[IBL] Hello and Thoughts on Ballot Voting

[Sean Sweda]

Just so everyone is aware, the statutory deadlines for playoff series in the Constitution date back to the original conception of the league where all games were played by MIS (i.e. team with home field plays first two games of series by MIS one week, then opponent plays the games at their park the next week, etc).  IMO the Commissioner shouldn’t feel bound by these artificially long deadlines. Two weeks should be plenty of time to play a series that can’t have any more than 7 games. Furthermore, in the past our regular season schedule has been extended by 4 real time off weeks. Assuming the other proposal passes that changes how IP penalties are accrued we will be able to reduce the number of these off weeks and start the playoffs sooner.

Sean
< via mobile >

> On Mar 22, 2021, at 4:09 PM, D <genny429 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks Rusty, enforcing the individual series deadlines sounds good.  One question:
> 
> If the individual series deadlines are added, they total eleven weeks allotted for the playoffs from the start of the wild card series to the end of the championship. This past IBL season, I believe week 27 was played in or about the last week of October.  Eleven weeks would run through the end of the calendar year. How would the December 15 hard deadline be reconciled with the cumulative eleven-weeks time allotted owners for individual series in the Constitution?
> 
> 
> Thanks, the discussion around the proposal is much appreciated!
> 
> David
> 
>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021, 2:38 PM Mike Monostra <monostram1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thank you Rusty. With that clarification, I fully support the proposed change and hope others do the same.
>> 
>> NJR Mike
>> 
>>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 3:16 PM Russell Peltz <peltz38 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> To (hopefully) clarify:  
>>> 
>>> I intend to start enforcing the playoff deadlines, because I am not happy with the playoffs dragging into the next year.  I may still allow some leeway if there are difficulties finding a time for FTF.  If there aren't any penalties specified in the rules, I guess this just means I'll nag more.
>>> 
>>> But if the ballot item passes and late playoff results can result in a team losing position in the draft due to forces outside of their control, then I will be even more strictly enforcing the deadlines to make sure that doesn't happen.  That includes mandating MIS games if FTF can't be arranged.
>>> 
>>> -Rusty
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:07 AM Russell Peltz <peltz38 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The Constitution has rules for when playoff series results are due, but we haven't strictly enforced them.  If there are consequences for late playoff results, I will make sure to enforce the deadlines.  If someone is not making themselves available to play a playoff series FTF in a timely manner, their opponent will be allowed to play the games by MIS.  The Constitution specifies two weeks to play a five-game Wild Card series and three weeks for all other series, which allows plenty of time to complete them.
>>>> 
>>>> -Rusty
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 9:48 AM Mike Monostra <monostram1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> As someone who has been hurt by repeat 100% injuries, I still don’t think we should change the injury rules. I 100% agree with everything Larry said, owners receive enough benefits in regard to playing time flexibility. I also agree with his thoughts on the suspension proposal.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The one item I was uncertain about was 2021-06. I agree with others that something needed to be done about the playoffs all winter long. After some deliberating, I ultimately voted in favor of the proposal even though I shared similar concerns to David and Brent. It’s hard to predict if it will have the intended effect of speeding up the playoffs or not, I think it needs to be put into practice. If we have to amend it later, than we can certainly do that
>>>>> 
>>>>> NJR Mike
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:20 AM Larry Selleck <lms4th at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I’m voting No on getting to choose when to serve TEST / SUSP because (a) it shouldn’t be a choice and (b) in the MLB, when a player is suspended for testing positive, even if their suspension ends, they are still not allowed to play in the playoffs.  As a side note, because the roll is quite rare, i suspect most players with test / susp don’t end up getting hit with it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In regards to any rule to limit injuries to substantially no more than a player actually had, I’m against as well.  We already get enough benefits by being able to exceed player usage by 33% (or more) than what hey had and we have no requirement to rest our players ... yes, our stud catchers (and any position player) can play 36 games in a row without rest and both ends of a double header. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As a side note, I did play in a league once where injury days were equated to days they were actually injured in MLB (I.e. if a player missed first 3 weeks of the season in MLB, they missed equivalent of first 3 weeks of the sim season).  It made planning easier, but roster construction a bit more of a challenge and end of season a real challenge.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Just my 2 pence,
>>>>>> Larry
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 at 04:14, imap.mail.rcn.net <noel.steere at rcn.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> [As an aside, I am strongly in favor of changes to the injury rules that would mitigate the chances a player suffers substantially more injury days than they did in real life in the prior MLB season. That would be a higher priority for me than softening the blow only of a test/suspension.]
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I’ve been meaning to make a suggestion regarding this:  After a player has served the number of injury days listed on their card, any further injury rolls are treated as if they have 0 injury days.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I’d have to look at the charts, but I believe this limits a player to 18 further injury days on a single roll, and the 2d10 scenarios are less likely as the player’s durability rating increases.  So more durable players still have an advantage, but players who have already served, say, half a season on the IL can play a season that resembles what they actually played.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> > On Mar 17, 2021, at 2:49 PM, D <genny429 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> > 
>>>>>>> > [As an aside, I am strongly in favor of changes to the injury rules that would mitigate the chances a player suffers substantially more injury days than they did in real life in the prior MLB season. That would be a higher priority for me than softening the blow only of a test/suspension.]
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibl.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20210322/280ea38a/attachment.htm>