Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Mack

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    522

    Question Mack

    Are you guys ever going to improve this thing? An API to import leagues would be tremendous. The current setup is very unfriendly and laborious.
    My Leagues
    AL Only 5x5 Keeper, 10 teams, $260, 23 active, 17 reserves (majors + minors)
    NL Only 5x5 Keeper, 12 teams, $260, 23 active, 17 reserves (majors + minors)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Westwood, MA
    Posts
    44,893

    Default

    Yes, it certain is laborious. And yes, an import mechanism would be a game changer. That is high on our priority list.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,168

    Default

    How long has it been high on that list

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Westwood, MA
    Posts
    44,893

    Default

    A long time for sure.

    It just ends up getting bumped by other priorities... maybe it's shiny-new-thing syndrome on our part. But we spent the bulk of our offseason tech resources implementing the new SP algorithm, for instance. I'm very happy we have that now, and it seems like you subscribers are too (based on the comments). I certainly wish we had that AND Mack. But at least we got one this winter.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,639

    Default

    Hi Ray, another vote for Mack enhancements. Been waiting a long time. Only came to this Forum and searched for "Mack" because I just spent 10 minutes or so quadruple clicking to get rid of all the teams I'd set up year to date to analysed various player trade-offs. An improved Mack may not be sexy, but it is the single best tool on the site for analysing players based on the tools and principles you've taught us. Needs to happen.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Westwood, MA
    Posts
    44,893

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WillinTO View Post
    Hi Ray, another vote for Mack enhancements. Been waiting a long time. Only came to this Forum and searched for "Mack" because I just spent 10 minutes or so quadruple clicking to get rid of all the teams I'd set up year to date to analysed various player trade-offs. An improved Mack may not be sexy, but it is the single best tool on the site for analysing players based on the tools and principles you've taught us. Needs to happen.
    Totally agree. A modern MACK would be a major leap forward for us. It's been a long time, I totally agree. I just want to assure you it's not due to a lack of interest on our end.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Lake Charles, LA
    Posts
    6,000

    Default

    A couple of options that show up for the MACK report under pitching are XE+/- and EP. I could find nothing in the glossary defining these terms. What are they?
    John

    "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means!"--Inigo Montoya, "The Princess Bride"

Similar Threads

  1. XE +/- in MACK
    By Maturin in forum HQ Tech Support
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-10-2017, 09:23 AM
  2. Mack to CDG
    By AJP in forum Editorial HelpLine
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-18-2017, 02:24 PM
  3. MACK 2.0 use
    By zinotwo in forum HQ Tech Support
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-10-2008, 10:43 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •