Commissioners also running teams - your thoughts - Page 4

bigphesta · 09-04-2002, 12:52 PM

Key to running a team and a league is wanting the league to last forever while having a team which you want to see last as long. My reason for starting the NAHHBL was so I could take my Mets from 1980 to beyond with no fear of a commish suddenly falling off the face of the earth (hey, it's happened!)

AND on the subject of one guy doing multiple things... Those Groeing brothers in the CDL ( http://cdl.ootp-leagues.com/ ) - no one ACTUALLY believes that they are two seperate people do they? No two brothers are that dominant... they're one in the same! We're on to you Killebrew!!

Killebrew · 09-04-2002, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bigphesta
AND on the subject of one guy doing multiple things... Those Groening brothers in the CDL ( http://cdl.ootp-leagues.com/ ) - no one ACTUALLY believes that they are two seperate people do they? No two brothers are that dominant... they're one in the same! We're on to you Killebrew!!

Hehe - just letting ya' know I did read this

.

CommishJoe · 09-04-2002, 06:00 PM

I've been running leagues since 1999 and I've been an owner in every one of them. People said the USBL was one of the best High Heat leagues around, and I have been hearing good things about the TLB (especially since only 1 owner has quit in 2 seasons, and we are even expanding). If you want opinions about me as a commish, feel free to come to our message board and ask (a good # of owners from the USBL are still around).

Bottom line, a league is only as good as it's owners. And a commish that cheats will drive all his good owners away. Wanna run a good league? Simple, don't cheat

It has absolutely nothing to do with owning a team in that league.

Another question ... do you think that the championship that I won in 2002 of the TLB mean anything less then the one I just won in the ACL (where I am an owner and not a commish)?

Killebrew · 09-05-2002, 01:52 AM

My take on this is that it's so easy for a "win at all costs" cheater-type guy to commish a league and own a team secretly, that I would actually trust a commish more if he was comfortable commishing while operating a team. To do the massive job of commishing a league (can be 25+ hours depending how much time you have and how many features the league has) and not have a team would raise flags for me. I'd wonder why someone would dedicate that kind of time to live vicariously through others when most online commishes have teams themselves, and I'd also wonder how long a league would remain interesting for a guy to commish when he has no stake in the league.

MannyTrillo · 09-05-2002, 03:01 AM

DiversionX's concerns don't seem to be about cheating, though, and IMO, they are legitimate.

To me, the bottom line is that a commish must take his league more seriously than he takes his takes his team, or there will inevitably be problems... people *will* be more receptive to trade offers from the commish than those from other owners, and many will allow themselves to be badgered into bad deals by the commish- unfortunate, but true. I was in a league once where I emailed another owner about whether or not a particular player was available, and never got a response... a week later, the commish's team got the same guy for a song- to go along with 3 or 4 other HOFers in their primes that he had picked up. I did not, and still do not, believe the commish was cheating, but I do believe he had an unfair advantage by virtue of the fact that he was the commish. I quit, and the league didn't end up lasting very long.

I am currently in 3 leagues where the commissioner does own a team, and in none of those leagues has it been a problem. That is because all of these guys are more concerned with running a good league than building a juggernaut of a team. If one of my commishes put together a team that won 120 games every year, I'd probably lose interest, fast- since there's no question that the commish, even without cheating, does have the chance to take advantage of an unlevel playing field. But, as long the commish understands that the future of the league is more important than the future of his team, it shouldn't be a problem.

Goody · 09-05-2002, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MannyTrillo
DiversionX's concerns don't seem to be about cheating, though, and IMO, they are legitimate.

I agree, Manny.

He's not saying that he doesn't trust himself to cheat, like he's going to go and pull some HornsManiac stunt.

I don't even think that it gives them a tremendous unfair advantage. But I do think that it totally changes the way they look at the league they are commissioner of if they own a team. I ran a few teams in my league between owners to keep things going and I could tell my perceptions changed a lot during that time. I focused my efforts more on those teams and divisions as far as getting to know the players and stats. In my league the owners like to have one impartial person to chat with about things they can't reveal to other owners....like drafts....stats they've noticed...strategies they might use against certain teams. When I'm not following every team in the league with the same impartialty it takes away from the enjoyment for some of the owners.

When I'm not running a team and I'm just the commissioner....I spend equal time perusing stats...thinking about who to write articles about...for every team and division.

The tendecies that go with owning a team and being a commissioner at the same time are unavoidable. I don't think its a cheating issue at all.

Especially since DivX and the former commissioner both agree that he didn't quit that league because of straight-up cheating.

Jestre · 09-05-2002, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Portlander

In my league the owners like to have one impartial person to chat with about things they can't reveal to other owners....like drafts....stats they've noticed...strategies they might use against certain teams. When I'm not following every team in the league with the same impartialty it takes away from the enjoyment for some of the owners.

Once again I don't think this is an issue with everyone. I own a team in my league and still vastly enjoy discussing strategy and tactics with several owners on all those topics. I also have discussed those topics with the commish of the other league I'm in. I just don't feel owning a team is like running the CIA. Its all about having fun, sharing idea's and thoughts are part of that fun.

Goody · 09-05-2002, 07:28 AM

Here's an example of what I meant.

Owner A says to me in Yahoo messenger during a chat before round 1 of an ammy draft..."Wow I really like that rookie pitcher. There's a lot of hitting but he seems to be the only good pitching prospect. I hope nobody notices him..."

He wouldn't be able to do that if I was an owner because he'd be pointing the guy out to me. Other owners might not have scouted the same way...scouting is part of your strategy and you should be rewarded for putting in more work or having a better strategy.

If I was an owner...he has to keep silent about it until after the round. But by then its not as intriguing.

Just my opinion. We talk a lot in yahoo in my league. I've been told more than once by owners that its nice to be able to discuss things with somebody even if I can't share what I think they should do.

Jestre · 09-05-2002, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Portlander
Here's an example of what I meant.

Owner A says to me in Yahoo messenger during a chat before round 1 of an ammy draft..."Wow I really like that rookie pitcher. There's a lot of hitting but he seems to be the only good pitching prospect. I hope nobody notices him..."

He wouldn't be able to do that if I was an owner because he'd be pointing the guy out to me. Other owners might not have scouted the same way...scouting is part of your strategy and you should be rewarded for putting in more work or having a better strategy.

If I was an owner...he has to keep silent about it until after the round. But by then its not as intriguing.

Just my opinion. We talk a lot in yahoo in my league. I've been told more than once by owners that its nice to be able to discuss things with somebody even if I can't share what I think they should do.

That would only apply if you picked before him, I love to talk ammy draft strategy with some of my owners, sure you have to omit names sometimes and just hint at certain strategies but that is part of the fun. Besides most owners have their own thoughts on how to build a winning team and draft players. Unless you are known as the 'Mel Kiper' of your league or the particular owner thinks you are 'smarter' than him (not a common happening) then your draft thoughts shouldn't really affect another owners decisions.

John C · 09-05-2002, 11:53 AM

As usual, I'm chiming in late.

Commissioners as owners...I figured that was a non-issue. My entire experience with leagues is having a commissioner as an owner. Have I been blessed with upstanding individuals who are impartial? I guess, based on some responses to this thread.

Jon Johnson (Metros League creator) ran the first league I was ever in, the MLEB (think Metros and the player set, but using BBPro98). He ran the Giants. I believe he finished third and sixth in his two runs there. He did try to field a winner, but not overly so. When he turned the league over to me, I continued my competitiveness, and it didn't seem to affect the league.

I think this all ties into personal experience with leagues. I couldn't imagine not owning a team in a league I run. I run the Philadelphia Grays in the ABL, who happen to be the most underachieving team in the league (I've even traded for a top-flight CF and I can't get on the right track). I honestly see no problem, as the argument has already been posed that you can leave if a commish cheats.

Peace
John
-The thread killer!

DiversionX · 09-13-2002, 08:35 AM

Just as a final thought, the league I had quit finished another season. The commissioner crushed everyone with a 124-38 record. The team behind him had 101 wins and still finished over 20 games out!!! He had 1 significant injury all year and 2 non day-to-day injuries total (1 was to a minor leaguer) - I didn't even have to scroll the injury page, it fit on one screen! I just find that curious as every other team in the league had quite a few injuries, at least 2 or 3 scrolled pages worth.

I'm still looking for a new league, preferrably one where the commissioner doesn't run a team, although I will consider an extremely active and dedicated league where the owners can voice things in a semi-democratic opinion.

John C · 09-13-2002, 01:05 PM

I hate that some commissioners ruin it for the rest of us.

In my ABL, I run the Grays, one of the best young teams in the league. I simmed out 101 years before I started (as I say every time I bring up the league, but there's actually a point this time). Since I did that, teams were left as is for the 2002 season. I didn't put everyone into a free agent pool, because I felt that would have disrupted the history of the league.

Anyway, I have one of the better young teams in the league, and I made some trades to try to bolster my team. I have a solid team. However, I'm tied for fourth, at .500. Easily, my team is one of the two most underachieving teams in the league. Will I make a run? I don't know. I hope. I want my team to win. Will I cheat to get there? Hell no.

Just wanted to prove that there are some commissioners who will stop at nothing to win, as long as it's done the right way, within the confines of the league.

Oh, and my league is a democracy, although this first season, I've been sticking to the rules (right now, my extension process has been questioned by an owner, but I want to test this set of rules for the first season. It's open for debate in the offseason.)

Peace
John

Goody · 09-13-2002, 01:23 PM

That almost every league in online sim baseball has a commissioner running a team was part of the point I was trying to make. Its become the norm so everyone is cool with it (when the commissioner is good and honest), but is it the best way? I'm in, and know of, great leagues where commissioners run a team and can be trusted not to cheat. That's not the issue, the issue is more why is this the popular way and is it the best way?

DiversionX · 09-13-2002, 01:39 PM

Wow, someone who agrees with me?!?!?! If you find a league out there (other than my pathetic mogul league) that has a team-less commissioner, let me know!!

Cooleyvol · 09-13-2002, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Portlander
That almost every league in online sim baseball has a commissioner running a team was part of the point I was trying to make. Its become the norm so everyone is cool with it (when the commissioner is good and honest), but is it the best way? I'm in, and know of, great leagues where commissioners run a team and can be trusted not to cheat. That's not the issue, the issue is more why is this the popular way and is it the best way?

Is it the best way? I'd say YES for most of the leagues.

If it ain't broke, why fix it?

Jestre · 09-14-2002, 08:23 AM

I'd be hesitant to join a league wherein the Commish didn't own a team. I would think a teamless commish would be much more likely to lose interest and just let the league go or turn it over to someone else that may not be such a great commish... Just my opinion.

MannyTrillo · 09-14-2002, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DiversionX
Wow, someone who agrees with me?!?!?! If you find a league out there (other than my pathetic mogul league) that has a team-less commissioner, let me know!!

Summer of '49 (link in sig) is a great historical league where the commish doesn't run a team, the 1951 season starts Sunday. It's been over 1 full season since we've had an opening, though...

joshuaaaaaa · 02-20-2003, 05:25 PM

Edit: Ignore this...no need to beat a dead horse.

Eckstein 4 Prez · 02-20-2003, 08:41 PM

Even though all the commishes I've had experience with do a great job (and own a team), I think there is something to be said for the points that Manny, Portland, and Diversion are making.

It's not that these commishes will cheat, it's just that there's something to be said for having a commish who doesn't own a team. I'll put it this way: it seems like most of the best leagues out there have commishes who are also owners. All other things being equal, I'd choose to have a commish who doesn't own a team, but then again - all things aren't equal, and I don't think MUCH is lost by having a commish own a team. Just a little - and I don't really think it's fair to ask someone to put in all the hours necessary to commish if they don't get a team. If someone WANTS to do it, kudos to them, but if not.... that's understandable.

So - there you go. My thoughts on the topic. Take it or leave it.

satchel · 02-20-2003, 11:17 PM

I think having an independent Commissioner is the best idea, but in practice it usually doesn’t matter. There are positive and negative aspects to both systems, depending on the individual Commissioner. Every individual wants a different game experience, though many people have similar tastes.

09-04-2002, 06:00 PM	#63
CommishJoe Global Moderator Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 5,238	I've been running leagues since 1999 and I've been an owner in every one of them. People said the USBL was one of the best High Heat leagues around, and I have been hearing good things about the TLB (especially since only 1 owner has quit in 2 seasons, and we are even expanding). If you want opinions about me as a commish, feel free to come to our message board and ask (a good # of owners from the USBL are still around). Bottom line, a league is only as good as it's owners. And a commish that cheats will drive all his good owners away. Wanna run a good league? Simple, don't cheat It has absolutely nothing to do with owning a team in that league. Another question ... do you think that the championship that I won in 2002 of the TLB mean anything less then the one I just won in the ACL (where I am an owner and not a commish)? __________________ Joe Success isn’t owned. It’s leased. And rent is due every day.

09-05-2002, 03:01 AM	#65
MannyTrillo All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 664	DiversionX's concerns don't seem to be about cheating, though, and IMO, they are legitimate. To me, the bottom line is that a commish must take his league more seriously than he takes his takes his team, or there will inevitably be problems... people will be more receptive to trade offers from the commish than those from other owners, and many will allow themselves to be badgered into bad deals by the commish- unfortunate, but true. I was in a league once where I emailed another owner about whether or not a particular player was available, and never got a response... a week later, the commish's team got the same guy for a song- to go along with 3 or 4 other HOFers in their primes that he had picked up. I did not, and still do not, believe the commish was cheating, but I do believe he had an unfair advantage by virtue of the fact that he was the commish. I quit, and the league didn't end up lasting very long. I am currently in 3 leagues where the commissioner does own a team, and in none of those leagues has it been a problem. That is because all of these guys are more concerned with running a good league than building a juggernaut of a team. If one of my commishes put together a team that won 120 games every year, I'd probably lose interest, fast- since there's no question that the commish, even without cheating, does have the chance to take advantage of an unlevel playing field. But, as long the commish understands that the future of the league is more important than the future of his team, it shouldn't be a problem. __________________ Poster emeritus "Not butchery, dining!!" obt sk cmh ct President, A-1 Aces OT Posting Club Click here to join

09-05-2002, 07:28 AM	#68
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	Here's an example of what I meant. Owner A says to me in Yahoo messenger during a chat before round 1 of an ammy draft..."Wow I really like that rookie pitcher. There's a lot of hitting but he seems to be the only good pitching prospect. I hope nobody notices him..." He wouldn't be able to do that if I was an owner because he'd be pointing the guy out to me. Other owners might not have scouted the same way...scouting is part of your strategy and you should be rewarded for putting in more work or having a better strategy. If I was an owner...he has to keep silent about it until after the round. But by then its not as intriguing. Just my opinion. We talk a lot in yahoo in my league. I've been told more than once by owners that its nice to be able to discuss things with somebody even if I can't share what I think they should do. __________________ In the past: Laseron Baseball Association creator. Present: I am Rezulm on PT and OOTP Discord. Future: I wish it was the past.

09-05-2002, 11:53 AM	#70
John C Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Albion, RI Posts: 2,260 Infractions: 1/0 (0)	As usual, I'm chiming in late. Commissioners as owners...I figured that was a non-issue. My entire experience with leagues is having a commissioner as an owner. Have I been blessed with upstanding individuals who are impartial? I guess, based on some responses to this thread. Jon Johnson (Metros League creator) ran the first league I was ever in, the MLEB (think Metros and the player set, but using BBPro98). He ran the Giants. I believe he finished third and sixth in his two runs there. He did try to field a winner, but not overly so. When he turned the league over to me, I continued my competitiveness, and it didn't seem to affect the league. I think this all ties into personal experience with leagues. I couldn't imagine not owning a team in a league I run. I run the Philadelphia Grays in the ABL, who happen to be the most underachieving team in the league (I've even traded for a top-flight CF and I can't get on the right track). I honestly see no problem, as the argument has already been posed that you can leave if a commish cheats. Peace John -The thread killer! __________________ Facebook \| My Videos

09-13-2002, 08:35 AM	#71
DiversionX Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 148	Just as a final thought, the league I had quit finished another season. The commissioner crushed everyone with a 124-38 record. The team behind him had 101 wins and still finished over 20 games out!!! He had 1 significant injury all year and 2 non day-to-day injuries total (1 was to a minor leaguer) - I didn't even have to scroll the injury page, it fit on one screen! I just find that curious as every other team in the league had quite a few injuries, at least 2 or 3 scrolled pages worth. I'm still looking for a new league, preferrably one where the commissioner doesn't run a team, although I will consider an extremely active and dedicated league where the owners can voice things in a semi-democratic opinion. __________________ For the owners, BY the owners - the BIG Baseball League http://www.big-baseball.com ******************************

09-04-2002, 12:52 PM	#61
bigphesta Banned Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Des Moines, Iowa Posts: 1,366	Key to running a team and a league is wanting the league to last forever while having a team which you want to see last as long. My reason for starting the NAHHBL was so I could take my Mets from 1980 to beyond with no fear of a commish suddenly falling off the face of the earth (hey, it's happened!) AND on the subject of one guy doing multiple things... Those Groeing brothers in the CDL ( http://cdl.ootp-leagues.com/ ) - no one ACTUALLY believes that they are two seperate people do they? No two brothers are that dominant... they're one in the same! We're on to you Killebrew!!

09-05-2002, 01:52 AM	#64
Killebrew Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 3,326	My take on this is that it's so easy for a "win at all costs" cheater-type guy to commish a league and own a team secretly, that I would actually trust a commish more if he was comfortable commishing while operating a team. To do the massive job of commishing a league (can be 25+ hours depending how much time you have and how many features the league has) and not have a team would raise flags for me. I'd wonder why someone would dedicate that kind of time to live vicariously through others when most online commishes have teams themselves, and I'd also wonder how long a league would remain interesting for a guy to commish when he has no stake in the league.

09-13-2002, 01:05 PM	#72
John C Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Albion, RI Posts: 2,260 Infractions: 1/0 (0)	I hate that some commissioners ruin it for the rest of us. In my ABL, I run the Grays, one of the best young teams in the league. I simmed out 101 years before I started (as I say every time I bring up the league, but there's actually a point this time). Since I did that, teams were left as is for the 2002 season. I didn't put everyone into a free agent pool, because I felt that would have disrupted the history of the league. Anyway, I have one of the better young teams in the league, and I made some trades to try to bolster my team. I have a solid team. However, I'm tied for fourth, at .500. Easily, my team is one of the two most underachieving teams in the league. Will I make a run? I don't know. I hope. I want my team to win. Will I cheat to get there? Hell no. Just wanted to prove that there are some commissioners who will stop at nothing to win, as long as it's done the right way, within the confines of the league. Oh, and my league is a democracy, although this first season, I've been sticking to the rules (right now, my extension process has been questioned by an owner, but I want to test this set of rules for the first season. It's open for debate in the offseason.) Peace John __________________ Facebook \| My Videos

09-13-2002, 01:23 PM	#73
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	That almost every league in online sim baseball has a commissioner running a team was part of the point I was trying to make. Its become the norm so everyone is cool with it (when the commissioner is good and honest), but is it the best way? I'm in, and know of, great leagues where commissioners run a team and can be trusted not to cheat. That's not the issue, the issue is more why is this the popular way and is it the best way? __________________ In the past: Laseron Baseball Association creator. Present: I am Rezulm on PT and OOTP Discord. Future: I wish it was the past.

09-13-2002, 01:39 PM	#74
DiversionX Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 148	Wow, someone who agrees with me?!?!?! If you find a league out there (other than my pathetic mogul league) that has a team-less commissioner, let me know!! __________________ For the owners, BY the owners - the BIG Baseball League http://www.big-baseball.com ******************************

09-14-2002, 08:23 AM	#76
Jestre All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: North Smithfield,Ri,USA Posts: 612	I'd be hesitant to join a league wherein the Commish didn't own a team. I would think a teamless commish would be much more likely to lose interest and just let the league go or turn it over to someone else that may not be such a great commish... Just my opinion. __________________ My eyes perceive the present, but my roots are imbedded deeply in the grandeur of the past. "Chief Meyers"

02-20-2003, 05:25 PM	#78
joshuaaaaaa All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 633	Edit: Ignore this...no need to beat a dead horse. __________________ Baltimore Monarchs-GUBA Baltimore Orioles-ORB2 "One of the greatest discoveries a man makes, one of his great surprises, is to find he can do what he was afraid he couldn't do." ~Henry Ford ~ Last edited by joshuaaaaaa; 02-20-2003 at 06:22 PM.

02-20-2003, 08:41 PM	#79
Eckstein 4 Prez Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: The OC Posts: 6,347	Even though all the commishes I've had experience with do a great job (and own a team), I think there is something to be said for the points that Manny, Portland, and Diversion are making. It's not that these commishes will cheat, it's just that there's something to be said for having a commish who doesn't own a team. I'll put it this way: it seems like most of the best leagues out there have commishes who are also owners. All other things being equal, I'd choose to have a commish who doesn't own a team, but then again - all things aren't equal, and I don't think MUCH is lost by having a commish own a team. Just a little - and I don't really think it's fair to ask someone to put in all the hours necessary to commish if they don't get a team. If someone WANTS to do it, kudos to them, but if not.... that's understandable. So - there you go. My thoughts on the topic. Take it or leave it. __________________ Looking for an insomnia cure? Check out my dynasty thread, The Dawn of American Professional Base Ball, 1871.

02-20-2003, 11:17 PM	#80
satchel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Ft Smith AR Posts: 2,681	theory I think having an independent Commissioner is the best idea, but in practice it usually doesn’t matter. There are positive and negative aspects to both systems, depending on the individual Commissioner. Every individual wants a different game experience, though many people have similar tastes. __________________ JL Commish NPBL Rhode Island Reds ’33 ’34 ’35 TCBA San Francisco Railbornes ’74 ’76 ’77 ’78 FL New Orleans Black Sox ’56 ’57 ’58 ’59