Correct, if there's a guy getting only 5 or 0 minutes and he should be getting more then that would be something that qualifies as "benching"logpmess wrote:I don't think this needs clarification but just so everything is clear. "Benching" is going to be based on minutes not actually starting. Right?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Be my guest and set my lineup this week if you think you can do better.NOLa. wrote:I think you are tanking.
PLEASE DONT BE MAD AND GIVE ME THE COLD SHOULDER AGAIN
Sent via Morse code
Sawlt lifeIamQuailman wrote:Be my guest and set my lineup this week if you think you can do better.NOLa. wrote:I think you are tanking.
PLEASE DONT BE MAD AND GIVE ME THE COLD SHOULDER AGAIN
Sent via Morse code
Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
*hurriedly hides Vlad Rad and Zan Tabak*42PhD wrote:Some people play too many white dudes.
There, I WIGGING said it.
If you want to Generally Manage / Commission by color, you need to be looking at white, not all this red-blue distracting bullshit.
Check my roster, our white dudes play minimally or because of recommended. You guys can fight over how to bucket Arroyo, but I've had inquiries about him, so he's my token honky at best.
Courtesy of you...NOLa. wrote:This thread has quickly turned into a dumpster fire
Sent via Morse code
Care to point out?Inner_GI wrote:Courtesy of you...NOLa. wrote:This thread has quickly turned into a dumpster fire
Sent via Morse code
NOLa. wrote:Care to point out?Inner_GI wrote:Courtesy of you...NOLa. wrote:This thread has quickly turned into a dumpster fire
Sent via Morse code
Sent via Morse code
Was that necessary?NOLa. wrote:I think you are tanking.
PLEASE DONT BE MAD AND GIVE ME THE COLD SHOULDER AGAIN
Sent via Morse code
Did you read the whole first post where he said to tell him?Inner_GI wrote:NOLa. wrote:Care to point out?Inner_GI wrote: Courtesy of you...
Sent via Morse codeWas that necessary?NOLa. wrote:I think you are tanking.
PLEASE DONT BE MAD AND GIVE ME THE COLD SHOULDER AGAIN
Sent via Morse code
DarthVegito wrote:Yay unlocked! Stay out of here trollani!
Ok so I just wanted to point out that going by colors to enforce this rule may not be the way to go. Take a player like Isaiah Rider for example. Very possibly the best offensive player the Magic have. He's yellow/yellow and he's probably better than 90% of green/greens in the league.
Sure judging whether one player is better than another is subjective but that's what your(and council) are there for. Almost nothing can be black and white. I just don't think a player with not a single rating over 60(besides FT) should be getting 40 minutes a game on a 5 win team when there are better options....And there ARE better options.
There will always be the case of exceptions being pointed out but when administering overarching rules you have to make blanket statements. Knowing Doug the way we know him, if you can explain why player a is better than player b who's "color" is rated lower then that's fine once you receive the warning. If you can't which will be the case I'd bet 90% of the time, the warning will hold true.DarthVegito wrote:Yay unlocked! Stay out of here trollani!
Ok so I just wanted to point out that going by colors to enforce this rule may not be the way to go. Take a player like Isaiah Rider for example. Very possibly the best offensive player the Magic have. He's yellow/yellow and he's probably better than 90% of green/greens in the league.
Sure judging whether one player is better than another is subjective but that's what your(and council) are there for. Almost nothing can be black and white. I just don't think a player with not a single rating over 60(besides FT) should be getting 40 minutes a game on a 5 win team when there are better options....And there ARE better options.
Yes most definitely agree. The exact case I'm referring to though, it does involve being subjective. People are being sneaky and moving players to different positions where they shouldn't be in order to justify playing an inferior player starter minutes. I'm not trying to undermine either, trust me. I just think it's a blatant violation and wanted to bring it to light. These gms are not as naive as they portray themselves.ballsohard wrote:There will always be the case of exceptions being pointed out but when administering overarching rules you have to make blanket statements. Knowing Doug the way we know him, if you can explain why player a is better than player b who's "color" is rated lower then that's fine once you receive the warning. If you can't which will be the case I'd bet 90% of the time, the warning will hold true.DarthVegito wrote:Yay unlocked! Stay out of here trollani!
Ok so I just wanted to point out that going by colors to enforce this rule may not be the way to go. Take a player like Isaiah Rider for example. Very possibly the best offensive player the Magic have. He's yellow/yellow and he's probably better than 90% of green/greens in the league.
Sure judging whether one player is better than another is subjective but that's what your(and council) are there for. Almost nothing can be black and white. I just don't think a player with not a single rating over 60(besides FT) should be getting 40 minutes a game on a 5 win team when there are better options....And there ARE better options.
Can we agree to this ?
Your posts are too smart for me42PhD wrote:While there is bitching about what actions, taken as a whole, constitute tanking as opposed to being bad or stupid (see: Cavaliers), how about someone state what exactly the negative effects are.
If a person puts up an hugely bad, others get an easier pass to playoffs, but it probably all washes out among the competitors.
So is it about groups of people being hugely bad? Those people holding assets while being bad that could be used to help "you" win? (Or someone else)
Is it just less fun for the League?
People may not be able to define something but or point to it (an electron) but they can certainly understand the effects those things have in the world (this screen you are looking at). Conversely, we can make up shit very precisely that does not exist (a unicorn).
So what's the deal? What's the harm?
My personal opinion is you have GM's who simply lose hope, never regain it, and live the dream rather than actually WIGGING play the game. Chasing the draft pick or the star and dreaming is better than having them and still losing (see: Cleveland). If this is not fun, then educate your peers even if it costs you wins, and you may find things turn up.
To avoid mere bitching, I'll post suggestions in a moment.