Lifetime Standings

stargells star · Post by **stargells star** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 4:35 am

Greg,

I noticed that list is compiled of only those who have participated in '04 and '05 , what about those who haven't been in this since it's inception? How would they get on this list?

Terry H · Post by **Terry H** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 6:41 am

In some cases I've noticed that a manager and co-manager have two ranking positions (ie. 5&6), where as they represent only one team.

stargells star · Post by **stargells star** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 8:48 am

with that in mind,it seems that the lifetime standings is not a good reprensitation of it's namesake, i would think that those who played last year should be in there as well

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 9:03 am

The lifetime standings make for nice conversation but that is about it. And that is coming from the person who is #24 on the list.

Of more interest would be a all-time money list. And in that list, I would only include the manager and not the co-manager. You can't attribute $200,000 to a overall winner who had a 2-man management team.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Mar 12, 2006 10:53 am

Originally posted by stargells star:

Greg,

I noticed that list is compiled of only those who have participated in '04 and '05 , what about those who haven't been in this since it's inception? How would they get on this list? Yes, we'll update that list this year with two-year players who started with us in 2005. My goal is to have asterisks for the number of years people have been in so that it has more meaning. I also want to eliminate the double listings for co-managers. Actually, it's okay to list them, but it throws off the numbering of that list and I'll have STATS fix that soon.

The list will have relevence each passing year and you'll be able to note players who have been in it from the start from those who have been in it for two years. This is still a work in progress, but we'll get it right soon.