Comments on: 2009 Final Transaction Tally

By: Sot

Sot — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 16:36:21 +0000

2009- $105 i think
2010- $149.99

By: JM

JM — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 15:15:19 +0000

Just curious…what does CBS charge for the league?

By: TillmanUSA

TillmanUSA — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 15:14:17 +0000

I still like the idea of splitting if there is a tie. I’d take the split vs. our tie breaking system after a 162 games. Well, in some cases 163 games.

Just to confirm, the due’s are due on draft day correct? This has always been the case. I have heard rumblings of different.

Anyone up for a draft on the first Sunday in the season?

By: TillmanUSA

TillmanUSA — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 21:03:45 +0000

Im the only team in this league that pays over a $1 a day to be in here, I should get the tie breaking votes…

By: WTNY

WTNY — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:46:56 +0000

You’ve completely lost me here.

“In any proposed split pot scenario the team that would have won the old tie breaker clearly loses out.”

Is this new info here? Of course the team that would’ve won the tie-breaker under the current rules loses out on money. At the same time, the team that lost the tie-breaker under the current rule gains money. I proposed the split pot rule because I don’t see how a team with more at-bats or higher finishes in individual categories deserves a higher finish = more money when both teams scored the same amount of SOT points.

But you know this already, so what was the purpose of commenting?

By: JM

JM — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:12:34 +0000

We currently have a tie breaker system and do not split the pot. In any proposed split pot scenario the team that would have won the old tie breaker clearly loses out.

By: WTNY

WTNY — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 02:50:21 +0000

How would a team finish in 3rd if they have the same amount of points as the team above them in the standings? Isn’t that the scenario here? Teams 2 and 3 finish in a tie, therefore they split the money. What am I missing? There is no 3rd place team, there’s a tie for 2nd between two teams.

By: JM

JM — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 20:33:24 +0000

I was comparing the current and the hypothetical proposed in #7. Under the current rules one team gets the 2nd place money while the other gets the lesser 3rd place money. Changing the rules and splitting the pot would help the team that would have finished in 3rd under the current rules and hurt the team that would have grabbed 2nd.

By: WTNY

WTNY — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 19:31:28 +0000

What are you talking about here – “A split only seems to benefit the team that would have finished one place lower.”

If two teams have the same amount of points, how will one of them finish lower in the standings? Since TRC and EE would’ve tied for 2nd, they both get $557. Am I missing this one?

By: JM

JM — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 15:27:20 +0000

After looking at the winnings from last season, I’m against splitting the pot in the event of a tie as previously suggested in #7. There would be one person that would get screwed in a split pot arrangement. For example, if TRC and EE tied this year TRC would get screwed with $835.50 + $278.50 = $1114.00 split in half $557.00. A split only seems to benefit the team that would have finished one place lower.