Posted by ronthegenius on 12/15/2021 9:15:00 AM (view original):
I understand there has always been a grace period in which changes can be made.
And I'm not faulting anyone who takes advantage if it.
But I'll throw this out for consideration. In the future, how about a draft (in order of finish, or reverse order of finish) where you make your selection and then have to stick to it.

I don't even think you need to set an order for selection. There are advantages to picking early (you get the player you want), or late (you get the lay of the land a bit before you choose your player). But I do think people should have to stick with their selection. If they want to change the season of their player, fine, but stick with the player himself.

In this specific case, one of the reasons I moved on from Hernandez is because I didn't think I'd end up rostering both Kershaw and Greinke with players like Degrom and Cole nominated. Now Degrom is gone for a relatively useless pitcher, so I'll be forced to find another good SP teammate.

Think about poor Marvin Benard - picked 3 times and dumped three times. LOL. Nominating a player for their teammates many times doesn’t pan out. I’ve tried it few times (especially the Kershaw/Greinke tandem) and always ended up settling for less. For better or worse if I nominate a pitcher it’s one I can use and, hopefully, it’s one that others can’t use to their advantage. Having said that, I favor random draft order. Why should anyone be advantaged for a high or low dollar nomination.

Posted by joerat1 on 12/15/2021 9:44:00 AM (view original):
Think about poor Marvin Benard - picked 3 times and dumped three times. LOL. Nominating a player for their teammates many times doesn’t pan out. I’ve tried it few times (especially the Kershaw/Greinke tandem) and always ended up settling for less. For better or worse if I nominate a pitcher it’s one I can use and, hopefully, it’s one that others can’t use to their advantage. Having said that, I favor random draft order. Why should anyone be advantaged for a high or low dollar nomination.

I had no idea that Benard was picked three times. I wasn't following the selections for the first day or two. Had I known, I wouldn't have jerked him around like that. As you suggest, he's been through enough.

As for Jtpsops referring to Chris Haney as *relatively* useless, that's probably the nicest thing anyone has ever said about Chris Haney.

For the record, my switch to Haney had little to do with draft position (and nothing to do with who y'all picked), but everything to do with teammates and, in particular, SP IP. I chose DeGrom because he was the first good player I found with 8-11 seasons. I didn't even look and realize that he had no appealing teammates until last night. I was obviously fine with picking last. So this morning I spent a little time looking for a team with a few usable teammates and came across the 2002 Sox. None of the good players had 8-11 seasons, but I found that Haney did. As for blowing up y'alls plans: being someone who drafts off the cuff with little to no research, all I can say is -- good.

For the record my switch had little to do with draft position (I may have already had first pick in my league; I never bothered to check) and more to do with the fact that my heart is two sizes too small.

The reason why I allow unlimited changes is because I don't want somebody to be screwed by a subsequent pick ruining their teammate options. What if I chose Joe Horlen as my nominated player after the '64 Pete Ward nomination or chose Don Drysdale after the '64 Roseboro nomination?

One can argue the advantages and/or disadvantages of nominating a player early or late, but by allowing unlimited changes, it is my hope that everybody goes into the draft satisfied with their selection. There's plenty of strategy required during the draft... I don't see a need to add a whole new level of nomination strategy.

New deadline for changes... 12/16 8:22 am.

Posted by schwarze on 12/15/2021 11:17:00 AM (view original):
New deadline for changes... 12/16 8:22 am.

Ok I don't think i quite realized that the clock moved every time there was a new change (maybe I did but I don't remember). I for some reason thought today at midday was final deadline. Now I feel a weeeeeeeee bit bad.

Posted by slainte on 12/15/2021 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by schwarze on 12/15/2021 11:17:00 AM (view original):
New deadline for changes... 12/16 8:22 am.

Ok I don't think i quite realized that the clock moved every time there was a new change (maybe I did but I don't remember). I for some reason thought today at midday was final deadline. Now I feel a weeeeeeeee bit bad.

ya... but if you changed back the clock would start all over again...

Posted by 3dayrotation on 12/15/2021 11:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by slainte on 12/15/2021 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by schwarze on 12/15/2021 11:17:00 AM (view original):
New deadline for changes... 12/16 8:22 am.

Ok I don't think i quite realized that the clock moved every time there was a new change (maybe I did but I don't remember). I for some reason thought today at midday was final deadline. Now I feel a weeeeeeeee bit bad.

ya... but if you changed back the clock would start all over again...

Isn't there a rule about this in chess?

Posted by schwarze on 12/15/2021 11:17:00 AM (view original):
New deadline for changes... 12/16 8:22 am.

I read all of the comments, still my favorite draft!!! Thanks, Schwarze!

Schwarze is the best in running the drafts. Period.

Posted by joerat1 on 12/15/2021 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Schwarze is the best in running the drafts. Period.

"Quote"

Thanks.

The reason the clock re-sets is because I don't want a bunch of changes minutes before the deadline. This way, it keeps things fair for those that can't be at their computer 24/7. If 24 hours pass after all the recent changes, then I can assume everybody is satisfied with their selection and know all the other selections.

Somebody should change their player to Marvin Benard.... then they can name their team "Poor Marvin Benard"