|
|
Post by Commissioner Erick on Jul 9, 2017 11:36:24 GMT -5
There are still a few things I need to iron out with the league. I need to determine if we're using Slack, and if so what for. Since the league will be slower, the urgency Slack provides isn't as necessary, but it IS beloved. I'd also like an assistant commish, someone who can help with a logo for the league, and someone to help with the draft. Next year, or later this year, I'll look into incorporating StatsLab.
There are a few things I feel are intrinsic to how I want the league to go. Coaches/Scouting/slow sim speed, unbalanced schedules being the most important. I also would love it if the league became writing-centric! However, if rainouts prove to be a disaster, or people want a 20-80 scouting system (anything but 1-100) I can accommodate that. Let me know whatever thoughts you have!
|
|
|
|
Post by NYMets_Nige on Jul 9, 2017 19:51:39 GMT -5
My thoughts - - Slack is great for day to day chat, shooting the breeze and announcements that will ping everyone, like sim run, sim alterations and important notifications. Permanent things like trades, away notices and writing should be on forums but if we have to pick on or other I'd go for forums as Slack is too volatile and things are hard to find after a while. - I could help with monitoring things as I'm around a lot. Statslab is very unstable especially for the draft, Stats+ ( www.ootpdevelopments.com/board/showthread.php?t=272978 ) is the best thing since beer lol. It links into Slack and you can get all sort of player & team stats from it. The draft can be run through it and you can get your scout's view of each player in it, direct on your phone thus speeding up drafts - Really don't like 20-80, much prefer 1-10 or 1-20 |
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner Erick on Jul 9, 2017 22:36:23 GMT -5
Cool! I can look into Stats+!
I like StatsLab as a historical supplement rather than a real-time one.
|
|
|
|
Post by TJbrewers on Jul 11, 2017 18:07:42 GMT -5
I like having to write a comment or two about each move (the big ones atleast)! I also like 20-80 but im fine either way!
|
|
|
|
Post by NYMets_Nige on Jul 12, 2017 5:41:20 GMT -5
NO !!
N0-one likes 20-80 lol 
|
|
|
|
Post by Commissioner Erick on Jul 12, 2017 19:22:36 GMT -5
LOL, I'm cool with 20-80. I'll consider it if there's groundswell.
|
|
|
|
Post by TorontoGM_Joe on Jul 15, 2017 13:25:00 GMT -5
Much prefer 1-10 ratings
|
|
|
|
Post by hmason91 on Jul 15, 2017 15:24:30 GMT -5
Overall/Potential I like 20-80, and the rest I could care less.
|
|
|
|
Post by tampabay_g on Jul 17, 2017 0:13:37 GMT -5
i also like the 20-80 ratings but will live with whatever is decided.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve - Tigers on Jul 17, 2017 15:49:28 GMT -5
smaller number the better. 2-8 would be good. Imposes immersion on GM's to look beyond an easy number that gives you the answer that you should be able to figure out using whatever criteria you use to analyse.
|
|
|
|
Post by cardsgm on Jul 21, 2017 17:08:48 GMT -5
I really like the 20-80 scale .
|
|
