I'm glad we loosened up on the "no mentioning undrafteds" rule last time so that people didn't have to XXX out every name in the bio thread. Still think that references that specifically praise undrafteds in the bio thread should be XXXed out, but general mentions should be fine.
I maintain that bios should only be allowed in the bio thread, they have gotten so long that they really clutter the draft thread.
I don't feel strongly either way, but I would prefer it if GMs only posted mini-bios in this thread (maybe paragraph or three with some basic stats that tell the most important stuff) and saved the novel-lengthed stuff for the bio thread. I would like to think that everyone is at least skimming the bio thread anyway.
I don't feel strongly either way, but I would prefer it if GMs only posted mini-bios in this thread (maybe paragraph or three with some basic stats that tell the most important stuff) and saved the novel-lengthed stuff for the bio thread. I would like to think that everyone is at least skimming the bio thread anyway.
I like that idea. Key text, no undrafted names and a link to the full bio.
I like that idea. Key text, no undrafted names and a link to the full bio.
Agreed. One paragraph or a short list of his major accomplishments, no undrafted names, and a link to the full bio. That's what I'm going with out of respect for the other GMs. As one ATDer already said this is the draft thread, not the bio thread.
I agree. And honestly, the longer a bio is, the less likely I am to read any of it.
Biographies aren't made to be forced down people's throat, but are made to be read by people who are genuinely interested by a certain player. If you're not into long biography, LoH is a good start to summarize someones career pretty quick.
I agree. And honestly, the longer a bio is, the less likely I am to read any of it.
I didn't expect anyone to read all my bios in detail when I drafted my players. That's why I specifically mentioned when I made a particularly useful bio last year, which I think I did three times.
Long bios are more useful when it comes time to assassinate teams and vote on standings than they are when you first draft a player, IMO. They are also useful for playoff arguments (I definitely refer to my own bios in the playoffs).
I didn't expect anyone to read all my bios in detail when I drafted my players. That's why I specifically mentioned when I made a particularly useful bio last year, which I think I did three times.
Long bios are more useful when it comes time to assassinate teams and vote on standings than they are when you first draft a player, IMO. They are also useful for playoff arguments (I definitely refer to my own bios in the playoffs).
Yeah, for sure. I meant that just in the draft thread, I almost never read the monster bios that get posted.
Yeah, for sure. I meant that just in the draft thread, I almost never read the monster bios that get posted.
Oh, I agree. I think I'm actually less likely to read a bio in detail if it appears in the draft thread too, because when I actually am in the mood to read bios and go to the bio thread, I'll see the bio from the draft thread and think I already read it when instead I barely skimmed it to get back to the draft talk.
I'll do what I did last year, post a little bit with the pick, then post a link to the completed bio when I finish it. I definitely use bios the most when assassinating/voting, and most of all arguing in the playoffs.
somewhere somehow , deep in the darkest side of saskatoon , seventieslord is already regretting his decision
nope, not at all. I'll let you know when that happens, don't worry.
and I am in Regina, not Saskatoon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever
There's certainly nothing wrong with not picking Orr first ifyou want to build your team differently.
yeah, i think any of the big 3 are justifiable (but not anyone else)
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87
Damn, there goes my chance at grabbing Wayne.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe
Yet another reason everyone should have voted for my team last year. My first two picks were forwards. Break the evil runs on defensemen.
three of my top-4 picks were forwards!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho
Beliveau is a lot like Harvey where his value in the ATD is higher because he is so easy to build around. Big fan here. Everything you could want in a player.
yep
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe
I didn't expect anyone to read all my bios in detail when I drafted my players. That's why I specifically mentioned when I made a particularly useful bio last year, which I think I did three times.
Long bios are more useful when it comes time to assassinate teams and vote on standings than they are when you first draft a player, IMO. They are also useful for playoff arguments (I definitely refer to my own bios in the playoffs).
damn right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Lander
try to keep bios to a 100 words or less?
some of us would rather see some info on the player then a pic
we've been through this.
how about you do your thing (which no one has ever tried to stop you from doing), and let the people who research books, newspapers and websites post the fruits of their labours. ok?
The Winnipeg Saints select the very saintly D Eddie Shore
1929 and 1939 Stanley Cup Champion
1933, 1935, 1936, 1938 Hart Trophy Winner
1931, 1932, 1933, 1935, 1936, 1938, 1939 1st Team All-Star
1934 2nd Team All-Star
Legends of Hockey
Quote:
An imposing blend of raw talent and intimidation, defenseman Eddie Shore was one of the greatest ever to play his position in any era and his end-to-end rushes became every bit as famous as his crushing bodychecks and nasty disposition.
I'd like to suggest that people include the pick number when announcing their selection. It's not really an issue now, but I think it will really come in handy later when people are trying to go back and sift through all the thread pages trying to find a particular pick bio or comment on a pick.
Damn, there goes my chance at grabbing Wayne.
