|
|
Post by rookieoftheyear on Mar 23, 2014 6:21:22 GMT
I never knew the round table was a job ? I thought shorty just liked doing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 23, 2014 7:46:01 GMT
Pretty sure that the *author* gets whatever the vote is, which has been - for the most part - a +5 reward.
|
|
shorty
Administrator 
Administrator
Posts: 15,223 
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Mar 23, 2014 16:10:53 GMT
Yeah anyone is welcome to host the Roundtable Article.
|
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 29, 2014 4:08:29 GMT
Yeah anyone is welcome to host the Roundtable Article. Complete and utter mess this time around. If it's ok with everyone, as AG - I'll select someone to host the Roundtable from now on - spread the love around. I'll simply ask someone, and they can write the Qs and put it up. MUST be up prior to the first round sim from this point on. |
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Mar 29, 2014 4:26:49 GMT
Yeah anyone is welcome to host the Roundtable Article. Complete and utter mess this time around. If it's ok with everyone, as AG - I'll select someone to host the Roundtable from now on - spread the love around. I'll simply ask someone, and they can write the Qs and put it up. MUST be up prior to the first round sim from this point on. Not a bad idea. |
|
|
|
Post by getbeard on Mar 29, 2014 4:34:15 GMT
Do the participants receive any reward for the round table?
|
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 29, 2014 7:18:27 GMT
Complete and utter mess this time around. If it's ok with everyone, as AG - I'll select someone to host the Roundtable from now on - spread the love around. I'll simply ask someone, and they can write the Qs and put it up. MUST be up prior to the first round sim from this point on. Not a bad idea. Then we avoid messes like this one, and everyone gets a shot. I'll generate some guidelines as well - as this one was a bit of a mess as far as making it easier for the host (like your instructions when you were running it). Do the participants receive any reward for the round table? Participants do. I believe (?) that it's +2 for everyone in it, and the standard "whatever-the-vote-is" (which is +5 this time around) for the host. That said, this one's a complete mess as to who actually hosted it. It was kinda SRG, kinda me. He came up with the questions, but then waited too long to put it up - so I just said "fuck it" and did all the editing. I guess we'll split that reward. |
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Mar 29, 2014 8:50:52 GMT
Unfortunately the previous offseason articles done by me are on the HASL boards. You got the gist of it tho when you posted the responses. I usually add pictures to mine just to make them interesting, but that was more to add little extra interest aside from colored text. All in all, each author should be allowed to add their own personal touch to it when it's their time to host it.
|
|
|
|
Post by malice on Mar 30, 2014 15:03:15 GMT
Articles are kinda my province as AG, and the Round Table falls under that. After this season's one - it needs a bit of an overhaul.
Here's how it will work from next season:
Towards the end of this season (perhaps during the playoffs), I'll select someone who I think will do a good job. The person doing it won't take part in it, but will gain whatever +s are voted in (it's an editing gig). 6 people to take part, including the two Finalists (4 randomly chosen). If anyone successfully comes of CY, they'll be a part of it too (if there's more than one GM in that category, the highest finisher wins entry). In that situation, 3 participants will be randomly chosen.
From next season, the reward will be +2 per participant, but one GM will get +3 for the best responses (if I'm not taking part, I'll select. If I am, then GMA Pres/VP will choose). That should encourage people to write well, and take their time with their responses.
The article MUST be published prior to the commencement of the new season. During the pre-season is ok, but once the first sim hits - it should be up before that point.
|
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Apr 7, 2014 17:31:46 GMT
Atlantic Division: BOS - B Town, MIA - , NJN - redrum741, ORL - shortyman920, PHI - crazyguy2010, WAS - celticfanMidwest Division: DAL - lottoboundjazz, DEN - coldj3, HOU - Flip, MIN - rookieoftheyear, SAS - gotmelk0490, UTA - gmgreggor, MEM - BrazilianDudeCentral Division: ATL - shard24, CHA - itnas123, CHI - daedalus, CLE - entrapy, DET - wassabi, IND - malice, MIL - thecommish, TOR - tyfreakPacific Division: GSW - chriskamanyourmom, LAC - apokolypz, LAL - getbeard, PHX - walker44688, POR - @hyperyellow, SAC - basenoc, SEA - BoshtrichBurgerLet's a consensus on this before next FA Anyone interested in making a modification to the new camping rules? I'm not a fan of the "28 and over = zero camps at all" rule. I understand that older players should have been prioritized by now, and this is to prevent inflation, but I'll bet most older players still have a camp or points left in them. I'll use myself as an example. Of my 5 starters, 4 are 28 and older, but I kept track of their camping history when HASL was still up, and I know for a fact that Foster, Marion, Tmac, Francis all have something available to them. Francis has points left, TMac has a Physical camp left, Marion has points left, and a camp left I believe, and Foster has a skill camp left. So really, in the interest of prevent inflation, it's (imo ) hurting teams who rely on their older players, and teams who have planned out their spending for these older players. So here's my proposal idea: - Let 28 and older players receive article points. This will have a two-fold effect: 1) It won't inflate the league and allows older players to receive some points. 2) Encourage more article writing, which = more activity. I think we can all agree that the activity here has taken a dip the past two weeks. Other ideas I had were: *Allow 28 and older players to have one camp or *Allow 28 and older to have points available to spend on them. or *Let us choose to either give htem points or put them in one camp. |
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Apr 7, 2014 17:40:06 GMT
I just want some general thoughts on the matter.
|
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Apr 7, 2014 17:42:57 GMT
Also, basenoc, any chance you can start keeping track of the camped players like before? I dk if anyone is doing that right now. |
|
|
|
Post by rookieoftheyear on Apr 7, 2014 21:28:12 GMT
I feel the camp rules are fine but don't have a strong opinion either way. Out of all your proposals I like letting them receive AC's best
|
|
|
|
Post by malice on Apr 8, 2014 1:59:18 GMT
It's tough... because I *know* that the guys I have who are 28+ have been fully camped and had all their limit of +6. That said, perhaps a partial relaxing of the rule. What about if it were a single +2 (from say... GMOTY voting?) could be used on 28+ guys?
|
|
daedalus
Administrator
Co Commish
Posts: 5,582
Staff Member
|
Post by daedalus on Apr 8, 2014 14:32:00 GMT
Tons of abuse can happen with this. I'm fine with how Bundy set it up given we don't have the old HASL list which would tell you which of those players is maxed. So I guess I'm against any new proposals involving 28+ guys.
|
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Apr 9, 2014 0:39:54 GMT
It's tough... because I *know* that the guys I have who are 28+ have been fully camped and had all their limit of +6. That said, perhaps a partial relaxing of the rule. What about if it were a single +2 (from say... GMOTY voting?) could be used on 28+ guys? I'd be happy with any points really. A lot of older players are maxed out, but I think peopel are over estimating that figure. I'll bet a lot of em have at least something left to them. Francis, Marion, McGrady, Foster all have available points on them on my team for example. I'm sure there are other examples as well. |
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Apr 9, 2014 0:49:46 GMT
Tons of abuse can happen with this. I'm fine with how Bundy set it up given we don't have the old HASL list which would tell you which of those players is maxed. So I guess I'm against any new proposals involving 28+ guys. And why is that? A few extra points in older players isn't going to inflate the league. And again, lots of older players had camps available on them so this is hardly a massive risk at all. I'd bet all $3.5k cash that I have (which I have no one to spend on) that more older players have poitns available than those that don't. I also planned my team and their spends accordingly with their camp availability in mind so it's been kind of frustrating for me this entire time knowing that it's out the window. I have players whom I was planning on giving a camp later in their career when they are 32-33, and camping them late in their career is a great way to extend careers. I had shittones of older players in the last league, but they all performed because I pumped camps into them late into their careers. Most of the 28 and older crowd were also out of their rookie contracts when this league started which means that not only are they missing out on potential camps, they also missed the opportunity to get a Mentor and NBA Ready Camp which a lot of relevant players in the league currently have received. I'm not going to post a proposal either way, I doubt enough people will even come on to vote... |
|
