SIM COMPLETE - 1994 - SIM 16

[Clay]

There is a joke in there...but I don't want the BLB to go on hiatus.

Maybe.... but statistically, the Colonials ARE the best team in the Feeder League era. That's not a reach, that's a fact. Not blowing myself, it's just a snap shot of time. Plus, it only matters if you believe in my theory about better teams (W/L) aid in development.

[Pat]

I'm pretty sure that was my theory in the first place, anyways. I used to get shit about playing 30-year-olds in Single-A, still do, but winning helps development.

[Delandis]

Hence my maybe it's Morgantown... but I have proof on my own team... aka the best team in the BLB since I could see the real ratings.

Fixed that for you.

Disclaimer: Just joking, Clay. I don't really think you cheat.....or do I??????

Herrera, Maeda, Woodbury, Morgan, McQueen, and Chavez are all pre-feeder performers. You earned a lot of good 1st round picks from a terrible Virginia squad. However, that doesn't take away from the Herrera trade up and Woodbury trade with Philly. Two of the best transactions of all time.

I guess I just don't think we've had enough data to conclude internationals pan out less often than feeder league top prospects. I've had very different results than what you suggest is the case.

[Clay]

I'm pretty sure that was my theory in the first place, anyways. I used to get shit about playing 30-year-olds in Single-A, still do, but winning helps development.

Not the same theory.... my theory is that it doesn't matter what the minor league teams do as long as the BLB team is winning. I've never had a winning season in the minors.

[Pat]

Not the same theory.... my theory is that it doesn't matter what the minor league teams do as long as the BLB team is winning. I've never had a winning season in the minors.

Oh.

I disagree with said theory.

[Carlos]

Not the same theory.... my theory is that it doesn't matter what the minor league teams do as long as the BLB team is winning. I've never had a winning season in the minors.

Wait...what?

Wouldn't your team be an example of how this couldn't be true? No, really. Seriously, without trying to insult you because you've done a great job landing young talent and turning things around: your team sucked ass for a long while.

How could the guys that helped your team win two Cups be the result of playing in the minor league system of a winning team when your team wasn't winning?

[Clay]

Because my 2nd Round + picks didn't start developing until I got Harcourt, Woodbury, etc... and climbed out of the basement.

[funclown]

There is a joke in there...but I don't want the BLB to go on hiatus.

Good call!

[Carlos]

Because my 2nd Round + picks didn't start developing until I got Harcourt, Woodbury, etc... and climbed out of the basement.

Okay that's very specific. I would argue that your core players are more the result of your success and most of them were already on your roster by the time you had your first .500 season in 1987.

That's a roster of Maeda, Pancho, Morgan and McQueen. And the very next season you acquired Woodbury.

Harcourt, on the other hand, was gone by 1986 when your team finished 16 GB.

I'm not seeing the proof that your theory holds water. You can point to guys you have now such as Hector Chavez and Jerry Daly, but that would just apply to strengthening an already strong roster - and those two men are merely just pieces of the puzzle.

The larger pieces were already around. Which 2nd+ round pieces are you talking about exactly? Or maybe I'm not understanding what you mean.

[Matt]

In my opinion this entire discussion comes down to scout's ability and luck...nothing more...nothing less.

[Pat]

In my opinion this entire discussion comes down to scout's ability and luck...nothing more...nothing less.

Stats are your friend.

[Carlos]

In my opinion this entire discussion comes down to scout's ability and luck...nothing more...nothing less.

Luck plays a good part of it. I agree. Everything could be aligned right, but a magical injury here or there and a sure-thing is a sudden disaster.

I do think Clay has the right of it, though, in studying what kinds of players succeed and don't. It is a computer game and algorithms are at play. Much like I think some guys can spot which 5 rated hitter is better than the other, there's gonna be a way to spot which young talented player is more likely to develop over the other.

Now, luck can counteract the reality, but I'd take percentages over luck any day especially if those percentages are at my favor. You'll strike gold more often than not.

[Matt]

Ok...scout's ability and luck...and throw in a little stats and player traits (intelligence/work ethic).

Then prepare for the ultimate OOTP kick in the balls when your player suddenly just decomposes in the off-season for no reason.

[Pat]

Ok...scout's ability and luck...and throw in a little stats and player traits (intelligence/work ethic).

Then prepare for the ultimate OOTP kick in the balls when your player suddenly just decomposes in the off-season for no reason.

Miguel

Angel

Padilla

[Delandis]

Miguel

Angel

Padilla

Elman Amilakhori.