item 9-the "future"

[darrenphiladephia]

When we run out of "future" in about two years, I think we should roll back and start over. I don't think it would be as interesting moving to fictional players. And why not return to 1978? We should go back as early as possible. It is the historical aspect of this league which makes it as engaging as it is.

[Da Commish]

I'd be okay either way. I'd say anywhere from 1969 forward would be okay (start of division play), but my preference would be 1978.

[NYYankees]

I also enjoy the real players, but I would hate to see the present lessened. What I mean is when we get to those last couple of seasons everyone will be in a win now mentality and the young players and prospects will have little to no value to everyone. Considering how long it take some "rookies" to develop guys from say 2004 or 2005 on may never even make it to the big leagues. I would favor say playing a couple of seasons fictionally so we can see some more development of these real players. We would still mainly be dealing with real players as most rookies take at least 1-2 years to break in. After that we could re-wind back to 1978. I would say 1978 would be my preference as far as starting points go.

[Pat]

I agree with Darrin almost totally, but would favor a move back to 1969. It would be fantastic to be able to manage Willie Mays, Roberto Clemente and all of the great players from that era.

[PiratesBill]

Just a 'what-if'...what if we do go back to an earlier time, BUT still keep our current players? We'd have current stars playing alongside all-time greats. I assume the only problem would come from when those existing players rolled around & became available to draft again.
...ok, maybe it won't work.

[NYYankees]

Bill,
I really like that idea, if we went back far enough I think it might be able to work. The real question would be about the teams that would not exist at the rewind time (Rockies, Devil Rays, etc).

[philly]

i don't think we should do that. it would be interesting to do, but i believe we should make an effort to maintain as much historical integrity in this game as possible. mixing players and times might be good for a different start-up league, but not this one. i think we should go back as far as possible, keep the players chronologically accurate, and go from there.

[gerrygeil]

I like Bill's idea, but understand Philly's point of view too. Maybe starting back as early as possible with everything equalized would be interesting too!

[Da Commish]

It would be hard to take players "back" with us, but it could be done. However, it could cause some AI issues if we ever bumped into them again. Each player is assigned a unique ID in the Lahaman database. When they are imported into the game as rookies, they are assigned "ootp" IDs. So I don't think that they would crash the game...but...it would look weird for the Yankees to have a 40-something Roger Clemens, for example, and the Red Sox to have a rookie Clemens in 1984-86.

Also, going back beyond 1977 would cause us to have two owners- of Seattle & Toronto- to not get their only franchise. We could still add them in, but they have no history, so they'd be entirely fictional, or we would have to sacrifice two other teams.

[NYYankees]

Mark raises a good point with the Blue Jays and Mariners. With that in mind I think 1978 would be the best time to go back to when we do. At the same time though I am still in favor of going two or three seasons beyond reality before we pull the plug and go back.

[PiratesBill]

My biggest concern is what the yankees have mentioned...about a 'win now' mentality at the end of our final season. How about this for another 'what if':

How about we start back at whatever year (say 1977) & we each get 10 or so (to make it easier on Mark) fictional players that have the same Ratings as players than we had on our squad when time ran out.
In othert words, if I'm developing a 2007 SP Prospect with a 8-7-9 rating, I get a fictional player on my 1977 team created with a 8-7-9 rating, with the same age as my prospect.

This would create a certain degree of continuity between your existing team & your new team. My biggest concern is the thought of Mark having to manually create 300 players. Maybe we carry-over 5? Thoughts??

[NYYankees]

Bill, I think that is a great idea as well. I am not sure on the feasibility of 10 guys, but 5 sounds reasonable.

[ChicagoCubs]

I think that we should keep going until the season of 2010 or so, and then just start back at the 1978 season, so the Blue Jays and Mariners would have their teams already set. Also, i like keeping the 5 or 10 fictional players as prospects when we go back, i am also not sure if that is feasable

[Athletics]

admin said:

Also, going back beyond 1977 would cause us to have two owners- of Seattle & Toronto- to not get their only franchise. We could still add them in, but they have no history, so they'd be entirely fictional, or we would have to sacrifice two other teams.

Are we sure that the owners of the Blue Jays and Mariners care that they get those teams if/when the league restarts? I own Oakland, but am a lifelong Phillies fan. If the Phils had been available when I joined this league, I'd own them now. As a matter of fact, that's who I'd perfer to run if we restarted. Actually, the only fair way to restart this league might be a mandatory shuffling of owners. Would it really be fair or fun to simply play "It's a Wonderful Life" with your team?

[Da Commish]

I'm willing to do that. I'm sure there would be a fair amount of teams that would interest me. And it's a good point that maybe those two owners would not want their clubs. Have not heard their opinions...