Master Blacklist Commentary & Team Rosters Topic

scudmissle
Posts: 3587 (0)
Hall of Famer
483 4
Prospect
Posted by eleibowitz on 6/3/2011 8:02:00 AM (view original):
Can I ask a question why is round 6 capped at 2600 mins per player?  Considering how this draft is playing out can you get rid of that?
it is capped at 2600 minutes per player because they act as bench players or platoon agents. if not limited playing time, then we are drafting 2 full time players, which would then really create a draft imbalance according to slots. it is the same as in the odl and 52 mil league (with slight variations). why is this a problem now, leibo? 
6/3/2011 9:48 AM
eleibowitz
Posts: 3680 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 289 10 4 15
Rookie
Posted by scudmissle on 6/3/2011 9:48:00 (view original):
Posted by eleibowitz on 6/3/2011 8:02:00 AM (view original):
Can I ask a question why is round 6 capped at 2600 mins per player?  Considering how this draft is playing out can you get rid of that?
it is capped at 2600 minutes per player because they act as bench players or platoon agents. if not limited playing time, then we are drafting 2 full time players, which would then really create a draft imbalance according to slots. it is the same as in the odl and 52 mil league (with slight variations). why is this a problem now, leibo? 
Becuase the top slots have an imbalance now.  I've really haven't paid attention to it but just really looked at it.  We got the first C and then last for PF, PG and SF.  Then we get top on a weak SG draft and leftovers in the 6th round.  We should at the very least gotten a middle pick in the PG or SF draft.  So taking to minute cap off will help restore the imbalance.

6/3/2011 10:21 AM (edited)
felonius
Posts: 3771 (0)
Hall of Famer
154 9 6
Rookie
I have no problem with players under 2600 minutes and most of the rounds were watered down (it's a blacklist league that happens) - the thing is I looked at the way the draft was set up from the beginning and planned accordingly - in fact I almost took Brand in the PF round thinking to play him at SF in anticipation of using two strong rebounding PF eligible platoon players in the final round and then I did draft an SG eligible SF with that same plan in mind for an SF platoon rotation - also I drafted a minutes shy PG (less than 2500 minutes) knowing I could reap  the benefits of a super sub at that position - keep in mind 2600 minutes is still a very substantial 32 minutes per game

one thing I would consider for next time is capping how many players can be delisted by position
6/3/2011 10:36 AM
longtallbrad
Posts: 4804 (0)
Hall of Famer
434 52
Pro
I agree with leibo on this...but i also agree with felonius.  Too late to make changes now, given that owners have already been implementing draft strategies based on the current rules.
6/3/2011 10:40 AM
eleibowitz
Posts: 3680 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 289 10 4 15
Rookie
Posted by longtallbrad on 6/3/2011 10:40:00 (view original):
I agree with leibo on this...but i also agree with felonius.  Too late to make changes now, given that owners have already been implementing draft strategies based on the current rules.

But then you can take that back all the way when we were picking draft slots.  I would of never taken the 2 spot if this was the way the draft was to be played out.  And felonius understand what you are saying but to a point.  I'm looking to equalize the draft and think this is a good and fair way to do it. 

6/3/2011 10:45 AM
logain
Posts: 2582 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 110 428 2
Prospect
I'm good with everything. A little confused about why the bottom slots pick before the top slots in 4/6 Rds but my team will suck equally either way. Minute cap or not I'd pick the same two players.
6/3/2011 10:48 AM
longtallbrad
Posts: 4804 (0)
Hall of Famer
434 52
Pro
Posted by eleibowitz on 6/3/2011 10:45:00 AM (view original):
Posted by longtallbrad on 6/3/2011 10:40:00 (view original):
I agree with leibo on this...but i also agree with felonius.  Too late to make changes now, given that owners have already been implementing draft strategies based on the current rules.

But then you can take that back all the way when we were picking draft slots.  I would of never taken the 2 spot if this was the way the draft was to be played out.  And felonius understand what you are saying but to a point.  I'm looking to equalize the draft and think this is a good and fair way to do it. 

Well, that's also true.  I don't know off-hand what slot I would have wanted, but the considerations would definitely have been different.
6/3/2011 11:04 AM
longtallbrad
Posts: 4804 (0)
Hall of Famer
434 52
Pro
Still, I have to hope and assume the salary cap will be the great equalizer.  My past couple seasons' worth of assumptions about which draft slots were most advantageous definitely didn't prove to be necessarily true.
6/3/2011 11:05 AM
felonius
Posts: 3771 (0)
Hall of Famer
154 9 6
Rookie
another way to look at the question of the 'weak SG' round is that it's relatively more advantageous to pick high in a weak round where you still stand a chance of getting value and the people after you will get drek than a strong round like the SF one we're in now where everyone is more likely to get a value pick
6/3/2011 11:07 AM
eleibowitz
Posts: 3680 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 289 10 4 15
Rookie
Posted by longtallbrad on 6/3/2011 11:05:00 (view original):
Still, I have to hope and assume the salary cap will be the great equalizer.  My past couple seasons' worth of assumptions about which draft slots were most advantageous definitely didn't prove to be necessarily true.
I think if this was a 42m draft I would say yes the cap is a good equalizer but $47m I think with all the big dawgs out its actaully a pretty friendly cap.  Also the spot I would taken was Felonius's ;)

6/3/2011 11:07 AM
logain
Posts: 2582 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 110 428 2
Prospect
Actually when we originally signed up slots 12 11 were by far the best and I was picking last in 4 Rds. The lesson here is to get the draft order figured out correctly before ppl sign up. And maybe just do random slots.
6/3/2011 11:10 AM
felonius
Posts: 3771 (0)
Hall of Famer
154 9 6
Rookie
I think sly's draft system might be the best bet for next time
6/3/2011 11:11 AM
logain
Posts: 2582 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 110 428 2
Prospect
Posted by felonius on 6/3/2011 11:07:00 AM (view original):
another way to look at the question of the 'weak SG' round is that it's relatively more advantageous to pick high in a weak round where you still stand a chance of getting value and the people after you will get drek than a strong round like the SF one we're in now where everyone is more likely to get a value pick
I'm not sure. We will see players taken early in the sg rd that were undrafted in the last league. Overall I like the 100% eligible rule better.
6/3/2011 11:13 AM
felonius
Posts: 3771 (0)
Hall of Famer
154 9 6
Rookie
I dont - it dilutes the value of high end picks in certain rounds even more - there's next to no value in the PF round if the center round came first and all the best PFs are C eligible - ditto the SF round if it comes after SG round - the best SFs are all gone - hell Lebron went in the PG round in the last draft
6/3/2011 11:18 AM
slymonium
Posts: 4809 (0)
Hall of Famer
284 30 2
Prospect
Posted by felonius on 6/3/2011 11:11:00 AM (view original):
I think sly's draft system might be the best bet for next time
Sounds like scud wants to do it that way next time.  The issue that will be sure to arise in that scenario (which you pointed out earlier) is by virtue of draw, some individuals will have their top 4 pick land in the 2Bench round. 

BUT- The 2Bench round won't always be drawn to be the last round.  Imagine if the random ordering in that draft landed the 2Bench round first. Good lordy, that could screw the rest of us as there are so many excellent seasons out there under 2600 minutes.
6/3/2011 11:28 AM
◂ Prev 1...7|8|9|10|11...14 Next ▸
Master Blacklist Commentary & Team Rosters Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.