Question about next year's draft

[Hitman23]

I know this is currently being discussed, but there are so many conversations going on in the other thread I wanted to keep this seperate.

question # 1 - Am I to understand that the poll regarding the draft rules are going into affect AFTER next year's draft? As in the 2005 season?

question # 2 - In next year's draft, how many keepers will everyone have according to the current rules?

question # 3 - in next year's draft, what is the order?
1st gets first - last gets last
last gets 1st - 1st gets last
lottery
1st team that misses playoffs gets 1st, then in order of places - last place playoff team gets next pic then reverse order to 1st getting last pick (this one is actually a good idea, it was brought up in my other league)

thank you.

[patrick.o]

And while we're answering draft questions I'd still like to know what the status will be of a player who was drafted, dropped, and picked up as a free agent. I think he should regarged as a free agent; Big_E thinks he should be regarded as a guy who was drafted.

[Big_E]

Not just me...that was Sax's position...I was just reiterating it.

I originally posted the same question you did back in April.

Here's the thread discussing it.

For the record, I thought the same thing you did...someone clearing waivers should be a FA/22nd Round pick. But not according to Sax's clarification. Anyone drafted is confined by their original draft position. Even if they clear waivers.

[Bozidar]

Just to be clear, I agree with Sax on that issue. Just like when a player passes through waivers, he's still got his salary to be paid. You pick him up, you take the baggage.

And i still think that a random draft is the only fair way. I've made my points on that one, and won't reiterate them here. If it's got to do with more keepers, they even them out, and randomize it.

[Hitman23]

hey, what about my question.

[Yankchic22]

Originally posted by Hitman23
hey, what about my question.

Psst... they're ignoring you

[Saxmania]

In an ideal world, I'd like to let players be "re-set" in terms of their draft position, but it does raise issues:

1) Early in the season, people were dropping injured players (e.g. Nevin) when they were out for the season, and other people were nabbing them as keepers. It doesn't seem very fair to those who assumed that out-for-the-season players would be useless, careless as they might have been.

2) Certain times during the season (most obviously the All-Star Break) would probably be fairly easy to sneak through drops and trades, and this might mean that clearing waivers could be fairly easy.

3) These are new rules, and giving less experienced players a little leeway to drop players and not be hurt by it too much seemed like a good idea.

Frankly, I can live with things this year, and if it's really not necessary, it can be changed for 2004/5, when we'll have ironed out most of the mistakes that I/we've made so far. But taking things slowly this year seems like the fair way to play it to my way of thinking.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Saxmania]

With regard to the draft position, this is what the League Blueprint says:

Drafting will take place in a serpentine system. A random draw will be established before the draft begins, and the first team drawn will have first choice of draft position. They may choose any of the first 18 positions, and the system continues with the next-drawn player choosing their position in the draft until all are filled. Owners may draft any player currently on a major-league 25-man roster. Owners may choose not to draft in any round, but must draft a minimum of 17 players during the draft.

We decided to waive the "choose position" rule this year, since people thought it fiddly and unnecessary. I still like it, since I'm not convinced that, in a serpentine draft, a great advantage is gained by an earlier draft position in the odd-numbered rounds. In any case, the Blueprint states pretty clearly that draft order (or choice of draft order) is random, and I can't see how we can change that for 2004 since it is affected by the play in 2003, which is what we signed up for in the Blueprint. So I think we have to say that draft order will be random in 2004 (unless you want to blow this league up and start again), and can next be changed in 2005.

Does anyone have a problem with that from a fairness point of view, rather than a "I don't like the random draft" aspect? In other words, does everyone agree that the Blueprint that we agreed to play with says a random order shall be used, regardless of the year, and that it shouldn't be changed for 2003/4 since this year's results would have an impact?

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Hitman23]

Sax, I know you have a blueprint, and I'm sorry to be asking all these questions. But so many things have been changed, discussed, I want to make sure I'm clearon the rules. So any changes made from now on, are for the 2005 draft only. Does this include the keepers? 4 for the champ, 3 for playoff teams and 2 for everyone else?

[Big_E]

Sorry, Sax. I must have forgotten about that. In that case, since I have argued that keeper rules changes must be for 2005 since we agreed to the 2004 rules when we signed up for 2003, I hereby fully agree that the 2004 draft order should be random.

[patrick.o]

Originally posted by Hitman23
Sax, I know you have a blueprint, and I'm sorry to be asking all these questions. But so many things have been changed, discussed, I want to make sure I'm clearon the rules. So any changes made from now on, are for the 2005 draft only. Does this include the keepers? 4 for the champ, 3 for playoff teams and 2 for everyone else?

4 for the champ at a 1 round penalty, 4 for the rest of the playoff teams at a 2 round penalty, 3 for everyone else at a 2 round penalty.

And this is a rule I hope is changed after this upcoming draft to same picks and penalty for everyone.

[Yankchic22]

I would just like to insert here, that I never even posted in the blueprint thread and a couple of other owners didnt either, so this wasnt a unamious decision. And rereading it, I dont get where is inplies that these are the rules for the following TWO years? Am I missing something.

[Hitman23]

Originally posted by patrick.o
4 for the champ at a 1 round penalty, 4 for the rest of the playoff teams at a 2 round penalty, 3 for everyone else at a 2 round penalty.

ok. now I'm clear. And even more happy. I drafted Johnson fairly low.

Randi, I hate to say it, but I'm sure Sax was running the league with the thought that if you didn't protest, you were in agreement. I don't think there's much you can do about it.

[Yankchic22]

Steve, you didnt post in the thread either.

All Im saying is that all season, every time soemone had an issue, the automatic response, is that EVERYBODY agreed to something or other.

Truth is, everyone did not agree. Just that there weren't objections. I just dont get where we discussed this years draft order last year?!?!

[Hitman23]

Originally posted by Yankchic22
Steve, you didnt post in the thread either.

That is why I'm not objecting to anything for next years draft. I understood not responding was taken as agreement.

What I am objecting to is proposals for the following year. I do think the rules should be tweaked.

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Saxmania
Does anyone have a problem with that from a fairness point of view, rather than a "I don't like the random draft" aspect? In other words, does everyone agree that the Blueprint that we agreed to play with says a random order shall be used, regardless of the year, and that it shouldn't be changed for 2003/4 since this year's results would have an impact?

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

i disagree, but what else is new... i don't think it's fair to give the world champ two extra keepers or playioff teams one extra keepr and then give him an equal shot at the number 1 pick the following year... but hey i'm sure i'm the only one that thinks it don't add up...

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Yankchic22
I would just like to insert here, that I never even posted in the blueprint thread and a couple of other owners didnt either, so this wasnt a unamious decision. And rereading it, I dont get where is inplies that these are the rules for the following TWO years? Am I missing something.

agree 100%.. i just signed up w/ yahoo w/o even seeing any blueprint, but hey, it was agreeed to by some i guess, and now it has to be enforced for 2 seasons before we can even make practical changes... 2 years from i bet half the league is different, but oh well...

[Yankchic22]

Originally posted by Ansky39
i disagree, but what else is new... i don't think it's fair to give the world champ two extra keepers or playioff teams one extra keepr and then give him an equal shot at the number 1 pick the following year... but hey i'm sure i'm the only one that thinks it don't add up...

Thats what Im trying to say. Everyone says we agreed to this (Or says Some of us just kept quiet) But I dont see where we agreed to all this. Exactly what you are saying is my point. Lets say Boz wins. He gets 4 keepers at 1 round penelty, and then could draw 1 in the draft. Its just not fair.

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Yankchic22
Steve, you didnt post in the thread either.

All Im saying is that all season, every time soemone had an issue, the automatic response, is that EVERYBODY agreed to something or other.

Truth is, everyone did not agree. Just that there weren't objections. I just dont get where we discussed this years draft order last year?!?!

I'm sorry you feel that way Randi, but the truth is this:

If you agreed to play in the league, and made no objection to the rules as they were laid out, then you were, in fact, agreeing with them.

Rules change, as these last two years have shown us, but sax and the rest of us are doing our best to make them voted on changes that are fair and best for the league.

One of the ways we're trying to make things fair is to not change things for THIS year. And it includes next year's draft, because play/moves made this year were for preperation of next year.

This isn't a private forum. None of the discussion that took place here was made a secret. Quite the contrary, we tried to put them out there to make them as obvious as possible.

[Hitman23]

The only way to fix this problem is to have a vote on whether or not next year's draft should be changed. If it's unanymously agreed on, then we can make changes.

[Yankchic22]

Originally posted by Bozidar
If you agreed to play in the league, and made no objection to the rules as they were laid out, then you were, in fact, agreeing with them.

I just want to know where in the blueprint, we agreed, or didnt object to NEXT years draft order?

[Saxmania]

I'm sorry, Randi, that was kind of arrogant of me.

The point I was trying to make is that we tried very hard to put together a full 18-team league at quite short notice, because very few people seem to check this forum until March, when we need to be all in order to get the draft done. So the amount of feedback available on the Blueprint was limited to seven or eight people. When people sign up to the league, I would say it's fairly implicit that we also sign up to the rules that are in the Blueprint unless they raise a particular issue. This happened several times, and we worked to reconcile any issues that arose, but I don't think there was one complaint about the draft order, so we kept it. There just wasn't really time to have a line-item veto on the Blueprint, because then you end up with 18 competing league structures, and then it's June and you haven't had the draft yet.

We didn't discuss the 2003 order in 2002 because the 2002 game was thrown together at the last minute, and it wasn't a keeper league at that point, so we saw no reason to make rules for years to come. 2003 is a keeper year, however, so the consensus seems to be that it's not fair to alter rules for 2004 that will have been affected in 2003. Players are (or should have been) playing according to the rules that were in the Blueprint, and to suddenly change the rules with no warning, and expect the results of their past decisions to be altered, seems unfair, don't you think?

I agree it hasn't been the smoothest of journeys, but there's really a limited number of ways of getting a varying number of fantasy baseball players to agree to a set of rules, and setting out a list and asking them to pick out what they don't like seemed to be the quickest, easiest, and fairest way.

So, in summary: Rules for the draft and keepers should stay as they are for 2003/4 because that's how the league was set up at the beginning of the year. If people don't like how that was done, then I apologise, but a) no-one said anything, which makes it difficult to fix, and b) it's hardly fair to go changing it now. We have not made any concrete decisions about how to change the league for 2004/5 YET, and I think the proper time for this is after the 2003 League finishes in September, BUT we are having discussions (including in this thread) about how to improve it in the future, so that we consider new ideas while they're fresh, and everyone sees the discussion happening (rather than whomever wanders into this forum during the offseason).

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Hitman23]

Originally posted by Yankchic22
I just want to know where in the blueprint, we agreed, or didnt object to NEXT years draft order?

Before the draft commences for the following year’s fantasy season, each owner of a team that intends to take part in the season may submit players from their last season’s final rosters to be withheld from the draft process as ‘keepers’. These players will automatically be added to their respective owners for the new season. However, this process will require the use of a higher draft pick. The available players to be designated as ‘keepers’ are as follows:

All teams: Up to 3 players at a cost of a draft pick 2 rounds higher than the player’s draft level the previous year
Any playoff team: Up to 4 players at a cost of a draft pick 2 rounds higher than the player’s draft level the previous year
Championship holders: Up to 4 players at a cost of a draft pick 1 rounds higher than the player’s draft level the previous year

sorry Randi. But it seems clear to me.

[Big_E]

I have no real problem with the defending champs getting the #1 pick if that's how it works out. In a serpentine draft, everybody has the same total value of picks. That is, in two rounds:

Team A picks #1 and #36 (total value of 37)
Team B picks #2 and #35 (total value of 37)
etc down to Team R picks #18 and #19 (total value of 37).

Look at the first round of this year's draft:
Rodriguez, Alex (SS-Tex)
Guerrero, Vladimir (RF-Mon)
Soriano, Alfonso (2B-NYY)
Johnson, Randy (SP-Ari)
Sosa, Sammy (RF-ChC)
Schilling, Curt (SP-Ari)
Bonds, Barry (LF-SF)
Martinez, Pedro (SP-Bos)
Giambi, Jason (1B, DH-NYY)
Ordonez, Magglio (RF-CWS)
Pujols, Albert (LF, 3B, 1B-StL)
Zito, Barry (SP-Oak)
Jeter, Derek (SS-NYY)
Garciaparra, Nomar (SS-Bos)
Tejada, Miguel (SS-Oak)
Beltran, Carlos (CF-KC)
Berkman, Lance (CF, LF-Hou)
Oswalt, Roy (SP-Hou)

Was there a real advantage if you took A-Rod #1 vs someone who took Pujols with the #11 pick? Would you be upset if the defending champs got A-Rod and you "only" had Pujols?

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Yankchic22
Lets say Boz wins

Lets!

[Yankchic22]

Originally posted by Hitman23
sorry Randi. But it seems clear to me.

RANDOM DRAFT PICKS?

No one listens to me.

All Im saying, is that it wasnt discussed last year. To be honest I really dont care what happens or not at this point.

I dont take it as seriously as some of the others do.

[Big_E]

Originally posted by Yankchic22


RANDOM DRAFT PICKS?

No one listens to me.

Not random picks, random order.
The only thing random is if you're "busy" during the draft and let the computer do your picks for you.

[Yankchic22]

UGH!

You know what I mean!!&po'd&

[Hitman23]

Originally posted by Yankchic22
RANDOM DRAFT PICKS?

oh ok. I was adressing the keepers question and it was stuck in my head. my bad.

[Yankchic22]

Originally posted by Hitman23


oh ok. I was adressing the keepers question and it was stuck in my head. my bad.

For this you will pay

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Bozidar
I'm sorry you feel that way Randi, but the truth is this:

If you agreed to play in the league, and made no objection to the rules as they were laid out, then you were, in fact, agreeing with them.

Rules change, as these last two years have shown us, but sax and the rest of us are doing our best to make them voted on changes that are fair and best for the league.

One of the ways we're trying to make things fair is to not change things for THIS year. And it includes next year's draft, because play/moves made this year were for preperation of next year.

This isn't a private forum. None of the discussion that took place here was made a secret. Quite the contrary, we tried to put them out there to make them as obvious as possible.

was that uh "gentleman's agreeemnt" in the blueprint that everyone agreed to? jus' askin'...

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Big_E
Not random picks, random order.
The only thing random is if you're "busy" during the draft and let the computer do your picks for you.

LMAO!!!

[Saxmania]

I should add (and try to avoid any kind of hifalutin posture as I do so) that if the consensus is genuinely that the league is not being administered in the best interests of its owners, then I will be happy to step down as commissioner with no hard feelings or ill will. I do enjoy writing weekly round-ups and trying to put together the best possible fantasy league structure around, but the number of complaints and misunderstandings this year does suggest to me (and, I'm sure, others) that this isn't being done right.

While I've really enjoyed being able to help start something that I hope has been fun and profitable for NYYFans.com ($330 raised so far! ), it clearly makes no sense for me to call myself commissioner or anything like it if this league is causing problems on a weekly basis. I'd like to think that this league is something that we can look back on in a few years' time and be proud of in some way, but it would be utterly self-centered and pompous of me to wish to make rules at the expense of other people's enjoyment. If anyone would like to make the case for a change of commissioner, then please post a thread (or you can PM me and I'll do it) on this forum. There will be, seriously, 100% no ill will on my part, and I will hand over whatever responsibilities I have happily if that's what's in the best interests of the owners.

By the way, this isn't a backhanded appeal for hugs and compliments, sincere or not. There have been many more problems, arguments, and debates over the rules this year than there were last year, and I'm not going to pretend otherwise. Obviously, I will hope that the league will still be here no matter what in 2004, and I look forward to taking the Swingers into a winning season under whomever's commissionership. But I'm not doing a Bud Selig here and hanging on after my welcome's worn out. I'd rather this Forum be friendly and fun, quite frankly.

If "commissionership" is even a word.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

[Hitman23]

Sax we are just discussing. Not complaining. These things need to be discussed.

I think I speak for everyone when I say you are doing a great job as commish.

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Ansky39
was that uh "gentleman's agreeemnt" in the blueprint that everyone agreed to? jus' askin'...

no, otherwise it wouldn't have been referred to as a "gentleman's agreement", it would have been the "Stop Boz from playing the game the way he was" clause in the Blueprint.

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Big_E
I have no real problem with the defending champs getting the #1 pick if that's how it works out. In a serpentine draft, everybody has the same total value of picks. That is, in two rounds:

Team A picks #1 and #36 (total value of 37)
Team B picks #2 and #35 (total value of 37)
etc down to Team R picks #18 and #19 (total value of 37).

Look at the first round of this year's draft:
Rodriguez, Alex (SS-Tex)
Guerrero, Vladimir (RF-Mon)
Soriano, Alfonso (2B-NYY)
Johnson, Randy (SP-Ari)
Sosa, Sammy (RF-ChC)
Schilling, Curt (SP-Ari)
Bonds, Barry (LF-SF)
Martinez, Pedro (SP-Bos)
Giambi, Jason (1B, DH-NYY)
Ordonez, Magglio (RF-CWS)
Pujols, Albert (LF, 3B, 1B-StL)
Zito, Barry (SP-Oak)
Jeter, Derek (SS-NYY)
Garciaparra, Nomar (SS-Bos)
Tejada, Miguel (SS-Oak)
Beltran, Carlos (CF-KC)
Berkman, Lance (CF, LF-Hou)
Oswalt, Roy (SP-Hou)

Was there a real advantage if you took A-Rod #1 vs someone who took Pujols with the #11 pick? Would you be upset if the defending champs got A-Rod and you "only" had Pujols?

what does addition of of picks have to do w/ anything.. so what #1 + #36 and #2 + #35 both equal 37.. what does that really prove???

you suggesting there is no inherent benefit to where someone picks? you suggesting that if i have the #1 pick it's no more valuable than someone w/ the #2 pick because of their second round pick? well i disagree 100%.. for what ever it's worth...

secondly, you reward the best and likely strongest team in the league w/ 4 keeprs w/ a 1 round penalty already giving that team an inherent advantage over every other team in the league and then you say the possibility that that team could win the #1 pick in the following draft doesn't give that team a ridciulous advantage over the rest of the field... ? i disagree again.. oh again for what ever it's worth...

are you trying to build a dynasty league or a keeper league.. mlb rewards the worst teams w/ the number one pick to maintain competivtive balance... here we are maintaining dynasties by rewarding the champ and still giving him a chance at the number one pick...

ahh what the hell it don't really matter in the end, i'll just name my 3 whole keepers and keep quiet.. startin to feel like i'm speaking russian in here...

[Bozidar]

Sax, this isn't about you, or the job you're doing. The problem is that you're NOT Bud Selig. You can't just hand down proclimations and stiff-arm the owners into swallowing whatever you like.

This is a community within the community. We've all got to work together. It's no one's fault (well, maybe Randi's) that they're so much discussion on this.

The 'problem' here, if you want to call it that, is that there's so very much to iron out.

What we should do, learning something from this thread and others, is to open up one thread per discussion point. When that discussion is finished, we'll draft the revised FBB Collective Bargaining Agreement clauses at the end of each thread. We should even have a thread to start it all, laying out the ground rules for these discussions (like: These rule changes don't affect anything until after the draft for 2004, or after the entire 2004 season).

Thoughts?

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Bozidar
no, otherwise it wouldn't have been referred to as a "gentleman's agreement", it would have been the "Stop Boz from playing the game the way he was" clause in the Blueprint.

ahh so the blueprint was modified huh.. and not by consensus either huh.. oh well... like george suggested during last years labor impasse, maybe others have more influence w/ the commisoner than i do...

[Hitman23]

Brian, don't blame Randi, we've all (except maybe you) had issues, complaints and arguements. Don't single her out.

I do agree with what you said though. One thread per issue. Main thread to be changed as rules are changed. Very good idea.

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Ansky39
are you trying to build a dynasty league or a keeper league.. mlb rewards the worst teams w/ the number one pick to maintain competivtive balance... here we are maintaining dynasties by rewarding the champ and still giving him a chance at the number one pick...

Kurt,
We'll prolly discuss this more later, but i both agree and disagree with you.

1) Doing both is unfair. You can't give the champ more keepers and the same chance at drafting #1
2) reverse drafting is ALSO unfair. You can't punish the best teams and give them only increased keepers to compensate for draft absolutely last (which i agree with you, it makes a difference where you draft)

So the way i see it, if reverse drafting is unfair, and random draft combined with increased keepers is also unfair, then the only way to make it fair is to remove the keeper bonus for teams, and make it a pure random draft.

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Saxmania
I should add (and try to avoid any kind of hifalutin posture as I do so) that if the consensus is genuinely that the league is not being administered in the best interests of its owners, then I will be happy to step down as commissioner with no hard feelings or ill will. I do enjoy writing weekly round-ups and trying to put together the best possible fantasy league structure around, but the number of complaints and misunderstandings this year does suggest to me (and, I'm sure, others) that this isn't being done right.

While I've really enjoyed being able to help start something that I hope has been fun and profitable for NYYFans.com ($330 raised so far! ), it clearly makes no sense for me to call myself commissioner or anything like it if this league is causing problems on a weekly basis. I'd like to think that this league is something that we can look back on in a few years' time and be proud of in some way, but it would be utterly self-centered and pompous of me to wish to make rules at the expense of other people's enjoyment. If anyone would like to make the case for a change of commissioner, then please post a thread (or you can PM me and I'll do it) on this forum. There will be, seriously, 100% no ill will on my part, and I will hand over whatever responsibilities I have happily if that's what's in the best interests of the owners.

By the way, this isn't a backhanded appeal for hugs and compliments, sincere or not. There have been many more problems, arguments, and debates over the rules this year than there were last year, and I'm not going to pretend otherwise. Obviously, I will hope that the league will still be here no matter what in 2004, and I look forward to taking the Swingers into a winning season under whomever's commissionership. But I'm not doing a Bud Selig here and hanging on after my welcome's worn out. I'd rather this Forum be friendly and fun, quite frankly.

If "commissionership" is even a word.

Be seeing you,

Saxmania

i have a problem w/ the 200000 page rule book, not with the commisioner...

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Hitman23
Brian, don't blame Randi, we've all (except maybe you) had issues, complaints and arguements. Don't single her out.

I do agree with what you said though. One thread per issue. Main thread to be changed as rules are changed. Very good idea.

Sorry, i left the smiley out, i was just kidding

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Ansky39
ahh so the blueprint was modified huh.. and not by consensus either huh.. oh well... like george suggested during last years labor impasse, maybe others have more influence w/ the commisoner than i do...

When're you going to get it, man? I didn't want that god damn agreement. I didn't agree with the premise of it. I don't think that I should be forced to put an RP/SP guy in whatever slot his team puts him in.

I just wanted people to get the ................ off my back about it. It's all i heard about all last season, and all during the off-season. So i worked with my opposition and tried to resolve the issue.

I guess the problem is you can never make everyone happy.. and that's another lesson for us to all consider, when talking about these rules..

[Bozidar]

Originally posted by Ansky39
i have a problem w/ the 200000 page rule book, not with the commisioner...

Do you have an alternative to the 200000 page rule book?

[Soriambi]

Sax, don't get discouraged, the league would not be the same without you as commish. You're, by far, the best man for the job. As for the issue at hand, I think that the draft should definately be a random order draft.

[Hitman23]

Originally posted by Bozidar
So the way i see it, if reverse drafting is unfair, and random draft combined with increased keepers is also unfair, then the only way to make it fair is to remove the keeper bonus for teams, and make it a pure random draft.

I agree. Everyone gets the same number of keepers. Your reward for being the champ is bragging rights. Good enough. I could live with the 1 round keeper penalty for playoff teams. Their 1st rounder still goes into the pool. And if they happen to get 1st pick then so be it.

[Big_E]

Originally posted by Ansky39
what does addition of of picks have to do w/ anything.. so what #1 + #36 and #2 + #35 both equal 37.. what does that really prove???

you suggesting there is no inherent benefit to where someone picks? you suggesting that if i have the #1 pick it's no more valuable than someone w/ the #2 pick because of their second round pick? well i disagree 100%.. for what ever it's worth...

Well, look at the 3 leagues I'm in.

League #1:
Draft order, Current position
1, 12 (out of 12!)
2, 9
3, 1
4, 4
5, 3
6, 8
7, 7
8, 2
9, 10
10, 11
11, 5
12, 6
With the Top 6 teams making the playoffs, 3 of the 6 teams would be from the top half of the draft, and 3 of the 6 teams from the bottom half. The team that drafted first is in last place, 22 games out of 6th, and 38 games out of first.

League #2
Draft order, Current position
1, 4
2, 10
3, 7
4, 6
5, 3
6, 5
7, 8
8, 9
9, 12
10, 1 (!)
11, 11
12, 2
So 4 of the 6 playoff teams will be from the top half of the draft, but the TOP TWO SEEDS drafted 10th and 12th -- DEAD LAST.

League #3 (this one )
The three teams currently in first place drafted:
1st
12th
16th
while the current WC leader drafter 9th.


So yeah, I would say that draft order is meaningless, that everyone has an equal chance at good players, and in the end what matters is drafting the best players you can, and managing your team well throughout the season. Not whether you draft first or last in the first round.

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Bozidar
When're you going to get it, man? I didn't want that god damn agreement. I didn't agree with the premise of it. I don't think that I should be forced to put an RP/SP guy in whatever slot his team puts him in.

I just wanted people to get the ................ off my back about it. It's all i heard about all last season, and all during the off-season. So i worked with my opposition and tried to resolve the issue.

I guess the problem is you can never make everyone happy.. and that's another lesson for us to all consider, when talking about these rules..

when are you going to get it.. my point is sax and big e suggested we can't modify the keeper rule or the draft order rule which impacts next season cause we agreed to it in the bklueprint and it would be unfair,.. however when it relates to that arbitrary rp rule it was ok to impose that, "agreement" on us even though it was not in the original blueprint and directlu impacts this season...

it's not always about just you boz, try to see the bigger picture... ; i remember last seas well and while some didn't seem to get over your 'apparent" advantage, i didn't care and just kidded you about it, cause i know there is no adnvantage one way or another...

but that is not my issue here.. i think if we see how we can improve this league, we implement it... there may be 15% of the owners here in 2005 to see these rules ever come to fruition..

but i'm a lone voice in the wilderness here.. and as i've said from day one, i'll go w/ the flow whatever is decided..

i may bitch a little.. well maybe more than a little.. but really it's not that serious and none of this ................ should be taken to heart by anyone.. some in here may have an ax to grind and can't seem to go get over what ever is bothering em, but not me, i just have a long proud habit of speaking my mind... often...

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Big_E


Well, look at the 3 leagues I'm in.

League #1:
Draft order, Current position
1, 12 (out of 12!)
2, 9
3, 1
4, 4
5, 3
6, 8
7, 7
8, 2
9, 10
10, 11
11, 5
12, 6
With the Top 6 teams making the playoffs, 3 of the 6 teams would be from the top half of the draft, and 3 of the 6 teams from the bottom half. The team that drafted first is in last place, 22 games out of 6th, and 38 games out of first.

League #2
Draft order, Current position
1, 4
2, 10
3, 7
4, 6
5, 3
6, 5
7, 8
8, 9
9, 12
10, 1 (!)
11, 11
12, 2
So 4 of the 6 playoff teams will be from the top half of the draft, but the TOP TWO SEEDS drafted 10th and 12th -- DEAD LAST.

League #3 (this one )
The three teams currently in first place drafted:
1st
12th
16th
while the current WC leader drafter 9th.


So yeah, I would say that draft order is meaningless, that everyone has an equal chance at good players, and in the end what matters is drafting the best players you can, and managing your team well throughout the season. Not whether you draft first or last in the first round.

look alot more goes into your success than soley the draft so telling me who's leading right now is menaingless... but if i can draft #1 and snag an arod to complement my 4 keepers from last year then compete w/ other teams that have 3 keepers and may end up drafting last you say there is no advantage... you gotta be kidding me... but hey, i'll be sure to explain this little peice of logic to scott layden... :rolleyes:

[Ansky39]

Originally posted by Bozidar
Do you have an alternative to the 200000 page rule book?

................ man just use the goddamn default rules... lets just buy a dfamn keepr league software and folow the damn default rules.. no one can bitch and no one can ................ it up...