Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:00 am
by Mets
It's hard for any of us to really have a good opinion on this because none of us are "casual fans". We play in a friggin simulation baseball league that's 365 a year. Not fantasy, but simulation. Try explaining that to the casuial fan.
Point is, I think we're too deep to even be arguing this point.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:20 am
by Yankees
Mets wrote:It's hard for any of us to really have a good opinion on this because none of us are "casual fans". We play in a friggin simulation baseball league that's 365 a year. Not fantasy, but simulation. Try explaining that to the casuial fan.
I try to explain this league to my friends on a near daily basis. Hasn't worked yet, but haven't stopped from trying...
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:35 pm
by Astros
Nationals wrote:Mets wrote:It's hard for any of us to really have a good opinion on this because none of us are "casual fans". We play in a friggin simulation baseball league that's 365 a year. Not fantasy, but simulation. Try explaining that to the casuial fan.
I try to explain this league to my friends on a near daily basis. Hasn't worked yet, but haven't stopped from trying...
When me and Gabe went to St. Louis for a game in 2008, we spent half the ride out there trying to explain the IBC to our friend and I don't think he was understanding even after all that
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:50 pm
by Nationals
Cardinals wrote:Nationals wrote:Mets wrote:It's hard for any of us to really have a good opinion on this because none of us are "casual fans". We play in a friggin simulation baseball league that's 365 a year. Not fantasy, but simulation. Try explaining that to the casuial fan.
I try to explain this league to my friends on a near daily basis. Hasn't worked yet, but haven't stopped from trying...
When me and Gabe went to St. Louis for a game in 2008, we spent half the ride out there trying to explain the IBC to our friend and I don't think he was understanding even after all that
Yep. Ever since I tried explaining this league to my friends, I've gotten more shit for doing this hyper-detached sports sim than I have for playing World of Warcraft.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:23 pm
by Giants
Yeah, I gave up, I just call it a fantasy league now.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:48 pm
by Twins
Athletics wrote:Yeah, I gave up, I just call it a fantasy league now.
Ditto.
Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:58 pm
by Yankees
My friends play fantasy sports. Then they often ask what's the scoring system...so now I just say, "It's a game simulated keeper fantasy league" and offer no corresponding explanation. That always throws them...
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:13 pm
by Royals
The best explanation I've found is to compare it to something like a big All-Star Baseball 2### league except almost none of the players are on the original teams. ASB and other similar games use projections so it's an easier jumping of point than fantasy baseball, which immediately gets people thinking about points and following along the real baseball season.
I suppose it helps that Nils and I were playing a lot of ASB when we first started the league too.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:50 pm
by Cardinals
I don't even bring it up, unless it's to somebody who might care and be interested eventually (Levine)
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:02 pm
by Angels
My interest in SIM BB and my heavy metal vomit music doesn't even register into the brains of pretty much every one I know. I don't even try to explain these passions of mine, I just answer any questions they may have until they lose interest in the topic, which is always pretty damn quick.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:08 pm
by Royals
It comes up from time to time, my friends will ask why the hell I'm spending so much time working in excel and access. Saying it's for a baseball league doesn't quite cut it.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:10 pm
by Mets
I usually tell people that I can explain it, but it'd make their brains explode.
The tough part is, I know some really smart baseball minds who would be great in one of these leagues, but we never get past the algorithm part of the conversation.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:24 pm
by Royals
Mets wrote:I usually tell people that I can explain it, but it'd make their brains explode.
The tough part is, I know some really smart baseball minds who would be great in one of these leagues, but we never get past the algorithm part of the conversation.
Good thing you don't bring up the quantum mechanics bit...
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 3:25 pm
by Royals
This was actually oneof the toughest parts of recruiting for the league, explaining the league to people one on one or when posting an opening on boards.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:55 pm
by Dodgers
You guys think you have a tough job explaining the league? I've cut it down to running the web site for a fantasy baseball league since attempting to explain OOPSS, DMB and IBC all in the same conversation really might blow some minds. For those of you who thought it, yes I have put it on a resume before...and it's actually helped.
Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:13 pm
by Phillies
Padres wrote:This was actually oneof the toughest parts of recruiting for the league, explaining the league to people one on one or when posting an opening on boards.
I had no clue what I was getting in to.
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:03 pm
by Royals
Phillies wrote:Padres wrote:This was actually oneof the toughest parts of recruiting for the league, explaining the league to people one on one or when posting an opening on boards.
I had no clue what I was getting in to.
It was even harder back then, i had no idea what the league was gona be like.
I'm with you Shawn, I've had to explain the projections that I've been working on to a couple people which never goes well.
Oh, and no, I have never put IBC Founder on a resume...
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:30 pm
by Phillies
Since Shawn said that, I am seriously considering putting "2002 IBC Champion" on my resume and see if I can snag Ed Wade's job.
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:11 pm
by Astros
I put Charter Member, International Baseball Confederacy on my application for a couple scholarships in high school
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:19 pm
by Yankees
I'd like to congratulate all the "Old Writers" in the world. In 2010 we will celebrate Andre Dawson, and Andre Dawson only. The man who couldn't get on base as often as Brett Gardner can.
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:46 pm
by Nationals
Nationals wrote:I'd like to congratulate all the "Old Writers" in the world. In 2010 we will celebrate Andre Dawson, and Andre Dawson only. The man who couldn't get on base as often as Brett Gardner can.
I did a double-take when I saw that...nothing against Andre, but he was no better than the fifth-best option on the ballot.
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:50 pm
by Rangers
Nationals wrote:I'd like to congratulate all the "Old Writers" in the world. In 2010 we will celebrate Andre Dawson, and Andre Dawson only. The man who couldn't get on base as often as Brett Gardner can.
Unbelieveable. I voted for, I think, five guys on my SBN ballot, and he wasn't one of them. Would have voted for Larkin and Trammell, just for two, ahead of Dawson too. Baseball writers are horrible.
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 3:43 pm
by Padres
Tigers wrote:Nationals wrote:I'd like to congratulate all the "Old Writers" in the world. In 2010 we will celebrate Andre Dawson, and Andre Dawson only. The man who couldn't get on base as often as Brett Gardner can.
Unbelieveable. I voted for, I think, five guys on my SBN ballot, and he wasn't one of them. Would have voted for Larkin and Trammell, just for two, ahead of Dawson too. Baseball writers are horrible.
Obviously Phil Rogers isn't the only dunderhead baseball writer out there. This is a joke ...