Posted by ozomatli on 10/23/2018 11:49:00 PM (view original):

Posted by schwarze on 10/23/2018 11:39:00 PM (view original):
I fully expect to get sniped with this next pick, but I already have my backup pick ready to go.

I think I know who you're picking. I didn't pick him. I thought about it though.

I was wrong. Thought you were taking Frisch

Posted by schwarze on 10/24/2018 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Northof49 is the only person left who got his player on his first try in every round. Hmmm, I wonder what park he is going to be playing in.

northof49
1.1-Koufax,Sandy
2.1-Hamilton,Biily
3.1-Marichal,J.
4.1-McLain,D.
5.1-McNally,Dave

Thanks for pointing that out schwarze! That is no longer the case.

Last round, I was deciding between Art Nehf, Toad Ramsey, Tony Gwynn & Tim Raines. I got Nehf... Gwynn went that same round. This round I was deciding on Ramsey & Raines and somehow Raines got though. Let me adjust that horseshoe.

People forget about Raines these days because he's overpriced. Not an issue in this league though

On that topic, I wonder if this format would work with a salary cap. Could end up that everyone goes in different directions and there's less overlap of choices, or that the cap concentrates demand even further?

Probably true that this depends more on whether the owners who are playing have similar styles or not, though, regardless of cap.

Being an old Expo fan, Raines was one of my favorites, just like Vladimir Guerrero, and Andre Dawson. They just don't seem to do as well in WIS as they did in real life. I saw Vladimir hit the ball in real life. I've never seen a ball jump off the bat like his did.

Lots of players in WIS are like that. Normalization hurts them.

I used to be in a draft similar to this when I played in Strat-O-Matic tournaments. They called it "Grand Prix" drafting (with "Chip Accumulation"). The general concept is the same, but there is no blacklist. Everybody would submit their player. If no matches, that person would get his choice. But when there was a match, we did something slightly different.

In round 1, if two people selected the same player, he would be awarded randomly to one of the two people who claimed him (coin flip, high card, etc). The person who won the player would have to give the losing person a chip. (If three people selected the same player, the two losing people would have to give a chip to the winning person).

In subsequent rounds, if two or more people selected the same player, the person with more accumulated chips would win the player and have to give a chip to the loser(s). Again, if two people with the same selected player had the same number of chips, the player would be randomly assigned and the winner gives a chip to the loser.

This methodology would, in effect, offset somebody getting extra lucky or extra unlucky on the random draws.

Something to think about.

How did it play out? I feel the value of getting your man in the early rounds far outweighs the later rounds.

It worked out fine. In fact, some folks used a little game theory and would purposely select a popular player in the early rounds hoping to pick up multiple chips for use in the later rounds. In fact, some people didn't want to win a 4-way tie as it really hurt them in the tie-breaker for multiple rounds after that.

The main advantage of this live Grand Prix draft was that it only took about an hour, where a typical snake draft would take 3+ hours.

Round 6.2 posted.. . . Just 2 matches, these two are fighting each other for a shortstop! They go to 6.3.

DoctorKz
nocomm999

Interestingly, rounds 2-6 have been very consistent in that after the x.2 iteration there have been exactly 2 owners left for the x.3 iteration.

The first round was, not surprisingly, the real dogfight round.

Only 5 owners have seen iteration 3 or higher of a round more than once. I guess I should feel honoured that I'm one.

I would most likely pivot to a different position if I'm heads up with one other person in Request x.2 or later - less of a chance at getting sniped again. That's what I did in round 2.

Posted by schwarze on 10/24/2018 3:43:00 PM (view original):
I would most likely pivot to a different position if I'm heads up with one other person in Request x.2 or later - less of a chance at getting sniped again. That's what I did in round 2.

Or assume that they will do exactly this, leaving you to get your man, like I did with redcped a few rounds ago

I went OF, P, OF, SS in Round 1. Just couldn't shake people. Granted, some of those choices were more obvious, I suppose.

Round 6 complete and posted. We are moving right along, thanks guys for being so attentive and getting your requests in fairly quick, I think I speak for all 24 of us when I say it is much appreciated!

Please check results and submit 7.1 thanks all.