Draft lottery Topic

This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 75
Prospect
That's a variation. Don't mind it.

I do like the "it's Christmas" aspect of a lottery.
1/12/2012 10:22 AM
jsturgis5866
Posts: 528 (0)
Hall of Famer
196 31 1 1 225
Prospect
But then you'd have teams manipulating their wins to get to 10. I'm disgusted by owners in so-called "good" worlds with win-floors, that tank just enough to stay clear of the rule but at the same time get into good draft position.

You could get rid of all projections, but you could work around that, I suppose. Maybe set it up so  that no $10m Internats ... round 1/1* draftees ... Type A FAs will sign with teams that finish below .500 the previous season. That would create an incentive to get to .500 with what's available. Quite doable.
1/12/2012 10:32 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Owners will always find loopholes.  That's why I tied 11th into 17th.   If you want to screw around and try to hit #10, you could end up with an unprotected pick.    For all I care, extend it to 20(all not playoff teams).   20/11, 11/20.
1/12/2012 10:35 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by jsturgis5866 on 1/12/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):
But then you'd have teams manipulating their wins to get to 10. I'm disgusted by owners in so-called "good" worlds with win-floors, that tank just enough to stay clear of the rule but at the same time get into good draft position.

You could get rid of all projections, but you could work around that, I suppose. Maybe set it up so  that no $10m Internats ... round 1/1* draftees ... Type A FAs will sign with teams that finish below .500 the previous season. That would create an incentive to get to .500 with what's available. Quite doable.
You're not understanding Mike's suggestion.  10 gets you the #1 pick.  But if you just miss and end up at 11, you get the #17 pick.  Huge risk if you're trying to manipulate for draft position.

Anyways, if you're trying to "improve" your draft position by dropping towards 10, you get there by winning games.  I'd say that's good for competition in the closing days of the season.

As for your comment about win-floors and tanking to stay just above the line . . . if you have graduated, multi-season targets, then that problem is mitigated.  Just scraping by one season just makes it that much tougher to meet next season's target.

1/12/2012 10:38 AM
jsturgis5866
Posts: 528 (0)
Hall of Famer
196 31 1 1 225
Prospect
OK, gotcha. But we all know that won't stop anyone who's trying to manipulate things... risk/reward. The chance at 10 is well worth the risk of dropping to 17. Hell, I'd do *that*.

1/12/2012 10:55 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by jsturgis5866 on 1/12/2012 10:55:00 AM (view original):
OK, gotcha. But we all know that won't stop anyone who's trying to manipulate things... risk/reward. The chance at 10 is well worth the risk of dropping to 17. Hell, I'd do *that*.

Again, if you want to drop to 10 (1st pick) at the risk of dropping to 11 (17th pick), then you do so by winning games.  That's not a bad thing, having non-playoff teams trying to win games at the end of the season.
1/12/2012 11:16 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Not necessarily.  You could be stuck at 13th(which would be 15th pick under my suggestion) right now.  A losing streak could move you to 1st(10th), 17th(11th) or somewhere in between.   But there's also the off-chance that a win streak puts you in the playoffs.    Moving it to 1-10(reverse order) and 11-20(non-playoff reverse order) would solve most of that.   Of course, that means the worst playoff team picks 21st instead of where they pick now(like our WS winner in Coop having a protected pick). 
1/12/2012 11:47 AM
shobob
Posts: 3404 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 370
Prospect
I thought this game was meant to mimic RL MLB, is it not?
1/12/2012 1:32 PM
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 75
Prospect

I thought this game had a cap, does it not?

1/12/2012 2:07 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Sure.  But I think all of us know that every #1 pick in MLB isn't going to the HOF.  The only way that doesn't happen in HBD is because of owner incompetence.
1/12/2012 3:37 PM
stevehoggett
Posts: 302 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 38 45
Prospect
I personally think HBD should implement some sort of attendance and bonus revenue that a team can use the following season. Cap this amount at say 10million. Have it directly related to win totals and playoff home games.

Have the 10m be assigned at budget time and allow teams to put it over and above the 20million caps for individual amounts. This means that you can leave it on player payroll or put it to prospect or coaching budgets without taking the 50% transfer hit.

1/14/2012 6:08 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by stevehoggett on 1/14/2012 6:08:00 AM (view original):
I personally think HBD should implement some sort of attendance and bonus revenue that a team can use the following season. Cap this amount at say 10million. Have it directly related to win totals and playoff home games.

Have the 10m be assigned at budget time and allow teams to put it over and above the 20million caps for individual amounts. This means that you can leave it on player payroll or put it to prospect or coaching budgets without taking the 50% transfer hit.

Seeing that the game is designed such that all teams start out each season on equal footing, I don't see how or why a suggestion in which "the rich get richer" improves the game at all.
1/14/2012 7:53 AM
stevehoggett
Posts: 302 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 38 45
Prospect
It would have 0 carry over and it would be used as an incentive to win. Lets not kid ourselves teams dont start out equal every season or else we would have a complete player draft every year. Theres already a carry over effect so why not have a tiny one that we can control.

something like this could work.

Each win = 100k in bonus money with a maximum of 10mil which would be 100 wins.

Now that I think about it there is no reason to provide more money for playoff home games since teams are already trying to win in the playoffs.
1/14/2012 8:20 AM
12 Next ▸
Draft lottery 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.