MLD World Thread #2 Topic

corbs1019
Posts: 86 (0)
Hall of Famer
1274
Prospect
Just a few other thoughts, even if we go with g_m's idea of a declining first round bonuses we can still end up with crap for rounds 2-6, Obviously by now everyone tries for the 17 and 18 year olds first, but is there a way to make all the draft choices just a little better, I mean in most years (with the exception of the four years in a row when I had a ton of retirements) I don't keep more than my top three picks anyway. I think that goes for a lot of the GM's.
 It just seems that the last three rounds of the draft are a waste more often than not.

 If teams have better choices to chose from and draft picks (not just first rounders) that can play reasonably well, we would all be less likely to have to sit a player for seasons to get him to grow into a respectable player. I mean in the third round when you are picking a D man who is 22 years old and has ratings like 55 Stamina shooting and skating in the mid thirties and a 74 toughness and maybe a 48 for D what can you do with a guy like that? He isn't going to improve very much even if you sit or play him.

 I am not sure what the answer is but I just wanted to point out that in my opinion it isn't just about first round picks but better players over all. I do agree that the +3 rule is outdated.
2/23/2012 6:15 PM
blee3467
Posts: 5 (0)
Hall of Famer
3 2 1268 15
Prospect
It seems most players (without bonuses) take about 8-10 seasons to get really good. Goalies take longer.

Why don't we just bump the ML'ers in the draft from "Above Average" to "Excellent" (or whatever it is)? With bonuses still going to the bottom 6 teams.

 If they are better from the get go there might be more teams that "go for it" each season. 

Just throwing it out there.
2/23/2012 7:39 PM (edited)
smeric
Posts: 752 (0)
Hall of Famer
501 153 57 1032 150 140 24 11
Rookie
A simple idea to assist in an anti-warehousing movement would be implementing a salary cap ... what the exact number is would require some number-geek analysis and tinkering, but I think it could work.
2/23/2012 7:48 PM
onekrazypuck
Posts: 182 (0)
Hall of Famer
13 1 1356
Prospect
Loving the discussion gents
2/23/2012 7:59 PM
god_mike
Posts: 801 (0)
Hall of Famer
19 28 27 1632 13 5 94
Rookie
Posted by smeric on 2/23/2012 4:46:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure I've even iced a 1st round pick in his draft year
i can't tell when a player was drafted, only when his first season was.  maybe OKP has that ability, i don't know.  when i say most of my players are under ten years, that's from when they started playing.  i have played a few of my picks in their draft year though.  :>
2/23/2012 8:52 PM
god_mike
Posts: 801 (0)
Hall of Famer
19 28 27 1632 13 5 94
Rookie
one option is to bump all the MLers up to Very Good.  that might have an adverse effect of most teams being able to ice stellar teams after a while.  though it would help with the parity.  not sure how much of a bump that would end up being.  i know we don't want to go with Great minor leaguers.  the reason i suggested giving bonuses to everyone in the first round is that in real life everyone in rounds 2+ are crap as well.  oh there are some gems, and a few that pan out, but really it's a crap shoot after half way through round one.  and i'm not sure we really want to have most teams be able to ice ten guys or more with stellar stats.  i'd rather see three or four top guys on each team with six or seven pretty decent guys, and six or seven that are usable, but not difference makers.  :>
2/23/2012 8:58 PM
onekrazypuck
Posts: 182 (0)
Hall of Famer
13 1 1356
Prospect
I just want to add, that the reason for the skill level of most of the players in the draft lacking in quality, was because we didn't want the league to be flooded with perfect players.  Its been that way since the beginning.  Having every team full of perfect or near perfect players wouldn't be much fun.....in fact, prior to creating the MLD, I was in another all MLer dynasty, a 3 season one with high skill drafts, and by the 3rd season, nearly every team was loaded.   It became almost random who would win it because all the teams were stacked.......(hence why I came up with the retirement rule for the MLD, to ensure all teams would turn over and not get stacked with perfect players. 
 
Having them(draft picks) at the levels they are currently at makes it more challenging.......

As for not being able to draft quality players in the later rounds, (who are game ready upon being signed)....... I thought that was an accepted common knowledge and part of the original plan with the MLD setup.  Remember, the unique thing about the MLD from day 1 was that GMs needed to manage their rosters accordingly to prevent needing to sign all 6 draft picks in an offseason....... So knowing that, if a GM does/did need to sign all six picks, it likely means/meant they went "all in" the previous season and/or they made that decision knowing that would leave them with 6 vacants roster spots after doing their end-of-season retirements.
2/23/2012 9:00 PM
damag
Posts: 5371 (0)
Hall of Famer
1723 69 11
Veteran
Here's my idea, maybe someone can blow a hole in it.  In real life leagues with these issues institute some kind of "luxury tax."  Well, what would a luxury tax for us be? 

In keeping with the 20+ games rule, I believe things we do should be simple, clean, easy to explain, and easy for the commish to handle.

I also play a lot of keeper leagues.  We draft every season, every league has different numbers you can keep.  Makes the leagues all different.

What if we instituted a small mandatory minimum number of retirements per team per season - like say, three?

Quite simply, if you want to stack your team, every $612k player you warehouse would cost you cutting a younger prospect.  Conversely, every kid you want to cook in the minors costs you a higher skilled vet.

What this would do is accelerate the timetable for every team to hit "maturity".  You'd have to make stronger and sooner decisions about when your roster reaches tipping point, when you can't keep guys around forever and you have to fill in the draft with new blood.

Refute please.

 
2/23/2012 9:00 PM
onekrazypuck
Posts: 182 (0)
Hall of Famer
13 1 1356
Prospect
Posted by god_mike on 2/23/2012 8:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by smeric on 2/23/2012 4:46:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure I've even iced a 1st round pick in his draft year
i can't tell when a player was drafted, only when his first season was.  maybe OKP has that ability, i don't know.  when i say most of my players are under ten years, that's from when they started playing.  i have played a few of my picks in their draft year though.  :>
Just want to say, I don't have the ability to determine what year a player was drafted.  :(
2/23/2012 9:03 PM
smeric
Posts: 752 (0)
Hall of Famer
501 153 57 1032 150 140 24 11
Rookie
Why are we floating alternative bonus ideas when the initial concern was bonuses not doing what was intended?  I'd rather see A) bonuses scrapped period or failing that B) a maintenance of the status quo ... never would I want to see EVERY 1st round player getting bonused.  What's the point in that?  Scrap the bonus all together - we are all drafting from the same pot anyway and now that you can pre-rank a full 24 players no one can complain about getting jobbed.  non-playoff teams already get the advantage of early picks so no need to keep tinkering imo.

Let's dumb down the talent pool instead of trying to find ways to create more high-end players.
 
2/23/2012 10:11 PM
damag
Posts: 5371 (0)
Hall of Famer
1723 69 11
Veteran
Agreed with smeric. We get a more dynamic and interesting league with more widely distributed LOWER talent players, not higher.

Same reason I'd rather play low cap, and as a matter of fact never play high cap leagues anymore. There's no fun in a Gretzky or Lemieux only scoring 30 goals. All the talent just cancels itself out.
2/23/2012 11:05 PM
damag
Posts: 5371 (0)
Hall of Famer
1723 69 11
Veteran
Also don't forget what drove okp to open up this topic... he's seen all the stockpiled talent not currently seeing game action. No wonder we turn up our noses at the draft offerings.
2/23/2012 11:13 PM
corbs1019
Posts: 86 (0)
Hall of Famer
1274
Prospect

First let me just say, As I stated I am not sure what the answer is I was just throwing out some ideas, in no way was I saying I wanted later draft picks to be "really good" game ready players I simply stated maybe a "little" better, and again it was just an idea I was throwing out for discussion.


 Do what you want to the draft and bonuses, but I am not playing under a system when I would have to retire players before there played there 6 seasons, I am also not in favor of a salary cap as I like to trade (at least I have some fun doing that) and trades affect a teams cap.

2/24/2012 11:21 AM
chuckinrlp
Posts: 3352 (0)
Hall of Famer
88 1 3156 1
Hall of Famer
I don't mind when lower draft picks aren't much use. It makes you stratagize a little more during the season. What is difficult to swallow is when you can't even use your number one draft pick because of crappy stats. (I'm not *itching, just wondering how others are doing it is all. I'll figure it out eventually...I hope!) ;^)
I do feel honored to be in this league, and I feel OKP has done an outstanding job of not only being a commish, but being a pro-active one who is always looking for ways to improve the quality of the league.
2/24/2012 12:48 PM
onekrazypuck
Posts: 182 (0)
Hall of Famer
13 1 1356
Prospect

Ideas are always welcome.

Another idea we could possibly consider is making it so each team MUST have a full roster for each game, 18 skaters + 2 goalies......but we'd need to also allow a little wiggle room for injuries, like for example when a player gets hurt in the AM game and the GM isnt able to log on till after the PM game. 

Just an idea.

 

2/24/2012 1:24 PM
◂ Prev 1...57|58|59|60|61...63 Next ▸
MLD World Thread #2 Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.