|
Honestly even though it's not what we agreed upon I think just the 7 round draft at the end makes the most sense at this point. Maintaining those initial draft rankings is only going to get more convoluted as trades and free agency continue. Plus there's the issue that, say AP retires after this year but his owner (Dontrel, I think) wins the league. Unless somebody else drops their first-rounder he gets the #1 pick while whoever the worst team is might not pick for quite a while depending on how far down the draft rankings their first non-kept player falls. I mean, there's balance there because Dontrel would be losing a great player, so it makes sense to give him a chance at compensation...but is it fair that the best team gets the first shot to reload over teams trying to rebuild? Of course we all drafted with the notion that the rankings would matter so some older players went pretty high...
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:46 |
|
|
It has the added bonus of being a dynasty league and not a keeper league! Also makes it real easy to do pick trades
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Azhais posted:It has the added bonus of being a dynasty league and not a keeper league! OK, so is the majority in agreement about switching to a 7 round draft instead of the convoluted 22 round one? So far, Myself Oldskool Azhais Honore De Balzac Forever Peace Harold Cooplowski Wuntvor are openly supportive of the 7 round switch. so 3 more votes to make it official. Edit: hopefully this is the last league change we have to make for some time, but it's best ot get this stuff hashed out early before people actually get serious about waivers and trades. etc. Marshmallow Blue fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Sep 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
I'll vote with you guys. The 22 round option is overly complicated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Hold the phone. Are you guys seriously discussing changes to player value right AFTER the draft? I thought using the huge keeper allotment instead of an outright dynasty system was intentional. Balancing picks versus youth was an interesting puzzle (and was certainly different from other leagues), and we all agreed to it. I mean, I traded away a 4th and took Harvin in the 5th specifically because of the quirky keeper rules (not mention the influence it had on the draft order I set for about 300 players). Changing the rules after the fact is incredibly unsportsmanlike, and seriously cripples my team. Look, I'm fine with an honest dynasty league, and don't want to spoil anyone's fun, but the time to make those decisions is before the draft, not after. In the very least, I propose that the first 20-30 picks this coming year still be determined by the overall pick value of players dropped. That should be easy enough to set manually, and provides a transition into a new system that is less grossly unfair.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
I don't really have much of an opinion. I mostly just decided to figure out the keeper aspect after the fact, so it doesn't change much for me whatever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:In the very least, I propose that the first 20-30 picks this coming year still be determined by the overall pick value of players dropped. That should be easy enough to set manually, and provides a transition into a new system that is less grossly unfair. Pretty sure it's doable: quote:Click "Select Keeper Players" and you will see all keepers set to the initial rounds of the draft by default. Simply hover over a pick and when you see the pencil icon, click the cell to display the keeper selection tool. Choose the specified keeper who should fill that slot (click done to confirm the change). You will note that the keeper then swaps into your chosen position. Repeat over and over until all keepers are in their correct slots and then click "Submit". When your league draft room opens, keepers will be placed on each individual team as you specified and when those picks are up to draft, they will be skipped, as the pick has already been made for you. I can't see the keeper settings rules and the FAQ just generalizes "or use some other setting you choose" so I don't know if there are set rules you have to follow or if you can manually set each team's keepers by the round they were initially selected & it'll filter through giving people draft picks as they have openings based on who they didn't keep like we originally assumed was possible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
Alright guys. Yeah, i can still do all that stuff and set keepers for the 15 of 22 rounds. That part isn't hard at all. Honestly, the second pick in a round bumping up one slot is a technical limitation as next year, i wont have 2 4th round picks. And when i add say jordan cameron as a keeper in my 4th round, i cant put julian jones in the 4th too. So he would be my 5th round. If i kept my 5th pick tim tebow, he would move to 6 and so on until the gap was reached where i had traded that pick away (this is why when trading picks you had to trade an even amount of picks.  the issue that needs solving is here: trading away a "first" round pick would be unfair as your first round pick might not be until round 16 (if you kept your first 15 players). Thats what we need a solution for. Looking at this overall. I don't think we need to switch draft/ keeper formats for next year. We just need to figure out how draft trades will work in the 22 round system.Edit: I have a new proposition that doesn't change the rules or gently caress up anyones draft. Keepers will be due the monday after the third preseason game. No one can trade for draft picks until between that tuesday and end of day that friday (just before the draft). This way everyone can be more specific about the picks they're trading for. Marshmallow Blue fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
I dont really mind which draft we do, but a straight 7-round seems like a lot less work. Trading players is seriously going to be convoluted with that spreadsheet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
To be quite honest I don't even understand the system as it is.. Seems like having 2 picks in one round is quite an advantage, as you can keep a player from the 4th round for a 5th? Would have expected that you need to assign your keeper to a round below or at the round he was drafted, but whatever. Don't really care if we change it, I'm fine with it either way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:52
|
|
|
The spreadsheet is for me to keep track of things, so you really dont need to worry about using it. It is a resource for you to use to see what round guy your trading for. Ill look deeper into the keeper cost issue as far as rounds go in a little bit. Edit: Ok, I made a fake league to F around with keepers. I absolutely can not set 2 players into the same keeper slot (two round fours etc since I won't have two round four picks each year). Since keepers are "no cost" it makes the most sense to just have it bump up the slot. It's not some great advantage since you're keeping 15 of 22 players. That is pretty much kickers, poor choices, a crummy defense and retirees, maybe an aging stud for an early pick. I could see it being an issue if it were like 3 keepers, but it's not that at all. It's just working around the system. Marshmallow Blue fucked around with this message at 14:32 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
Marshmallow Blue posted:The spreadsheet is for me to keep track of things, so you really dont need to worry about using it. It is a resource for you to use to see what round guy your trading for. If I am reading this right, then say you keep two round 4 players. One takes the 4th round pick, and the other takes the 5th. So, then does your 5th round keeper take your 6th since the 5th round is taken by your second 4th round player? If so then essentially your second 4th round keeper comes at an increasingly discounted price depending on how many of the rounds following you also fill up with keepers. This way works fine if the owner doesn't keep there 5th round keeper, but when they keep players 5-10 on top of the 2 4th rounders they are really just missing out on that 11th round pick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Honore_De_Balzac posted:If I am reading this right, then say you keep two round 4 players. One takes the 4th round pick, and the other takes the 5th. So, then does your 5th round keeper take your 6th since the 5th round is taken by your second 4th round player? If so then essentially your second 4th round keeper comes at an increasingly discounted price depending on how many of the rounds following you also fill up with keepers. This way works fine if the owner doesn't keep there 5th round keeper, but when they keep players 5-10 on top of the 2 4th rounders they are really just missing out on that 11th round pick. In my case, I traded my 6th for a 4th (and my 8th for a 12th). So it would only bump those 2 rounds to where my hole was at 6. If someone was dumb enough to trade their 4th round pick to me for my 10th, then yes it could be a value if I kept all slots in between.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
It depends on what the other owners do in rounds 1-10. If that 11th round pick is the first player dropped it's #1 overall (and would've been regardless). If everyone drops in round 11 because of the slideback it's somewhere in the mix instead of the assured #1 it would've been had it not slid out of the 10th round.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
oldskool posted:It depends on what the other owners do in rounds 1-10. If that 11th round pick is the first player dropped it's #1 overall (and would've been regardless). If everyone dropped their first player slotted at 11, the first pick would be the person with the worst record (Draft order). We are however doing secret keepers, so you won't know who's being kept until everyone has submitted their own keepers, so you won't be able to fudge around for an earlier pick. Marshmallow Blue fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
In every keeper league I've ever been in if you keep two players from the same round, the second player would use the pick of the round before. So if you are keeping two 4th rounders, it would cost a 4th and a 3rd. If it's the other way around, you are getting discounts (possibly huge discounts if you somehow manage to trade to get five third rounders or something).
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
The easy solution is to only allow 1 keeper per round and if you want 2 10th round keepers you better trade for someone's 10th round pick. Makes pick trades easy too, your 1st round is your 1st round, the end. No "my first pick is in the 16th!" shenanigans to worry about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Keeper hostage negotiations! Let's just dump the round thing & go true dynasty. It's not what we originally discussed or agreed upon but it's become apparent that what we agreed upon is incredibly confusing and exceedingly difficult (if not outright impossible) to actually pull off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 20:19
|
|
|
oldskool posted:Keeper hostage negotiations! More that it is a bad system in general. Double dipping into a round should push up, not down.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
Honore_De_Balzac posted:More that it is a bad system in general. How do you deal with somebody who keeps 1-14 and has two fourth-rounders? They just have to drop somebody in their top 4 rounds to make room?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 20:49
|
|
|
oldskool posted:How do you deal with somebody who keeps 1-14 and has two fourth-rounders? They just have to drop somebody in their top 4 rounds to make room? I don't know. That isn't a bad idea. I think in leagues that rank up they dont let you keep a first, and I'm not sure how 2 keepers in the same round work. I just spent a month writing up a dynasty rule book for my main league. My brain is pretty fried when it comes to this stuff. At this point I dont care too much how this goes. Seems the current idea is a little convoluted, but it could work. *shrug*
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
/\ this issue with not having an option to keep a first is losing a younger player that you picked ahead of a better but older player Ok. I think i'm seeing the clash between my planned system, and adding pick trading in that fixing one thing would throw the other off and vice versa. Ive come up with a few options. We need to decide on one of them. A: 15 keepers in general and a 7 round draft next year B: keeper cost: each round has a certain point value (round one would be more pts than two) and you get an allotment of points to keep as many players as you can afford based on keeping higher and lower rounds. Then the draft would be snaking from worst to best record. Marshmallow Blue fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
Marshmallow Blue posted:Ok. I think i'm seeing the clash between my planned system, and adding pick trading in that fixing one thing would throw the other off and vice versa. I've been thinking more about this, and I'm coming around to the idea of simplifying our future drafts with a straightforward 7-round system. Even though changing player values after the draft is a bit lame, it seems like the current system wasn't really all that clear, and everybody took wildly divergent approaches to the startup. What strikes me as best for the long-term health of the league is moving to an intuitive system that everybody understands. So here's my proposal, based on Blue's choice A above. quote:Yearly FA/R (free agent and rookie) drafts will take place within one month of the first game of the season. Pick order will be determined by the following criteria (using the records from the previous season), in order: I proposed an nfl-style draft rather than a snake draft in order to maintain league parity better while this funky transition away from the startup draft shakes out. No post-draft rule change this drastic is really "fair" per se, but taking active steps to maintain a competitive league strikes me as an important way to combat the negative consequences of overturning everyone's startup draft strategies. What do you think?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
That looks pretty fair. Also very easy to determine who's likely to be picking where throughout the season for purposes of draft pick trading, which is a nice bonus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
Alright, with 6 Yes Votes, and 2 don't cares, we will be switching to a a 15 keeper (flat, no at round costs) 7 Round draft each recurring season. Which will be a non snaking draft determined with the following order of operations. code:code:I'd like to thank everyone for hanging in there in the past week or so, and apologize for not having the league's poo poo together by draft day. It takes some seriously cool goons to deal with the bullshit-storm that would cause many team owners to likely back out. Now we'll be able to go out there week to week and have some "fun" watching our potentially horrible decisions come to fruition as actual horrible decisions. Edit: OP updated Marshmallow Blue fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Sep 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
Marshmallow Blue posted:have some "fun" watching our potentially horrible decisions come to fruition as actual horrible decisions. FantasyFootball.txt
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
I am glad I did not have to wait very long for my share of regret.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
#DougBaldwinRound1 #LifetimeOfRegret 
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Have to start Flacco over a probably-healthy Cam because if Cam can't go I don't want to drop anybody to pick up any of the free agent QBs that're starting. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
It turns out I didn't draft enough RBs if Bernard, and Woodhead don't start playing right. I'm ready and willing to be trade raped if anyone has some extras. e. Haha please no literal rape. I'm still a shrewd business man. Honore_De_Balzac fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Sep 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
All you have is receivers and all I don't need is receivers Also I hear that Bernard Pierce fellow currently on your bench is due for a lot more playing time this season for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
Honore_De_Balzac posted:It turns out I didn't draft enough RBs if Bernard, and Woodhead don't start playing right. I'm ready and willing to be trade raped if anyone has some extras. Sorry, I think I just suck at valuing players. I went and actually looked up the adps of my initial trade and only then realized how hilariously bad my offer was. Your response seems pretty fair but I accidentally deleted it when I closed the window. I'll try again when I actually have some time tonight. Thanks for not responding with your kicker for Lacy!
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:Sorry, I think I just suck at valuing players. I went and actually looked up the adps of my initial trade and only then realized how hilariously bad my offer was. Your response seems pretty fair but I accidentally deleted it when I closed the window. I saw you offer me a trade for a split second too. Something regarding doug martin being awful. Luckily though, I have 100% of Miami's rushing game. It spells success  (or 12th place of 12)
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Forever_Peace posted:Sorry, I think I just suck at valuing players. I went and actually looked up the adps of my initial trade and only then realized how hilariously bad my offer was. Your response seems pretty fair but I accidentally deleted it when I closed the window. Haha I figured you took my statement too literally. Thanks for giving me a look. oldskool posted:All you have is receivers and all I don't need is receivers I'm still holding out hope for Bernard. My main league plays 1 RB 1 WR 3 flex so I down played how important a second and third RB would be. Currently Vareen is the only one I feel good about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
oldskool posted:All you have is receivers and all I don't need is receivers We'll see how well Bernard "Trent Richardson" Pierce does with that role
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
Azhais posted:We'll see how well Bernard "Trent Richardson" Pierce does with that role Hopefully terribly, since I have Flacco 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Azhais posted:We'll see how well Bernard "Trent Richardson" Pierce does with that role You shut your dirty whore mouth! My Bernard is no TR....he is yet to have a good game...
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
My team is in a sure fine mess at the moment. With Doug Martin being a regrettable choice, I'm starting Darren Sproles because I don't want to start Moreno and Miller. Edit: gently caress it. GO HURNS
Marshmallow Blue fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Sep 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Honore_De_Balzac posted:Haha I figured you took my statement too literally. Thanks for giving me a look. Poked around a bit, but I'm not sure I see a trade here that benefits us both. I just have way too many upside lottery tickets at RB to sacrifice "right now" RB depth. Sorry! quote:My team is in a sure fine mess at the moment. With Doug Martin being a regrettable choice, I'm starting Darren Sproles because I don't want to start Moreno and Miller. Edit: gently caress it. GO HURNS FWIW I think your team looks great (other than a really inappropriate number of quarterbacks). You had 4 RBs break 10 points last week (with Morris finishing close to that with 9), have 3 solid WRs and a great pickup in Hurns, and a niners defense that scored 20 points. I didn't like my chances last week until Matt Ryan decided to supernova. Really though - I'd deal Sims for the right offer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:46 |
|
|
Tier One Kicker™ 
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2014 05:02
|
|