Everyone is just gonna put quitting regardless
Yes but you are talking about a disproportionate amount of talent being deleted.But we’re also deleting two teams. Shouldn’t that adjust the talent level too?
What do you mean doesn’t matter? You want to delete the talent and then not generate new talent?But doesn't the talent pool not really matter? Let's just say we generated no good IFA/Draft players for 8-10 years... doesn't the level of competition just come down?
Why does it matter? I'm serious. Won't the stats adjust and we will have the same league averages. A .270 hitter might become a .290 hitter.Yes but you are talking about a disproportionate amount of talent being deleted.
What do you mean doesn’t matter? You want to delete the talent and then not generate new talent?
No, because the baseline talent is still the baseline.Why does it matter? I'm serious. Won't the stats adjust and we will have the same league averages. A .270 hitter might become a .290 hitter.
If anything, JV is so skewed to one team-- that is a much worse problem to have talent pool wise. There are 2 teams in all of JV with a winning record!
Deleting Fax and BA's players won't make the SL better, it'll just makes it so those teams are now over .500. But the dearth of talent of those 7 teams compared to the 9 of the NL will still remain. I am positive Wooly got a massive boost from winning the SL year after year in terms of development and finances, something the other 7 won't be able to get back. There are NL teams that had financial stability to purchase IFA just from being able to be competitive, whereas SL teams couldn't because Wooly made half the teams in the conference under .500. Of the teams remaining in the SL, there's 2 who have a chance of being competitive once we realign (Beef, False Bay), the rest will take a year (UK, KAB?) or more (MIA, LR, NDR) to get back to competing. At least grabbing some of the talent allows them flexibility to tank harder or sign a couple FAs and start pushing for it.
If you delete Fax's players you are basically washing away a lot of potential the SL teams should've had in full force were it not for the bad records.
Hence the question mark I put. You could probably put Buffalo in that category too, all of our rotation are going to be in the pen by 2070Kabul is ready to compete if my players stop getting injured
But it’s not nearly as disproportionate
It could create a situation where there's only about 7 teams in the league that have any talent, and now they won't be checked by Halifax's (or BA which as another 5 or so solid guys) players. Buffalo would win 100 games without BA and Fax, should Morin, Santos, and Invalid be deleted too? How about Vegas' rotaiton? A lot of pot and kettle of similar colors coming from Doh here.I think he means that it’s silly to freak out about the talent distribution when we simultaneously have a team that’s winning 140 games
Based on the uneven distribution of talent Fax has.Based on what?
Maybe you’ve done research to this, but it makes more logical sense to remove two teams AND two teams worth of talent versus keeping the same talent level with two less teams.
That’s not the point at all and you know this.lulz at all of this talent could get out of whack talk when one team has the 4 best SPs in the game.
I’m not even talking about distribution. I’m talking about overall talent.I think he means that it’s silly to freak out about the talent distribution when we simultaneously have a team that’s winning 140 games
Ugh I’m going to triple post here, but it’s much more complicated than this when you consider minors. I don’t know how you can say the impact is less with deletion. You are removing a disproportionate amount of talent from the league compared to organizations. Part of the reason so many prospects failed is because his succeeded.The league will self-correct either way. Either with slightly worse classes or slightly better.
IMO, the impact will be less with deletion, since we are also deleting two teams.
Ugh I’m going to triple post here, but it’s much more complicated than this when you consider minors. I don’t know how you can say the impact is less with deletion. You are removing a disproportionate amount of talent from the league compared to organizations. Part of the reason so many prospects failed is because his succeeded.
You are also talking about completely erasing players like Gwilt, Sabertooth, Muli and Karshev. To to mention I don’t know what happens to the stats of players who played for BR/SF/FAX at any point in time. They might just disappear.
It works both ways but with less impact if you keep them. I’m not sure what you think the reverse. If you delete them you lose what, 35% of league talent? If you don’t you have an overage of like 10%.I’m intrigued by the “leveling” of the draft, but I’m envisioning really shitty drafts/IFAs for the next 4-5 years while the league self corrects the talent.
But it has to work both ways. 16 teams are going to instantly get significantly better - top level, depth, and minors.
Deleting Fax and BA's players won't make the SL better, it'll just makes it so those teams are now over .500. But the dearth of talent of those 7 teams compared to the 9 of the NL will still remain. I am positive Wooly got a massive boost from winning the SL year after year in terms of development and finances, something the other 7 won't be able to get back. There are NL teams that had financial stability to purchase IFA just from being able to be competitive, whereas SL teams couldn't because Wooly made half the teams in the conference under .500. Of the teams remaining in the SL, there's 2 who have a chance of being competitive once we realign (Beef, False Bay), the rest will take a year (UK, KAB?) or more (MIA, LR, NDR) to get back to competing. At least grabbing some of the talent allows them flexibility to tank harder or sign a couple FAs and start pushing for it.
If you delete Fax's players you are basically washing away a lot of potential the SL teams should've had in full force were it not for the bad records.