Not a bad sim, all things considered. I got no production from my 1B tandem I improvised to replace Jeon, but I still gained two games on Nate, including winning 4 of 6 from him (including a sweep at the Scorpion Pit!).
Aguinaldo hit even better in July than he did in June, but couldn't repeat as Player of the Month. He's at .408 now, and gaining plate appearances like mad now that he's hitting lead off. As are the rest of the usual suspects, Peppers and Shunk. Gary Giles continues to plead his case for playing time by hitting the tying and winning home runs in the last game of the sim against Walla Walla.
Even my pitching is decent, and I don't think I need to release any starters this sim, which is a good thing.
So, keep up the good work, Zev. By the time Jeon returns I should have caught up to Nate, and then it's a one month battle royale for the Zotti League crown.
I honestly don't understand how you're closing ground, Michael. I really don't. But, it's turned into a 54-game sprint to the finish and your team is close enough with few enough games that anything can happen.
Personally, I'm still struggling with understanding how my team can be 87-21. I mean, I liked my team a lot coming into the season, but that record is just silly. The only players that can even remotely be described as having down years are CF Sean Arant and MR Willie Sewell. Everyone else is playing at or above my preseason expectations. I mean, SP Chad Nelligan is 21-0 with a 1.78 ERA for heck's sake. That's absurd. The 2011 Monarchs are apparently what happens when you start with a good team and then everyone plays well. It's ridiculous.
Of course, by pointing this out, I've doomed my team to a rash of serious injuries, an embarrassing face plant in the Cecil Cup, or (more likely) both.
But hey, I'm a Seattle sports fan. I'm used to that kind of suffering. See 2001 Mariners or 2005-06 Seahawks for recent examples.
It also doesn't hurt that I've done some serious improvement to my offense this year, picking up Gerhardt, Aguinaldo, and Shunk to complement Jeon and Peppers.
Sure, my pitching sucks, especially in comparison to you and Nate, but I'm happy with the way I'm winning the close games. The back of my bullpen is as good as any (Augustin/Cowherd/Cuomo), and I just need my starters to keep it somewhat close until the late innings.
Anyway, I'm still on target for 100+ wins, and I have a stable of good solid players on the right side of 30, so perhaps I won't need to start the rebuilding process this offseason, as I thought I would.
For your sake, you had better hope that Nate outlasts me, because we know what happens when Seattle faces my franchise in the Cup, don't we?
You know Michael, we actually haven't met that often in the Cup, despite the fact that we've both been there five times. We have only met twice - one sweep by you and one seven-game war you won (although I outscored you for the series as a whole). And, we went into both series with identical Pythagorean records, so it's not like our teams had vastly different skill levels. You clearly won those meetings, and I'm not disputing that but I'm willing to roll the dice on another meeting, should it come to that.
Heck, I lost to Nate the first time I played the Riverdancers, so it apparently just takes the Monarchs some time to warm up. Our advance scouts must suck.
Again, and this is oddly becoming a trend, I agree with Nate. I'd really like to have more than 2 teams in the playoffs.
Instead of a wild card, I was thinking of a re-alignment into four divisions, so there'd be two division champs in each league. Sure, the divisions would be small, but it might help foster rivalries better if we make them geographical (west/east), or something even more radical than that.
I like the idea of 4 divisions, but I think we would need to add 4 more teams in order to do that. I think divisions of less than 4 teams are just too small.I know it is hard to find new owners so I don't know how easy this is to do. But id would make things more interesting for the regular season.
It would be best to have a 16-team league, but it was a really hard process to expand from the original 8 to 12, as some of the expansion franchises are still struggling to make it.
Seattle, River Cities (né Virginia), Houston, Saskatoon, Brooklyn, Los Angeles (Stockholm), Danville (California), and Walla Walla are the original franchises.
While it's partially due to ownership issues that have prevented Denver, Hickory, Covington, and (to a lesser extent, New York) from being competitive, it more had to do with the dire talent levels, even after an expansion draft.
Perhaps we could expand to 16 teams, but I think finding prospective owners for those spots is going to be difficult. Perhaps if we upgraded the league to OOTP 8 that might be feasible (so we don't have to convince people to buy 4-year old software), but we'll see.
Four divisions of three teams isn't ideal, but I like that more than two divisions of six teams. If I were to split up the divisions, I'd try to do it geographically:
Adams East: Brooklyn, Houston, Denver (I believe Michael, Denver's owner, lives in Maryland) Adams West: Seattle, Saskatoon, Hickory Zotti East: River Cities, New York, Covington/Cleveland Zotti West: Los Angeles, Walla Walla, Danville
This suggestion would have the top 4 teams in different divisions (of course, fortunes change season by season). Of course, due to the large talent gulf in the league, all four division leaders would be safely in front (I'd be slightly worried, only 12 games in ZW ahead of Walla Walla), but that's still an improvement over now, as there are only three teams with a legitimate chance to win the Cecil Cup this season. Well, two, really, since we're talking about River Cities as one of the three... sorry Nate. :P
I don't expect this to actually come to pass, but I do wish we had more playoff teams, no matter how self-serving it seems to sound.
Not a bad sim, all things considered. I got no production from my 1B tandem I improvised to replace Jeon, but I still gained two games on Nate, including winning 4 of 6 from him (including a sweep at the Scorpion Pit!).
ReplyDeleteAguinaldo hit even better in July than he did in June, but couldn't repeat as Player of the Month. He's at .408 now, and gaining plate appearances like mad now that he's hitting lead off. As are the rest of the usual suspects, Peppers and Shunk. Gary Giles continues to plead his case for playing time by hitting the tying and winning home runs in the last game of the sim against Walla Walla.
Even my pitching is decent, and I don't think I need to release any starters this sim, which is a good thing.
So, keep up the good work, Zev. By the time Jeon returns I should have caught up to Nate, and then it's a one month battle royale for the Zotti League crown.
I honestly don't understand how you're closing ground, Michael. I really don't. But, it's turned into a 54-game sprint to the finish and your team is close enough with few enough games that anything can happen.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'm still struggling with understanding how my team can be 87-21. I mean, I liked my team a lot coming into the season, but that record is just silly. The only players that can even remotely be described as having down years are CF Sean Arant and MR Willie Sewell. Everyone else is playing at or above my preseason expectations. I mean, SP Chad Nelligan is 21-0 with a 1.78 ERA for heck's sake. That's absurd. The 2011 Monarchs are apparently what happens when you start with a good team and then everyone plays well. It's ridiculous.
Of course, by pointing this out, I've doomed my team to a rash of serious injuries, an embarrassing face plant in the Cecil Cup, or (more likely) both.
But hey, I'm a Seattle sports fan. I'm used to that kind of suffering. See 2001 Mariners or 2005-06 Seahawks for recent examples.
Smoke and mirrors, apparently, Mack.
ReplyDeleteIt also doesn't hurt that I've done some serious improvement to my offense this year, picking up Gerhardt, Aguinaldo, and Shunk to complement Jeon and Peppers.
Sure, my pitching sucks, especially in comparison to you and Nate, but I'm happy with the way I'm winning the close games. The back of my bullpen is as good as any (Augustin/Cowherd/Cuomo), and I just need my starters to keep it somewhat close until the late innings.
Anyway, I'm still on target for 100+ wins, and I have a stable of good solid players on the right side of 30, so perhaps I won't need to start the rebuilding process this offseason, as I thought I would.
For your sake, you had better hope that Nate outlasts me, because we know what happens when Seattle faces my franchise in the Cup, don't we?
You know Michael, we actually haven't met that often in the Cup, despite the fact that we've both been there five times. We have only met twice - one sweep by you and one seven-game war you won (although I outscored you for the series as a whole). And, we went into both series with identical Pythagorean records, so it's not like our teams had vastly different skill levels. You clearly won those meetings, and I'm not disputing that but I'm willing to roll the dice on another meeting, should it come to that.
ReplyDeleteHeck, I lost to Nate the first time I played the Riverdancers, so it apparently just takes the Monarchs some time to warm up. Our advance scouts must suck.
Although, I'll say, having races like this is another fine argument for adding a wildcard team to the playoffs.
ReplyDeleteAgain, and this is oddly becoming a trend, I agree with Nate. I'd really like to have more than 2 teams in the playoffs.
ReplyDeleteInstead of a wild card, I was thinking of a re-alignment into four divisions, so there'd be two division champs in each league. Sure, the divisions would be small, but it might help foster rivalries better if we make them geographical (west/east), or something even more radical than that.
What say we all?
I like the idea of 4 divisions, but I think we would need to add 4 more teams in order to do that. I think divisions of less than 4 teams are just too small.I know it is hard to find new owners so I don't know how easy this is to do. But id would make things more interesting for the regular season.
ReplyDeleteIt would be best to have a 16-team league, but it was a really hard process to expand from the original 8 to 12, as some of the expansion franchises are still struggling to make it.
ReplyDeleteSeattle, River Cities (né Virginia), Houston, Saskatoon, Brooklyn, Los Angeles (Stockholm), Danville (California), and Walla Walla are the original franchises.
While it's partially due to ownership issues that have prevented Denver, Hickory, Covington, and (to a lesser extent, New York) from being competitive, it more had to do with the dire talent levels, even after an expansion draft.
Perhaps we could expand to 16 teams, but I think finding prospective owners for those spots is going to be difficult. Perhaps if we upgraded the league to OOTP 8 that might be feasible (so we don't have to convince people to buy 4-year old software), but we'll see.
Four divisions of three teams isn't ideal, but I like that more than two divisions of six teams. If I were to split up the divisions, I'd try to do it geographically:
Adams East: Brooklyn, Houston, Denver (I believe Michael, Denver's owner, lives in Maryland)
Adams West: Seattle, Saskatoon, Hickory
Zotti East: River Cities, New York, Covington/Cleveland
Zotti West: Los Angeles, Walla Walla, Danville
This suggestion would have the top 4 teams in different divisions (of course, fortunes change season by season). Of course, due to the large talent gulf in the league, all four division leaders would be safely in front (I'd be slightly worried, only 12 games in ZW ahead of Walla Walla), but that's still an improvement over now, as there are only three teams with a legitimate chance to win the Cecil Cup this season. Well, two, really, since we're talking about River Cities as one of the three... sorry Nate. :P
I don't expect this to actually come to pass, but I do wish we had more playoff teams, no matter how self-serving it seems to sound.