Being that this is only my 6th season, I'd say it is somewhat unreasonable, yes. First of all, and not that you would know this, but I don't recall ever losing a Type A to this point, so how could I comment with anything constructive?  Additionally, I've intermittently been active in the suggestions posed by others, clearly showing a desire to work through flaws of the game, regardless of the topic or its personal importance to me.  And you and I have agreed with one another more than once in these forums.

However, I am not interested in arguing with you either, Mike. But I don't take it lightly when anybody makes baseless accusations about my intentions or my character.  The absence of evidence to a point is not evidence to the contrary.

But yes, I adopted your view.  It is a nice solution, something I was hoping could be derived from a discussion that I merely hoped to initiate with my initial post.  The suggestion forum is nothing without dialogue.  Anybody who posts something without wishing to listen and adjust probably is in it to fix a personal problem.

Nothing I posted was an attack on your character.    I was simply pointing out that most suggestions come about because of personal experience.  Usually negative person experience.     Have you signed a Type A?   Did you care about the compensation the other owner got?   The only time I have was when I was making sure a competitor wasn't getting my top pick.    So I'd sign a 2nd Type A. 

I signed a type a from a bad team that got my first rounder. They were unaffected by this discussion.

I stand by my assertion that this is a flaw that affects half of the league every season, and extends beyond the tenets of competitive balance.

I made a suggestion, you made a revision, I adopted your view.  That's how the process should work, and who knows, maybe it will lead to something.  I don't fault you for making the assumption given what pops up from time to time in the suggestions, but I would hope you'll be less cynical in the future.

Thank you MikeT for contributing to a what resulted in a constructive discussion.

You didn't answer the question.   Did you care about his compensation?

Unlikely I'll be less cynical.   As I said, the game has been around 10 years and I was in the first world.   The suggestion process is what it is and it repeats itself.

As I said, I'm fighting for teams that are affected by this flaw.  His team was not.  I care about teams that are ripped off.  He was not ripped off.

The answer to your question is implicit in my response.  I care that every owner is subject to a fair compensatory system.  I don't feel the need to spell everything out.  

Sounds good.

cshake93 - I got "screwed" much like you this past season. Lost one of the best SPs in the world to FA.  Didn't match the max contract.  Team that signed him signed another Type A.  Vast majority would agree the one I lost is a lot better.

I'll get a 2nd round pick.

For the overall good of the world and HBD, it's best that the team who had a record worse than mine gets the better draft pick.

This rule hurts me now.  And it will help me when it's time to rebuild and I let my last few Type A's go.

If everyone who played HBD treated it like a full-time job, your idea would probably be better.  That's not how HBD works in the real world.

If you let me rank FAs, I'll do it for my own benefit every time.  I would have ranked my guy #1 and then ranked the worst FAs #2 on down the list as far as the list goes.

OVR is not a way to determine who the best player is.  If you think it is, let's you and I get into the same world under the condition that you'll accept every trade I offer as long as you get the better OVR (current or projected.)

The logic behind your proposal is solid, if we ignore the behaviors and motivations of the humans who play the game.

I don't believe that OVR determines who the best player is.  But there is definitely a linear association between overall and worth, though with some big outliers.  And I agree about the ranking flaw, which is why I ultimately adopted MikeT's idea to let FA contract values be the gauge.

UPDATE:  I got a 4th round comp pick for the best FA, not 2nd.

Yeah, overall contract value would be another way to do it.  If every HBD GM played the game like it mattered to them, or if there was real money on the line, or if we lost money if we gave up a team that was below average, that would probably be a better and more fair rule.

But in the real world, there's are a lot of people who run teams into the ground and leave them.  It's easier to get someone to take over those teams if it's easier to rebuilt them. Giving teams with a worse W-L record the better draft pick is one way to help bad team become more competitive.

The even better solution to this would be to eliminate Type A/B compensation draft picks in HBD. In MLB, when they were put into the rules, it was a way to balance talent so, over time, it didn't all shift from smaller markets to bigger markets.

In HBD, there are no smaller markets or bigger markets. All Type A/B comp picks do in HBD is help the good teams stay good. 

The way comp picks work in HBD is not even close to how the work in MLB.  We don't have to make a qualifying offer.  And it looks like they'll change the system so teams do get a sandwich pick, but teams will not lose a pick.  (I'm not sure if they've already agreed to this.)  If a player is traded their last season the team trading for them does not get a comp pick.

HBD would be a better game if they either got rid of comp picks or made them work more like MLB.

Don't expect anyone to agree with me in this forum.  Most of the people who post here have been playing a while or are pretty good HBD GMs.  They are the rich who get richer under the current HBD system.

You assume too much.  They should have done away with comp picks after Year 1.  I noticed way too many good players not getting signed because everyone treated first round draft picks like their first born child.   Tankers wouldn't sign their departing FA because they wanted the picks and others wouldn't sign Type A because they didn't want to give up their first round pick.    The only people signing them were those with protected 1st rounders or those signing multiple Type A FA and punting the draft.

Doing away with comp picks completely, or just giving the team losing the Type A a comp pick without punishing the signing team, would be a huge improvement.

Nice to agree with Mike once in a while.

I haven't made any assumptions, Mike. I've only made observations. Big difference there.

You're right, though.  I've noticed many good players remain unsigned because of comp.  So I agree that the best solution probably would be to get rid of the comp system as it is, and simply give compensatory sandwich picks.