Any historical league that has made it from 1901 to expansion?

Tekneek · 05-30-2004, 11:44 AM

I've seen a lot of historical leagues, but few seem to have started at 1901 (if any). The posts I have found for some starting at 1901 seem to have collapsed/died/disappeared. Are there any out there that have actually made it from 1901 to expansion, perhaps? Or at least 30 seasons in, perhaps?

I realize to get that far they would probably have had to migrate through the various versions, but there are plenty of other leagues around that have migrated from past versions. I'm looking for historical ones that started in 1901.

rem · 05-30-2004, 01:35 PM

IMO, 1901 leagues are a recent fan. 30 Sim years is a lot, I'm not aware of any leagues which have lasted much longer than 20 years using a conventional sim schedule. MLB Replay is probably your best bet. That league sims a year every two weeks and is up to 1918. A link is in my sig in the Washington Senators section.

Tekneek · 05-30-2004, 01:45 PM

Interesting. I did not think that it would take that long, but I suppose it does. I am in one online league that will probably only finish 1 season and a half before this calendar year ends. Another one seems to average about 5 seasons per calendar year. So, I just was not thinking too clearly about it.

I will be checking out MLB Replay.

It's a shame that these 1901 leagues may not make it. I am interested in seeing a full history unfold with human managers calling all the shots along the way. You can only get so much out of running the teams yourself, or letting the AI manage them.

rem · 05-30-2004, 01:56 PM

I do think MLB Replay will make it, even if it's "cheapend" somewhat by a fast sim pace. IMO, one major shortcomming (although I'm sure that others see it differently) is that they redrafted in 1901.

Tekneek · 05-30-2004, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by remangiii
IMO, one major shortcomming (although I'm sure that others see it differently) is that they redrafted in 1901.

I agree with you.

IatricSB · 05-30-2004, 06:06 PM

20th Century started in 1901 and is now in 1945.

I know of several leagues that started in 1904 a few years ago, but it seems like 1901 leagues are more common now than they were.

rem · 05-30-2004, 06:14 PM

^^^ Cool League.

Bluenoser · 05-30-2004, 06:15 PM

Ok, I'll bite

1. - How does a fast sim pace "cheapen" the league?

2. - How does redrafting become a "major shortcoming"?

rem · 05-30-2004, 07:31 PM

1) MLBR sees a little less than one trade a year because teams aren't really that concerned with winning since they will have another shot the next year. More than usual luck is involved since so much can happen in the last sim. Owners are also more willing to rebulid than they otherwise might be since it's such a quick turnaround.

2) Redrafting is fun for the original owners but it does destroy the historical accuracy of the league for the first 10-15 years or so.

I should state that MLBR is my favorite league and I'm in a few.

Bluenoser · 05-30-2004, 07:53 PM

1. I guess it depends on what kind of accuracy you're looking for then. Going back to 1901 and for quite some time onward, player movement, when it came to trading, was almost non-existent. IMO realism doesn't "cheapen" a historical league. But everyone has their own idea's on that.

2. Hmmm, not sure what to make of this answer. In #1 you said there is hardly no trading and plenty of rebuilding, which is historically accurate. In #2 you're saying the historical accuracy is destroyed. Sorry, but I'm confused here. Which do you prefer, historical accuracy or not?

Anyway, not trying to start a debate here, was just curious as to your reasons for the two statements. Thanks for the explanation.

IatricSB · 05-30-2004, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by remangiii
2) Redrafting is fun for the original owners but it does destroy the historical accuracy of the league for the first 10-15 years or so.

For those that are in favor of Re-drafting, a common argument is that historical accuracy is "destroyed" as soon as the first trade is made or more importantly, when the first rookie draft is run. When the league voted on this, the point was made that leagues are not historically accurate once the season a season is complete, so what's the difference whether season 1 is accurate or not. True, if you don't re-draft more of the players are on their proper team but still the historical argument is gone.

rem · 05-30-2004, 08:13 PM

1) I admitted that "cheapen" wasn't the right word. I suppose what i'm saying is that in an ideal world, I would prefer more of a conventional sim league. However, it’s a catch 21 as a conventional sim league isn’t reasonable to expect with the unconvential sim schedule. However, you can’t reasonably hope to replay a hundred years of baseball so you have to use the accelerated sim schedule. I admit that the rarity of the accelerated sim schedule is enjoyable, as is the ability to sim so many years in a short time period. I just think that in a utopian world that having some of the more conventional aspects of a league would be ideal.

2) If I had been an original

, I would have liked it. I think this qualifies as a more drastic upheaval.

But regardless of all that, it’s still loads of fun.

rem · 05-30-2004, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by IatricSB
For those that are in favor of Re-drafting, a common argument is that historical accuracy is "destroyed" as soon as the first trade is made or more importantly, when the first rookie draft is run. When the league voted on this, the point was made that leagues are not historically accurate once the season a season is complete, so what's the difference whether season 1 is accurate or not. True, if you don't re-draft more of the players are on their proper team but still the historical argument is gone.

Yeah, it's true that the Rookie Draft does greatly distract the historical accuracy.

Ekcut · 06-03-2004, 05:32 PM

The NABL http://www.dagordononline.com/nabl/ started in 1901 and is now in 1924. We sim 1 season every 3 weeks or so (2 weeks of simming, 1 week off season).
Trades are very important...but hten again so is drafting and FA's.
We actually have 2 openings, which is rare because we have very low owner turnover, but we lost a few because of the switch to OOTP6.

05-30-2004, 01:56 PM	#4
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	I do think MLB Replay will make it, even if it's "cheapend" somewhat by a fast sim pace. IMO, one major shortcomming (although I'm sure that others see it differently) is that they redrafted in 1901. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

05-30-2004, 06:06 PM	#6
IatricSB Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: California Posts: 3,493	20th Century started in 1901 and is now in 1945. I know of several leagues that started in 1904 a few years ago, but it seems like 1901 leagues are more common now than they were. __________________ Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body; but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming, "Wow! What a Ride!" Chicago(N) - Boys of Summer Oakland - 20th Century League Bakersfield - Wild Things Brooklyn - QBA Dodge City - NBSL California - ABC Dodger's Senioriest fan on the OOTP Boards

05-30-2004, 06:14 PM	#7
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	^^^ Cool League. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

05-30-2004, 07:31 PM	#9
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	1) MLBR sees a little less than one trade a year because teams aren't really that concerned with winning since they will have another shot the next year. More than usual luck is involved since so much can happen in the last sim. Owners are also more willing to rebulid than they otherwise might be since it's such a quick turnaround. 2) Redrafting is fun for the original owners but it does destroy the historical accuracy of the league for the first 10-15 years or so. I should state that MLBR is my favorite league and I'm in a few. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

05-30-2004, 08:13 PM	#12
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	1) I admitted that "cheapen" wasn't the right word. I suppose what i'm saying is that in an ideal world, I would prefer more of a conventional sim league. However, it’s a catch 21 as a conventional sim league isn’t reasonable to expect with the unconvential sim schedule. However, you can’t reasonably hope to replay a hundred years of baseball so you have to use the accelerated sim schedule. I admit that the rarity of the accelerated sim schedule is enjoyable, as is the ability to sim so many years in a short time period. I just think that in a utopian world that having some of the more conventional aspects of a league would be ideal. 2) If I had been an original , I would have liked it. I think this qualifies as a more drastic upheaval. But regardless of all that, it’s still loads of fun. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

05-30-2004, 11:44 AM	#1
Tekneek Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: GA, USA Posts: 455	Any historical league that has made it from 1901 to expansion? I've seen a lot of historical leagues, but few seem to have started at 1901 (if any). The posts I have found for some starting at 1901 seem to have collapsed/died/disappeared. Are there any out there that have actually made it from 1901 to expansion, perhaps? Or at least 30 seasons in, perhaps? I realize to get that far they would probably have had to migrate through the various versions, but there are plenty of other leagues around that have migrated from past versions. I'm looking for historical ones that started in 1901.

05-30-2004, 01:35 PM	#2
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	IMO, 1901 leagues are a recent fan. 30 Sim years is a lot, I'm not aware of any leagues which have lasted much longer than 20 years using a conventional sim schedule. MLB Replay is probably your best bet. That league sims a year every two weeks and is up to 1918. A link is in my sig in the Washington Senators section. __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

05-30-2004, 01:45 PM	#3
Tekneek Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: GA, USA Posts: 455	Interesting. I did not think that it would take that long, but I suppose it does. I am in one online league that will probably only finish 1 season and a half before this calendar year ends. Another one seems to average about 5 seasons per calendar year. So, I just was not thinking too clearly about it. I will be checking out MLB Replay. It's a shame that these 1901 leagues may not make it. I am interested in seeing a full history unfold with human managers calling all the shots along the way. You can only get so much out of running the teams yourself, or letting the AI manage them.

05-30-2004, 06:15 PM	#8
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 14,487	Ok, I'll bite 1. - How does a fast sim pace "cheapen" the league? 2. - How does redrafting become a "major shortcoming"?

05-30-2004, 07:53 PM	#10
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 14,487	1. I guess it depends on what kind of accuracy you're looking for then. Going back to 1901 and for quite some time onward, player movement, when it came to trading, was almost non-existent. IMO realism doesn't "cheapen" a historical league. But everyone has their own idea's on that. 2. Hmmm, not sure what to make of this answer. In #1 you said there is hardly no trading and plenty of rebuilding, which is historically accurate. In #2 you're saying the historical accuracy is destroyed. Sorry, but I'm confused here. Which do you prefer, historical accuracy or not? Anyway, not trying to start a debate here, was just curious as to your reasons for the two statements. Thanks for the explanation.

06-03-2004, 05:32 PM	#14
Ekcut Minors (Double A) Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 110	The NABL http://www.dagordononline.com/nabl/ started in 1901 and is now in 1924. We sim 1 season every 3 weeks or so (2 weeks of simming, 1 week off season). Trades are very important...but hten again so is drafting and FA's. We actually have 2 openings, which is rare because we have very low owner turnover, but we lost a few because of the switch to OOTP6. __________________ Everyday I break my own personal record for consecutive days without dying.