come off as a crotchety old man sometimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonerfantu on Oct 5, 2013 9:10:12 GMT -5
Is the Generation option basically one player every 20 years or so? Because that probably would have been the next option I'd have tried to gain support for.
|
|
K.
Other 
Posts: 301
|
Post by K. on Oct 5, 2013 9:22:56 GMT -5
Wow you are the DEFINITION of a stick in the mud. Note to self: being a stick in the mud apparently means being willing to compromise. Highly frowned upon by some though apparently. However, it at least puts a better image in one's head than some explanations from the Urban Dictionary! |
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Oct 5, 2013 9:37:49 GMT -5
No being a stick in the mud is being condescending of anyone looking for something new and refreshing. Hence his tone.
|
|
K.
Other
Posts: 301
|
Post by K. on Oct 5, 2013 9:56:37 GMT -5
I can't but admit that's true, I so do wish he would take an example from you.
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,921
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 5, 2013 11:53:17 GMT -5
Lulz. Idc tbh.
|
|
bigmark
General Manager
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,176
|
Post by bigmark on Oct 5, 2013 15:29:17 GMT -5
No offense but you come off as a crotchety old man sometimes. I'm crotchety and a stick in the mud because I said I'd be partially open to the idea instead of totally against it? Do you do anything besides be an insulting child in every league you are in? Why don't you just quit and stick with BBSBL. At least some people come with valid arguments. You reply with nothing but ignorance and stupidity. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2013 15:39:21 GMT -5
I blame BBSBL
|
|
Darryl
New Member
California Angels
Posts: 2,412
|
Post by Darryl on Oct 5, 2013 16:03:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on Oct 5, 2013 19:04:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Oct 5, 2013 19:43:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Oct 5, 2013 19:47:08 GMT -5
Not everything that kills brain cells is necessarily bad... Weed may kill a couple brain cells but it sure as hell gets your mind feeling good.  |
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,921
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 5, 2013 19:58:45 GMT -5
Not everything that kills brain cells is necessarily bad... Weed may kill a couple brain cells but it sure as hell gets your mind feeling good. Lulz |
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,921
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 5, 2013 19:59:12 GMT -5
Blame BBS. BBSBLs proud papa. |
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Oct 5, 2013 20:25:14 GMT -5
Sigh, break.
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,921
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 7, 2013 15:15:18 GMT -5
How about a decade player that has a WAR limitation? So essentially just a name. Not someone dominant.
|
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Oct 7, 2013 16:13:51 GMT -5
Then that would negate the point for drafting Koufax and Gibson, lol. Isn't that partially the motivation for this idea?
|
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Oct 7, 2013 16:14:45 GMT -5
Not opposed to it at all though.
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,921
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 7, 2013 16:23:28 GMT -5
What is the outcome looking like here? seems to have lost some steam. I guess I just dont understand what the major argument is. Hard to come to an agreement when one part of the discussion isnt clearly stated.
|
|
|
|
Post by soonerfantu on Oct 7, 2013 16:32:18 GMT -5
Then that would negate the point for drafting Koufax and Gibson, lol. Isn't that partially the motivation for this idea? Agreed. I wouldn't be against it with a WAR limitation, but that really wasn't my point. I want Koufax, not Darren Dreifort. lol |
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Oct 7, 2013 16:37:31 GMT -5
What is the outcome looking like here? seems to have lost some steam. I guess I just dont understand what the major argument is. Hard to come to an agreement when one part of the discussion isnt clearly stated. I think K was pretty clear he opposed all of the top talent in the 60 years of drafting being taken, therefore making the drafts be stripped of its depth---which I don't disagree with. The list I posted was just for half of the teams now. I am nervous to see the whole list once we expand in the 1960's. I think I am preferring a one/generation or forever idea. It would cut down on nearly 2/3 of the players or better, which is probably good. In the end, I still intend to make sure there is a replacement draft player good enough in the top 5 for each player that is removed. Perfect opportunity to see how good Brien Taylor would become =) |
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,921
|
Post by Spencer on Oct 7, 2013 16:45:07 GMT -5
What is the outcome looking like here? seems to have lost some steam. I guess I just dont understand what the major argument is. Hard to come to an agreement when one part of the discussion isnt clearly stated. I think K was pretty clear he opposed all of the top talent in the 60 years of drafting being taken, therefore making the drafts be stripped of its depth---which I don't disagree with. The list I posted was just for half of the teams now. I am nervous to see the whole list once we expand in the 1960's. I think I am preferring a one/generation or forever idea. It would cut down on nearly 2/3 of the players or better, which is probably good. In the end, I still intend to make sure there is a replacement draft player good enough in the top 5 for each player that is removed. Perfect opportunity to see how good Brien Taylor would become =) What about a tiered type suggestion. Each team gets a type A B C D E. Could be based on WAR. So we still get a handful of nice HOMETOWN players. Type A costs your first, Type B your 2nd. ETC. So its still a fun unique process but it allows for tankers to also get top talent. |
|
