Rotolab
Posted: August 1st, 2011, 5:18 pm
Not sure this belongs in this section. If not, please move it.
I've been a very happy Rotolab user for a number of years. I highly recommend the product, and its owner/inventor/guru Merv.
There is one part of the product which I've become disillusioned with, and that's the exclusive arrangement that RL has with BBHQ, where the HQ projections are the only ones which can be imported into the software. I've asked Merv if they can open it up to other sites (Mastersball, for example), maybe by allowing import from formatted Excel file(s). In previous years he's said no, but this year he hasn't responded (giving me perhaps false hope).
It would be so great if MB and RL could develop a relationship. This would be the best of both worlds, as I've grown increasingly unhappy with HQ's projections. I didn't have access to MB's this year, but I'm sure they were as good, or better. My biggest issue with HQ's is that a) they've been pretty far off on some of the guys who they take stands on (like Crawford and Casilla this year), and b) they're very slow to revise projections based on this year's performance.
I've already decided that next year I'll be a Platinum member here. I'll probably use Rotolab, as well, even if it can't use MB projections, but darn, it would be nice if it could.
I've been a very happy Rotolab user for a number of years. I highly recommend the product, and its owner/inventor/guru Merv.
There is one part of the product which I've become disillusioned with, and that's the exclusive arrangement that RL has with BBHQ, where the HQ projections are the only ones which can be imported into the software. I've asked Merv if they can open it up to other sites (Mastersball, for example), maybe by allowing import from formatted Excel file(s). In previous years he's said no, but this year he hasn't responded (giving me perhaps false hope).
It would be so great if MB and RL could develop a relationship. This would be the best of both worlds, as I've grown increasingly unhappy with HQ's projections. I didn't have access to MB's this year, but I'm sure they were as good, or better. My biggest issue with HQ's is that a) they've been pretty far off on some of the guys who they take stands on (like Crawford and Casilla this year), and b) they're very slow to revise projections based on this year's performance.
I've already decided that next year I'll be a Platinum member here. I'll probably use Rotolab, as well, even if it can't use MB projections, but darn, it would be nice if it could.