The Old Shoe: Monopoly Discussion Thread Topic

gumbercules
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 11 1 55
Prospect
Not quite.  It is a little more limited than you think.  I've asked ct whether he meant for all owners to be included in the supplemental draft or just those who are short of 25 players.  After confering with him, I'll make a ruling on that.  But after the supplemental rounds, if you have at least 25 players you don't get any more freebies.  At that point, if you want somebody, you have to pay for him. 
10/29/2010 12:52 AM
gumbercules
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 11 1 55
Prospect
And if you'd rather have the money and roster spot instead of a given player that you have, you're free to sell him. 
10/29/2010 12:53 AM
tarheel1991
Posts: 4490 (0)
Hall of Famer
73 298 9 1 42 189 1 1
Pro
Posted by gumbercules on 10/29/2010 12:52:00 AM (view original):
Not quite.  It is a little more limited than you think.  I've asked ct whether he meant for all owners to be included in the supplemental draft or just those who are short of 25 players.  After confering with him, I'll make a ruling on that.  But after the supplemental rounds, if you have at least 25 players you don't get any more freebies.  At that point, if you want somebody, you have to pay for him. 
The post that I was responding to to start all of this suggested that the supplemental draft should be extended past two rounds. I understand that, after the supplemental draft is over, you can not add more players for free if you are over 25 players. But if we extend the supplemental draft to make it more than two rounds, that would change. I do not want to do that.


Also, I think it's pretty clear from the original rules that the supplemental draft was supposed to include everyone. Some people will not be able to reach adequate levels of innings and/or at bats with their 25 players, because some units include multiple reserve players with low numbers of PA/IP, so I think it's a good idea. I just don't think it should be extended to allow owners to add more than two players, for free, before we move on to letting owners pay for any additional players they want.
10/29/2010 7:37 AM
gumbercules
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 11 1 55
Prospect
Yes, the supplemental draft does include everyone. 

If you were so dead set against adding more than 2 players, you should have brought it up before we started, when the discussion was raised in the initial forum thread.  CT addressed the issue and I'm sticking to it. 
10/29/2010 8:12 AM
tarheel1991
Posts: 4490 (0)
Hall of Famer
73 298 9 1 42 189 1 1
Pro
Posted by gumbercules on 10/29/2010 8:12:00 AM (view original):
Yes, the supplemental draft does include everyone. 

If you were so dead set against adding more than 2 players, you should have brought it up before we started, when the discussion was raised in the initial forum thread.  CT addressed the issue and I'm sticking to it. 
OK - I am pretty sure one or both of us is confused about what the other one is saying. Here is my understanding of what the rules currently say:

-After the initial player unit auction, there will be a 2-round supplemental draft, in which all owners participate
-After that supplemental draft, anyone who is still short of 25 players for the 2000 season may add players to get up to 25
-After every owner has 25 players, all remaining players may be bid on by anyone who still has funds remaining and wishes to add more players



I like those rules. I am fine with those rules. As far as I can see that is exactly what ctorriente posted (and amended to the original rules) in the initial forum thread. 


What I am against is extending the supplemental draft to more than two rounds, which was what another owner suggested prompting my response in this thread.

I am almost positive that at no point in the initial forum thread did ctorriente suggest that the supplemental draft would have any more than two rounds, and at no point he implied in any way that owners who already had 25 players would not participate in the supplemental draft . If I am reading what I see incorrectly, please point me to where I am wrong.
10/29/2010 9:20 AM
coldfeet
Posts: 382 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 18 2 4
Prospect

i asked a question, whether a team short of 25 players would be able to draft more than 2 rounds. the answer was pointed out in an earlier decision by ct.

10/29/2010 9:32 AM
crustydoc
Posts: 4207 (1)
Hall of Famer
586
Rookie
And the answer is also stated in tarheel's second bullet point, it appears . . . in which case, we're all on the same page, right?
10/29/2010 10:56 AM
deanod
Posts: 3152 (0)
Hall of Famer
115 18 1 105 1 52
Prospect
Yeah, I don't see why any change is necessary.  I had already brought up extending the draft with CT and he didn't want to, so he just added the option to bid for undrafted players afterward.
10/29/2010 11:58 AM
gumbercules
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 11 1 55
Prospect
I didn't say anything about a rule change.  I said we were sticking to what ct had originally laid out.  I think where we're getting confused is the addition of the players short of 25.  It all just depends on whether you view that addition as being an addition to the supplemental draft. 

Tarheel, I thought you were talking about a change to the rules ct laid out when in actuality I guess you were talking about something else.  You last post tells me you and I are on the same page.  As I said before, the rules as ct laid out in the forum are what we're going to go with, the ones you said you were good with. 
10/29/2010 12:58 PM
gumbercules
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 11 1 55
Prospect
And hopefully that's the end of this discussion.  Back to finding helmethead's replacement...
10/29/2010 12:58 PM
tarheel1991
Posts: 4490 (0)
Hall of Famer
73 298 9 1 42 189 1 1
Pro
Posted by gumbercules on 10/29/2010 12:58:00 PM (view original):
I didn't say anything about a rule change.  I said we were sticking to what ct had originally laid out.  I think where we're getting confused is the addition of the players short of 25.  It all just depends on whether you view that addition as being an addition to the supplemental draft. 

Tarheel, I thought you were talking about a change to the rules ct laid out when in actuality I guess you were talking about something else.  You last post tells me you and I are on the same page.  As I said before, the rules as ct laid out in the forum are what we're going to go with, the ones you said you were good with. 
perfect, thanks - sorry for the confusion. i suspected we were not quite understanding each other.
10/29/2010 1:12 PM
gumbercules
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 11 1 55
Prospect
Glad we got that sorted out.  Now where's our 24th owner?
10/29/2010 1:20 PM
grayfoxx
Posts: 6819 (1)
Hall of Famer
294 61 83
Prospect
What about *pugs*?, he hasnt made ANY post since 10/3
10/29/2010 1:23 PM
gumbercules
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
68 11 1 55
Prospect
Sitemailed pugs on Monday.  He replied and told me he's in.
10/29/2010 1:28 PM
brianjw
Posts: 1260 (0)
Hall of Famer
292
Veteran
I agree with profcake on the proposal to change future years rookie drafts. I think unless a change is needed to keep the league functional, we shouldn't change rules midstream.
10/29/2010 3:37 PM
◂ Prev 1...8|9|10|11|12...31 Next ▸
The Old Shoe: Monopoly Discussion Thread Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 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.