Author Topic: 2108 Season Thread (Read 4939 times)

Huckleberry · « **on:** May 21, 2017, 09:40:55 PM »

This is the thread for all discussion for the 2108 season, our league's ninth. This first post will be updated throughout the season and will also include links to other threads or amendment votes that come up during this time.

Sim to 10/23/2108 is complete. Next sim is Wednesday 7/5. THE NEXT SIM WILL BE THROUGH THE CONCLUSION OF THE WBA CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES AND TO THE FIRST DAY OF THE OFFSEASON. We are on the Sunday-Thursday sim schedule.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #1 on:** June 27, 2017, 08:40:38 PM »

Playoffs will begin shortly, however there is a three way tie for the final wild card spot in the IBL. Karachi and Seoul are scheduled for a game, Mumbai is not. I am unsure if this means that Mumbai is playing the winner or if they are out in the cold.

Bob_Meteors · « **Reply #2 on:** June 27, 2017, 09:35:40 PM »

Mumbai is out. I have no idea why but if you look in pennant chase, they have a 0.0% chance and the other teams have about 50% each.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #3 on:** June 27, 2017, 10:45:42 PM »

Quote from: Bob_Meteors on June 27, 2017, 09:35:40 PM

Mumbai is out. I have no idea why but if you look in pennant chase, they have a 0.0% chance and the other teams have about 50% each.

That may be correct but I'm not 100% sure. It's possible the pennant chase screen only calculates based on currently scheduled games while the software will schedule another game based on the first result. My hunch is that's the case, though (Mumbai drawing the short straw).

Huckleberry · « **Reply #4 on:** June 28, 2017, 08:22:06 PM »

Turned out to be correct. Mumbai was hosed and was not involved in the tiebreaker. Karachi beat Seoul to advance.

APMP · « **Reply #5 on:** June 28, 2017, 10:43:36 PM »

Quote from: Huckleberry on June 28, 2017, 08:22:06 PM

Turned out to be correct. Mumbai was hosed and was not involved in the tiebreaker. Karachi beat Seoul to advance.

BOOOOOOOO. Anybody know what the tiebreaker criteria was? Searched but couldn't find anything in the OOTP forums.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #6 on:** June 28, 2017, 10:50:22 PM »

I couldn't either. I think it might be random but I'll keep checking.

APMP · « **Reply #7 on:** June 29, 2017, 06:53:57 AM »

That's horribad...C'mon OOTP it's an easy fix.

At least I'll draft before Karachi and Seoul. Right?

Coop · « **Reply #8 on:** June 29, 2017, 07:03:01 AM »

I agree with you, APMP. It's a shame you're not getting the same chance to get into the playoffs as the two teams that had the same record as you.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #9 on:** June 29, 2017, 07:18:18 AM »

Yes, I've found complaints on the OOTP board that it's not handled correctly but it still isn't fixed. It's worth looking into changing the rules for the WBA that we set up tiebreaker games if there's an odd number of teams for a spot.

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/59527184/playoff-tiebreaker-rules/

I think our rules don't have to be quite as complicated as MLB (especially that one about looking at the last half of intraleague games), but something similar could be done.

APMP · « **Reply #10 on:** June 29, 2017, 09:57:47 AM »

Quote from: Huckleberry on June 29, 2017, 07:18:18 AM

Yes, I've found complaints on the OOTP board that it's not handled correctly but it still isn't fixed. It's worth looking into changing the rules for the WBA that we set up tiebreaker games if there's an odd number of teams for a spot.

http://m.mlb.com/news/article/59527184/playoff-tiebreaker-rules/

I think our rules don't have to be quite as complicated as MLB (especially that one about looking at the last half of intraleague games), but something similar could be done.

I would obviously be in favor

Echo127 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 29, 2017, 02:10:45 PM »

Oops, sorry for leaving all my 40-man players on the roster. Thought I didn't have to adjust anything until my playoff series began.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #12 on:** June 29, 2017, 09:41:40 PM »

Awards voting is now open in the utilities. Everyone can follow their own thoughts on this, but be careful on your Rookie of the Year ballot. In the ABL this year, for example, there are multiple players who appear to be the best candidates if you just look at the stats but they are long time IBL veterans.

CaseyBlakeDeWitt · « **Reply #13 on:** July 03, 2017, 10:20:36 AM »

Hey Huck,
Gerardo Tamayo mysteriously disappeared from my organization and wound up with Buenos Aires. Think we could move him back?

APMP · « **Reply #14 on:** July 03, 2017, 10:50:04 AM »

Quote from: CaseyBlakeDeWitt on July 03, 2017, 10:20:36 AM

Hey Huck,
Gerardo Tamayo mysteriously disappeared from my organization and wound up with Buenos Aires. Think we could move him back?

Lol some fishy stuff going on over in the Latin American division.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #15 on:** July 03, 2017, 10:54:58 AM »

Ha, this has happened a couple of times. He's actually in Rio's organization and I will try, again, to remember to move him back tonight.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #16 on:** July 03, 2017, 08:05:42 PM »

Okay, moved him back.

APMP · « **Reply #17 on:** July 09, 2017, 09:28:44 PM »

Quote from: APMP on June 29, 2017, 06:53:57 AM

That's horribad...C'mon OOTP it's an easy fix.

At least I'll draft before Karachi and Seoul. Right?

Yet another bug rears its head in OOTP. I draft after Seoul...probably because they lost the playoff game and therefore have one more loss than me.

Huck, can you edit the draft order manually to fix?

Huckleberry · « **Reply #18 on:** July 10, 2017, 06:58:20 AM »

Actually, that is correct. You technically finished third in the Asian Division with a better record than Seoul. Once OOTP locked you out of the playoff you were then basically locked into third place in the division.

Seoul had a chance at the playoffs but by losing they finished 4th. Accordingly you got the revenue based on finishing third in the division.

APMP · « **Reply #19 on:** July 10, 2017, 11:10:10 AM »

Quote from: Huckleberry on July 10, 2017, 06:58:20 AM

Actually, that is correct. You technically finished third in the Asian Division with a better record than Seoul. Once OOTP locked you out of the playoff you were then basically locked into third place in the division.

Seoul had a chance at the playoffs but by losing they finished 4th. Accordingly you got the revenue based on finishing third in the division.

So Mumbai got more revenue than a playoff team and draft after a playoff team even though they were robbed of their playoff shot. And Seoul got the playoff shot but higher pick than me after losing the playoff game.

I don't think the revenue difference is huge and I'd rather take the higher pick in each round, but I'm not sure what's fair and what's proper per our constitution.

Any other WBA owners have any thoughts?

Huckleberry · « **Reply #20 on:** July 10, 2017, 11:12:41 AM »

Well technically the first part is not true. Seoul was not a playoff team, they simply got to play in the tiebreaker game which is considered a regular season game.

I agree that I'd rather have the draft position than the $1.5M (I think that's the difference).

Bottom line is that we should probably add something to the rules that allows for better handling of tiebreakers in the WBA because OOTP does not do it correctly.

claphamsa · « **Reply #21 on:** July 10, 2017, 12:21:04 PM »

where do we see all this info?

Huckleberry · « **Reply #22 on:** July 10, 2017, 12:21:30 PM »

Which info? Draft order?

Bob_Meteors · « **Reply #23 on:** July 10, 2017, 12:34:28 PM »

I agree with Mumbai, doesn't seem fair that some bug made them not able to play in the tiebreaker and lose the higher draft pick because of it.

Huckleberry · « **Reply #24 on:** July 10, 2017, 12:48:08 PM »

It was a three-way tie and they draft before Karachi and after Seoul. Right now the WBA rules say that draft order is determined in-game by the OOTP software.

From Seoul's perspective they would, at this point, rather have not played in the game if they are now moved to drafting after Mumbai. If that change were forced, they would have received less revenue than Mumbai and now also draft after them.

APMP · « **Reply #25 on:** July 10, 2017, 03:56:57 PM »

Quote from: Huckleberry on July 10, 2017, 12:48:08 PM

It was a three-way tie and they draft before Karachi and after Seoul. Right now the WBA rules say that draft order is determined in-game by the OOTP software.

From Seoul's perspective they would, at this point, rather have not played in the game if they are now moved to drafting after Mumbai. If that change were forced, they would have received less revenue than Mumbai and now also draft after them.

Right, I agree that at this point, Seoul would not have played the game. What I was meaning to say is that, in my opinion, the higher draft pick in every single round is far more preferable to the marginally higher revenue (which by my estimations is less than $3 million). Of course if that's what the constitution says, then that's how it is.

(Showing my work--I would definitely want the better pick in each round of the draft rather than the higher revenue for 3rd place instead of 4th place: I think the constitution has the payout difference between 3rd and 4th as $1.5 million. The remaining formulas are ALMOST a wash since we have the same number of wins...I think there might be a slight difference on local media payout because they look at standings finish and maybe team strength which uses Pythagorean winning percentage?)

Not trying to stir up too much controversy, and I think Huck has already started a separate tiebreaker thread. Just venting a bit and seeing what other owners think

Huckleberry · « **Reply #26 on:** July 10, 2017, 04:02:16 PM »

You should offer Seoul $1.5M to swap picks in the first 5 rounds and see what he says.

He's actually relatively hard up money wise.

User Info

Who's Online

Search

Author Topic: 2108 Season Thread (Read 4939 times)

Latest OOTP News