Question - How many people would want a winner handed to them?

JAttractive · 07-15-2003, 04:44 PM

Hubertdd1's post had me thinking since I actually brought this up in conversation the other day with a fellow LBA member:

Would you actually want a team in the middle of a dynasty handed to you?

I was joking about giving up my team which seems on the verge of a dynasty but thought in all honesty that no one would want it for just that reason. This other member though believed that most player's would jump at the chance to take it which I found odd. When I was looking for my first online league two of my main requirements (beyond quality, fictional players etc.) was that the league be under two seasons old and that it had a brand new team or a "rebuilder" available (under .500 record).

I guess I don't understand the reasoning behind wanting to take over a winner. I suppose if you just want in to the league anyway possible that is one thing but to actually desire a winning team be handed to you is something I don't understand.

JAttractive · 07-15-2003, 04:52 PM

I suppose I should reword that to say this is something I can't relate to. I understand why some people would want it but it's just not for me.

Hubertdd1 · 07-15-2003, 06:26 PM

I would want a team that is perhaps a .450 team but with 1 - 3 prospects. If there aren't any prospects then it is really a long haul to mediocracy;

JAttractive · 07-15-2003, 06:33 PM

Hmm I suppose if a league doesn't use finances (ie. no free agency) I could definitely see how you could be in for a real long haul there. Losing for a year or two while you rebuild through the draft and free agency is fairly easy though since you can assume a horrible team will have a fairly low payroll as well (or you can get it that way fairly quick as contracts run out).

mpsquid · 07-15-2003, 06:36 PM

I'm now the Royals, Brewers, and Blue Jays. I think a little of everything would be fun if you had enough time. I'd love to give the M's or Astros a run at it sometime, just for fun.

(Note: Yankees omitted for personal reasons.)

kq76 · 07-15-2003, 06:52 PM

I wouldn't want a great team, but I wouldn't want an awful team either. An awful team would probably be too frustrating to bring back and a great team would just be kinda boring and winning the championship wouldn't mean as much.

When I took over the Thunder Bay Lightning of the CBL I think they were a team that was decent, but with a few wrong moves they definitely could have become a disaster. They finished 3rd (out of 4) in the year I took them over late in the season. My 1st full season with them they won the division and early this year, my 2nd season with them, they're in 1st again. However, I got them back on track with basically filling holes with (for the most part) reasonably priced vets who if a lot falter could really kill my team. But if enough stay good and I can restock my system with good young players in the meantime, I think we can be contenders for many years to come. The point of all this is, taking over a team that could have gone one way or the other depending on my moves and then making them a perrenial contender has been very satisfying. I highly doubt that picking a great or awful team would have been as much fun.

A.J. Holz · 07-15-2003, 06:55 PM

One of the leagues I recently joined had a team that was in very good shape, although not the dominant dynasty team like a '20s Yankees club or anything like that. I got the team because it was the available team when I applied for the league.

The first full year I ran the team it was in a hugely heated pennant race with some other great clubs, which was a lot of fun, and we wound up going to the World Series.

Still, I felt a little guilty because of doing well with what was essentially someone else's preparation. I mean, I didn't stand pat, just made a minor acquisition here, a small trade there, but the key players on the team were all there when I inherited the team.

In the long run, I think I would probably feel better about owning the team if it struggled and I made the moves to get it back to the top.

Jeremy Weimer · 07-15-2003, 07:46 PM

I wouldn't mind taking over a winning team in a league but I also have no problem taking over an average or below .500 team. I guess it just all depends on the circumstances and how bad you want in to a league.

View Poll Results: Would you want a winner handed to you?
Yes! Especially if it is a dynasty-level team!	3	9.09%
Yes but not a dynasty. I want it to be a bit challenging.	2	6.06%
I don't want a winner but not a complete pile of trash either .	11	33.33%
The worse off it is the more satisfaction I get in turning it around!	13	39.39%
Doesn't matter one way or the other, I don't care about the present team.	4	12.12%
Voters: 33. You may not vote on this poll

07-15-2003, 04:44 PM	#1
JAttractive All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Posts: 1,135	Question - How many people would want a winner handed to them? Hubertdd1's post had me thinking since I actually brought this up in conversation the other day with a fellow LBA member: Would you actually want a team in the middle of a dynasty handed to you? I was joking about giving up my team which seems on the verge of a dynasty but thought in all honesty that no one would want it for just that reason. This other member though believed that most player's would jump at the chance to take it which I found odd. When I was looking for my first online league two of my main requirements (beyond quality, fictional players etc.) was that the league be under two seasons old and that it had a brand new team or a "rebuilder" available (under .500 record). I guess I don't understand the reasoning behind wanting to take over a winner. I suppose if you just want in to the league anyway possible that is one thing but to actually desire a winning team be handed to you is something I don't understand.

07-15-2003, 06:36 PM	#5
mpsquid Minors (Double A) Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 182	I'm now the Royals, Brewers, and Blue Jays. I think a little of everything would be fun if you had enough time. I'd love to give the M's or Astros a run at it sometime, just for fun. (Note: Yankees omitted for personal reasons.) __________________ DDBL- Point Breeze Salty Dogs HFTC- BrewCrew

07-15-2003, 06:52 PM	#6
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,036	I wouldn't want a great team, but I wouldn't want an awful team either. An awful team would probably be too frustrating to bring back and a great team would just be kinda boring and winning the championship wouldn't mean as much. When I took over the Thunder Bay Lightning of the CBL I think they were a team that was decent, but with a few wrong moves they definitely could have become a disaster. They finished 3rd (out of 4) in the year I took them over late in the season. My 1st full season with them they won the division and early this year, my 2nd season with them, they're in 1st again. However, I got them back on track with basically filling holes with (for the most part) reasonably priced vets who if a lot falter could really kill my team. But if enough stay good and I can restock my system with good young players in the meantime, I think we can be contenders for many years to come. The point of all this is, taking over a team that could have gone one way or the other depending on my moves and then making them a perrenial contender has been very satisfying. I highly doubt that picking a great or awful team would have been as much fun. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080) Last edited by kq76; 07-15-2003 at 07:15 PM.

07-15-2003, 06:55 PM	#7
A.J. Holz All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 650	One of the leagues I recently joined had a team that was in very good shape, although not the dominant dynasty team like a '20s Yankees club or anything like that. I got the team because it was the available team when I applied for the league. The first full year I ran the team it was in a hugely heated pennant race with some other great clubs, which was a lot of fun, and we wound up going to the World Series. Still, I felt a little guilty because of doing well with what was essentially someone else's preparation. I mean, I didn't stand pat, just made a minor acquisition here, a small trade there, but the key players on the team were all there when I inherited the team. In the long run, I think I would probably feel better about owning the team if it struggled and I made the moves to get it back to the top. __________________ NABA - Tijuana Toros / Commish ORB - Oakland Athletics (former owner) MBBA - Seattle Storm JOBL - Grand Forks Varmints (former owner) FIBB - Chicago Fire TMBU - Tulsa Tomcats (former owner) ACL - Oakland A's (former owner) ACB - Rockville Superbas

07-15-2003, 04:52 PM	#2
JAttractive All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Posts: 1,135	I suppose I should reword that to say this is something I can't relate to. I understand why some people would want it but it's just not for me.

07-15-2003, 06:26 PM	#3
Hubertdd1 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 194	I would want a team that is perhaps a .450 team but with 1 - 3 prospects. If there aren't any prospects then it is really a long haul to mediocracy;

07-15-2003, 06:33 PM	#4
JAttractive All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Posts: 1,135	Hmm I suppose if a league doesn't use finances (ie. no free agency) I could definitely see how you could be in for a real long haul there. Losing for a year or two while you rebuild through the draft and free agency is fairly easy though since you can assume a horrible team will have a fairly low payroll as well (or you can get it that way fairly quick as contracts run out).

07-15-2003, 07:46 PM	#8
Jeremy Weimer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 3,411	I wouldn't mind taking over a winning team in a league but I also have no problem taking over an average or below .500 team. I guess it just all depends on the circumstances and how bad you want in to a league.