|
Post by Commish_Ron on Mar 15, 2018 15:02:19 GMT -5
Finally, I want to repeat, I am asking people to give it a shot for one season. There is nothing in here that will have a major impact on the league after one season. If it is not a popular program, no worries, we'll kill it and move on. I have to disagree with this last statement. Changing a players attributes/personality can have a huge impact on the game and based on the point system could happen over just one year. Again I can't stress enough how opposed to this I am. Just to be sure I understand you correctly. Your contention is that within any organization, the possibility of raising Intelligence by one level twice, or any other attribute once, on a single player will have a huge impact. Is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by Wilson_DodgersGM on Mar 15, 2018 15:16:34 GMT -5
I have to disagree with this last statement. Changing a players attributes/personality can have a huge impact on the game and based on the point system could happen over just one year. Again I can't stress enough how opposed to this I am. Just to be sure I understand you correctly. Your contention is that within any organization, the possibility of raising Intelligence by one level twice, or any other attribute once, on a single player will have a huge impact. Is that correct? When I scout players, my custom views always include work ethic and intelligence. I can tell you for sure that if I were deciding on a player to sign or trade for, that a single upgrade to intelligence would have some tangible effect on my decision. In fact if I were negotiating with a team and I was going to receive a young pitching prospect with a high ceiling and high risk with low intelligence, I might try to get the GM to upgrade his intelligence or I wouldn't do the deal. I don't like the fact that personalities could be commodified like that.
|
|
|
Post by Luc_AZdbacks on Mar 15, 2018 16:14:51 GMT -5
I don't care for this. I'm not at all on board with being able to change the personality types of players, that's not something I support. I also am not in favor of moving franchises but that's not the sticking point that my first objection is. I don't really see a need for this, but more importantly I'm pretty against some of the rewards. First off thanks Ron for putting all the work into this. Agree with almost everything Texas said. I’m not against the idea of a credit program, however I am also definitely against being able to alter player attributes.
|
|
|
Post by Arizona_PBL on Mar 15, 2018 18:09:28 GMT -5
I have to disagree with this last statement. Changing a players attributes/personality can have a huge impact on the game and based on the point system could happen over just one year. Again I can't stress enough how opposed to this I am. Just to be sure I understand you correctly. Your contention is that within any organization, the possibility of raising Intelligence by one level twice, or any other attribute once, on a single player will have a huge impact. Is that correct? I don't like the entire system, but I am firmly against changing player attributes and also buying cash for points. The reason i don't like the system in general is that it WILL lead to drama in the league. What happens when team A writes a long well thought out article and get 25 points and team B writes a 2-3 sentence throw away piece. Is Team B also getting 25 points? If team B doesn't then they will throw a fit and if he does get the 25 points then will Team A will get pissed for taking extra time and getting the same reward? The league has a 100% return this season, why are we messing with something that is working extremely well?
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Mar 15, 2018 18:27:08 GMT -5
If people go back and reread my initial post I was very clear that I was hoping to implement a system. try it out for a SINGLE season, and after that season amend as needed or strait up remove it if it was unpopular. I am frankly stunned that it is meeting this amount of resistance given those parameters.
100% retention is great. But it is not the only measure. Export rates are often not great. Players running out of DFA time and forcing me to analyze the players situation and determine the best move is common. The game will not allow me to sim a day if a player in any organization is out of DFA time. I am happy for the retention and genuinely would like to retain every GM in this league. However I do not think it is always competitive. I would like to try something to raise the bar. It seems to me that a program that uplifts and rewards activity is a better approach than one that calls individuals out or relies on punishment.
Does the system I recommended have flaws? Most certainly. The focus on the details and the absolute, immediate rejection of a new idea without giving it a chance disappoint me.
Quote from the initial post: "I ask that we try this for at least a season then next off season it can be removed if it is not popular or modified if certain aspects are not well received."
|
|
|
Post by BlueJaysGM_Fin on Mar 15, 2018 19:59:35 GMT -5
I just have to say, to start, i love this league and the amount of passion that exists. What a great league, filled with great GMs. It is one reason I am down to only one OOTP league. First things first. Ron is a great Commish who has the best interests at heart for anything PBL-related. I trust anything that Ron wants to implement in the PBL, he has thought-out long and hard. In all of my experiences with Ron, he takes his time to respond in well-thought manner. I say this as a reminder for all of us, and as a statement of fact for anyone here only a few seasons. Ron is a good dude. Which brings me to his idea. Ron was very clear he intended this idea to play out for a season before making a commitment to it, as a league. Consider it a pilot, if you will. Think about that for a moment. Ron isn't saying this is hereby implemented for the rest of eternity. It is a trial run, a pilot, a one season run to collect data and measure the impact across the league. So any fears should be put to rest until we at least try it. Which brings me to.... Don't we all owe ourselves a chance to see if this idea can really ignite the PBL to greater levels? I'll be honest, i don't quite connect to the reasoning of someone stead-fast against an idea they never try, first. Without experience, how do we even know will it/will it not make the PBL better? It's simply an opinion without fact and data. Wouldn't it be a good idea to try it and IF it simply doesn't drive the needle we thought it would, then we put it to bed and move on? For this argument, i point to the implementation of Zevin, the super-agent. Not many liked it at first, but after a few years I think we all agree it did add value to the league for the time it was here. This idea is no different, even if the outcome is. IMHO, we owe it to ourselves to try new measures with the hope it enhances the PBL experience. I say we give it a shot and see where it takes us. If only to say we tried it. Ask Mikey, he liked it.
|
|
|
Post by Arizona_PBL on Mar 15, 2018 20:20:35 GMT -5
Again my primary opposition is the changing of player attributes/traits. As Yoda would say, there is no try when it comes to changing that. Once changed, the player changes, can't really go back.
|
|
|
Post by Luc_AZdbacks on Mar 15, 2018 20:36:00 GMT -5
I just have to say, to start, i love this league and the amount of passion that exists. What a great league, filled with great GMs. It is one reason I am down to only one OOTP league. First things first. Ron is a great Commish who has the best interests at heart for anything PBL-related. I trust anything that Ron wants to implement in the PBL, he has thought-out long and hard. In all of my experiences with Ron, he takes his time to respond in well-thought manner. I say this as a reminder for all of us, and as a statement of fact for anyone here only a few seasons. Ron is a good dude. Which brings me to his idea. Ron was very clear he intended this idea to play out for a season before making a commitment to it, as a league. Consider it a pilot, if you will. Think about that for a moment. Ron isn't saying this is hereby implemented for the rest of eternity. It is a trial run, a pilot, a one season run to collect data and measure the impact across the league. So any fears should be put to rest until we at least try it. Which brings me to.... Don't we all owe ourselves a chance to see if this idea can really ignite the PBL to greater levels? I'll be honest, i don't quite connect to the reasoning of someone stead-fast against an idea they never try, first. Without experience, how do we even know will it/will it not make the PBL better? It's simply an opinion without fact and data. Wouldn't it be a good idea to try it and IF it simply doesn't drive the needle we thought it would, then we put it to bed and move on? For this argument, i point to the implementation of Zevin, the super-agent. Not many liked it at first, but after a few years I think we all agree it did add value to the league for the time it was here. This idea is no different, even if the outcome is. IMHO, we owe it to ourselves to try new measures with the hope it enhances the PBL experience. I say we give it a shot and see where it takes us. If only to say we tried it. Ask Mikey, he liked it. As usual, Fin provides a well-thought out logical response. I completely trust Ron as a GM and Commish, and that he would only implement something like this if he was convinced it would be good for the PBL. There may be things about it that I don't love right now, but I'll plan to try to withhold judgement until seeing what it's like after a season. Increased activity is definitely a good goal to strive for
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Mar 16, 2018 13:40:46 GMT -5
I very much appreciate feedback and above all else I do not want to foster any environment where people do not feel comfortable voicing opposing view points. My approach as a commissioner is to be a servant to the league. Not in any way shape or form a dictator. I am guilty the last couple of days of taking things too personally. I do strive to be above that. If any of my posts or private messages were defensive or snarky I apologize for that. I certainly do not take offense at opposing view points. The immediate rejection of the program and the vitriol in which I perceived them, real or intended, took me by surprise.
More recently I have received some far less emotional, well articulated feedback. I have to say that this is really something I can work with. People obviously have issues with personality attributes changing. Cool, we got a poll up and it is looking like that definitely is the majority opinion. We will remove them. David's take on adding cash to the league could be an issue that requires additional scrutiny. People have concerns about rewarding forum activity and how that may be unfair to those that are not comfortable writing content. All worthwhile conversations.
I will share that this program is not without precedence. I have witnessed something similar run successfully for an extended period of time. I will tell you that, in my experience, player attributes are typically modified on very young prospects to aid development before they really have a chance to solidify into a personality the people come to know. Not sure if that makes a difference or not. I have observed that offering incentive in the form of a reward does inspire content and often times really good content that would not otherwise have been created.
In the end my goal here is to improve on an already great league. PBL will not be an environment of constant change. But I will be consistently open to and striving for reasonable modifications to keep the league fresh and strong.
I do stand by my decision to get a program implemented unilaterally to get something started. As evidenced by the recent conversations I do not think it would be realistic to find common ground across the board for a program such as this. It was important to me to get something started and then let the conversation take us where it would. For those that were unhappy with not having a voice upfront, I apologize but I hope the point has been well made now there will be plenty of time and effort dedicated to hearing all voices and opinions on where we go from here.
There is a struggle to find rewards. Another crucial aspect of a rewards program is to have the rewards be something meaningful. Again, balancing that against them allowing for a severe competitive advantage. I do not think cosmetic changes only will meet that goal. I would love to hear ideas of possible rewards as alternatives.
And finally, if there are those that believe a rewards program is inherently flawed and can only have a negative impact. Be comfortable in the knowledge that if yours is the popular opinion, this program will die after a single season.
Thanks for allowing me a forum to share my thoughts and positions. Long live the PBL.
Ron
|
|
|
Post by Mac_Yankees GM on Mar 17, 2018 8:16:07 GMT -5
There is a struggle to find rewards. Another crucial aspect of a rewards program is to have the rewards be something meaningful. Again, balancing that against them allowing for a severe competitive advantage. I do not think cosmetic changes only will meet that goal. I would love to hear ideas of possible rewards as alternatives.
Here is my suggestion for a possible reward....As a small market GM one of the things that I am frustrated by my minimal impact on, but feel like I should be able to influence more is FAN INTEREST. Export Rate and Posting Articles on the boards are like staying connected with your fan base and advertising and building buzz about your team. This could be reward by a boost in the fan interest which could help a team with attendance/merchandising revenue. I think this type of reward would meet the goal of being something meaningful without effecting players and their ratings.
|
|