I agree with schwarze’s points.

Whatever way is easiest for you to do. I am sure your recovery is still very tiring. (Hopefully you are in the recovery stage.)

Here's what I'm thinking:

First of all, on the subject of swapping picks. I know that there are a few of you who would rather have A.L. or N.L. or modern ball rather than old-time ball - I get that. In the past, I haven't stopped the swapping of picks - not because I wanted to allow them but because I just never gave it that much thought until it pretty much hit me in the face and I had to make a decision...so I usually just went with it. Here's what I can do for this: Most owners who have several teams moving into the next Round don't care one bit about league or era when it comes to their teams. Some of the owners who only have one or two teams moving on are just happy to still be around and will be happy with where they land. For those who are particular about the era/league/etc. that they get placed in, please just let me know beforehand and I will do my utmost best to place you in a league where you can make that choice.

Once we get the Top 12 owners from Round Three (according to W/L record) and they choose which leagues they want to pick in, I'll then go in and create the draft orders for the remainder of Round Four in all six leagues. Especially when you get around the teams that finish somewhere between 77 and 87 wins, there's a big bunch of where everyone is pretty close to the same so it shouldn't be too hard to put a few select individuals where they would be most comfortable. All I can do is do my best. That should take care of any draft pick swapping.

EDIT: After giving it some additional thought - with the theme of Round Four having each team (Leagues 1 thru 5 anyway) running a chain of 111 seasons, if someone just wants to use modern players on their team or just old-time players on their team, they have that luxury. Other than needing one player from each of the 11 available seasons to each of the teams, the other fourteen players on your roster can come from any of the eleven seasons you get to choose from. League 6, were talking 1961 on so there won't be much flexibility there. Again, I don't see where there's going to need much need for wanting to swap out picks anyway.


I'm still thinking about the alignment...

Posted by mllama54 on 10/29/2020 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Whatever way is easiest for you to do. I am sure your recovery is still very tiring. (Hopefully you are in the recovery stage.)

How right you are - it just took me half a day to try and put together some coherent talk about the swapping of picks. Still dealing with the pneumonia aspect of this mess - always feeling like you can't get enough oxygen. As long as I'm not on a ventilator, I'm not ******** though...

Here's a crazy concept that I've been thinking about...

Trying to use the SCHWARZE/PEDRO "Snake-Style" but combining it with KSTOBER's opinion on the 21st thru 24th picks still having a shot at moving on, what about something like this:

N.L. East: Picks 1, 10, 11 and 20
N.L. Central: Picks 2, 9, 12 and 19
N.L. West: Picks 3, 8, 13 and 18

A.L. East: Picks 4, 7, 14 and 17
A.L. Central: Picks 5, 6, 15 and 16
A.L. West: Picks 21, 22, 23 and 24

Would that be too bizarre to work?

Posted by thejuice6 on 10/30/2020 12:30:00 AM (view original):
Here's a crazy concept that I've been thinking about...

Trying to use the SCHWARZE/PEDRO "Snake-Style" but combining it with KSTOBER's opinion on the 21st thru 24th picks still having a shot at moving on, what about something like this:

N.L. East: Picks 1, 10, 11 and 20
N.L. Central: Picks 2, 9, 12 and 19
N.L. West: Picks 3, 8, 13 and 18

A.L. East: Picks 4, 7, 14 and 17
A.L. Central: Picks 5, 6, 15 and 16
A.L. West: Picks 21, 22, 23 and 24

Would that be too bizarre to work?

My first reaction there is I'd much rather pick 4-7 than 3rd, because in theory I'd be playing many more games against those 21-24 teams that should (again, theoretically) not be as good.

Pedro's suggestion balances things better in my opinion (1-12-13-24, 2-11-14-23, etc.), but it also makes me wonder why have the top 12 owners from Round 3 be picking their leagues instead of 6. If it's 12, then I assume you'd have them picking 1-A, 1-N, 2-A, 2-N, etc. so they are split up into 12 different sides.

Remind me why we want to reward 73-89 teams who barely squeek into Round 4? I absolutely hate the idea of making an unbalanced division and/or league.

Also, pre-setting the alignment is invariably going to cause problems when one person has two teams in the same league or division.

Having people get to pick which division they play in (whether or not this division selection process starts at pick #1 or pick #7) at least adds some extra strategy. Simple process too... as each person selects their team, they also select their division. (This works well until about pick 21 or 22, where the last few picks may be forced due to owners with multiple teams).

Another benefit of giving people the choice of which division they want to play in.... Saving you time and effort...

You have quite a bit of work to figure out the draft order in each league.... To add another level of complexity to this process by also trying to do the draft order where no owner with multiple teams is in the same division/league, because of some arbitrary alignment mapping doesn't really make sense.

The inherent difference this round is that there is no AL/NL breakout with the team choices. Thus within a league there is a single draft of all 24 slots instead of two drafts with 12 slots. Why not just assign the even years to the AL and odd years to the NL.

So, we'd be looking at something like:

N.L.E: Picks 1, 11, 13, 23
N.L.C.: Picks 3, 9, 15, 21
N.L.W.: Picks 5, 7, 17, 19

A.L.E.: Picks 2, 12, 14, 24
A.L.C.: Picks 4, 10, 16, 22
A.L.W.: Picks 6, 8, 18, 20

Also, when you get down to the last few picks - say, 18-24, it probably wouldn't make TOO much difference in divisional placement so if we HAD to move someone to keep an owner from having two teams in the same division, we could with little to no trouble.

Posted by thejuice6 on 10/30/2020 1:49:00 PM (view original):
So, we'd be looking at something like:

N.L.E: Picks 1, 11, 13, 23
N.L.C.: Picks 3, 9, 15, 21
N.L.W.: Picks 5, 7, 17, 19

A.L.E.: Picks 2, 12, 14, 24
A.L.C.: Picks 4, 10, 16, 22
A.L.W.: Picks 6, 8, 18, 20

Also, when you get down to the last few picks - say, 18-24, it probably wouldn't make TOO much difference in divisional placement so if we HAD to move someone to keep an owner from having two teams in the same division, we could with little to no trouble.

No Juice - I was suggesting that League 1 be broken up as follows:

The AL be made of Yankees, Giants, or Phillies teams where the selected years end in even numbers: 1910-1920-1930...2020 and 1902-1912-1922...2012, etc

The NL be made of Yankees, Giants, or Phillies teams where the selected years end in odd numbers: 1901-1911-1921...2011 and 1903-1913-1923...2013, etc

The owners with the 12 best records from round 3 select the year/league they want Lg1 Al, Lg 3 NL, etc. You slot the rest of the owners in as you have in each of the other rounds.

Ahhh, I see...

The division alignment itself wouldn't matter as much as the stronger and weaker teams would be dispersed evenly between AL and NL.

The downside of the odd/even suggestion is that the last few picks may be forced. I haven't done the research, but what if there are 16 good "even" choices and only 8 good "odd" choices in any given league. So the last 4 owners want to choose an even year, but can't because we've already reached our allotment of 12 even numbers selected. I'm not advocating that we should reward the low draft picks, but I'm also suggesting we don't penalize them even more.

I don't get the push to try and reduce "choice", instead of increasing "choice".

Example:

With pick #1, I select the Yankees "7" and will play in the NL East
With pick #2, I select the Yankees "0" and will play in the AL East
etc...

This doesn't have to be complicated...