I saw a thread from about a month ago about the All-Time Greatest Players league. If there is an official update, I have some suggestions that you may keep in
mind, or dismiss as you see fit. But if you dismiss it I want the full offended look/handwave treatment. But I'll settle for a haughty laugh. Anyway.
1. There are some players with long careers that had more than one act. Jesse Orosco was a closer for the Mets and a pretty good one, then switched to setup man, and finally to LOOGY. He is rated on the disk as a LOOGY. It would be nice if Mr. Orosco was rated twice: one as the closer/setup man and one as the lefty specialist. Then I could pick the man I want to use. There are other players like this: John Smoltz (starter and closer), Dennis Eckersley (ditto), BJ Surhoff (catcher and rest of his career), Harold Baines (competent outfielder and DH), and Brian Downing (catcher and outfielder/DH). I am sure there are others, but not a tremendous amount - a player would have to have a long career, have a distinct break in his career, and actually be good in each segment to qualify for this treatment.
2. A more relaxed standard are catchers would be good so some more catchers could be made available. Some of us like making teams based on actual franchises and the catching position is a bit difficult. Seattle only has one catcher, excluding some guys that played only a year for the Mariners. Someone like Dave Valle would be useful here. (Milwaukee is low on catchers too, mainly because BJ Surhoff is rated as everything except that position.)
3. This is not a serious request, but it would be amusing if you included some of the worst players that qualify for the league. Todd Van Poppel. Neifi Perez. Bill Bergen (assuming he qualifies under relaxed catching standard). Actually, I would love if all players who meet the mimimum threshhold were included, regardless on how useful they might be. If you are making a league based on all players since the Toronto/Seattle expansion, or dead ball era players, or something like that, they would be useful.
1. There are some players with long careers that had more than one act. Jesse Orosco was a closer for the Mets and a pretty good one, then switched to setup man, and finally to LOOGY. He is rated on the disk as a LOOGY. It would be nice if Mr. Orosco was rated twice: one as the closer/setup man and one as the lefty specialist. Then I could pick the man I want to use. There are other players like this: John Smoltz (starter and closer), Dennis Eckersley (ditto), BJ Surhoff (catcher and rest of his career), Harold Baines (competent outfielder and DH), and Brian Downing (catcher and outfielder/DH). I am sure there are others, but not a tremendous amount - a player would have to have a long career, have a distinct break in his career, and actually be good in each segment to qualify for this treatment.
2. A more relaxed standard are catchers would be good so some more catchers could be made available. Some of us like making teams based on actual franchises and the catching position is a bit difficult. Seattle only has one catcher, excluding some guys that played only a year for the Mariners. Someone like Dave Valle would be useful here. (Milwaukee is low on catchers too, mainly because BJ Surhoff is rated as everything except that position.)
3. This is not a serious request, but it would be amusing if you included some of the worst players that qualify for the league. Todd Van Poppel. Neifi Perez. Bill Bergen (assuming he qualifies under relaxed catching standard). Actually, I would love if all players who meet the mimimum threshhold were included, regardless on how useful they might be. If you are making a league based on all players since the Toronto/Seattle expansion, or dead ball era players, or something like that, they would be useful.

