If just one more of the 1981 starting lineup had been drafted (4 of the 8 were not), I could have taken 1965 Willie Mays right now. But I'm about 170K short.

1985 Willie McGee OF 9,737,793

via proxy, bigsteve12 selects 1986 Tim Raines, 8,347,459

Posted by redcped on 8/7/2022 2:01:00 PM (view original):
If just one more of the 1981 starting lineup had been drafted (4 of the 8 were not), I could have taken 1965 Willie Mays right now. But I'm about 170K short.

Also, while I'm living in the world of coulda-been ... I coulda taken '85 Vince Coleman with my last pick instead of Billy Williams at OF2 and now have Mays in my lineup and Coleman as a super pinch runner.

The post-draft writeups should be fun to write, with dozens of should-haves and what-ifs.

Posted by schwarze on 8/7/2022 2:27:00 PM (view original):
The post-draft writeups should be fun to write, with dozens of should-haves and what-ifs.

Oh my writeup might be fun for you, but it's not going to be fun for me, not at all.

It's going to be interesting to see how the different strategies pan out. Drafting high-priced players and picking last (or near last) every round means one could be more likely to get stuck and/or not get anybody useful in round 25, but also means there isn't any wasted salary on the roster. Keeping a low salary gives you the advantage of picking early each round and gives you a little more certainty over your round 25 player, but is the extra $10-15 million in team salary you are giving up to those picking late worth that round 25 upgrade? I think carrying a mid-range salary has to be the toughest. Bouncing around from pick 8 to 16 each round and then not really knowing who your bonus player will be, trying to keep as many options open as possible... seems like a daunting task.

Common sense is telling me to grab 1963 Gary Peters to help my pitching, but I've never listened to common sense in my life. Gotta go with offense...

1964 Mickey Mantle (my pick here) in the outfield allows me to move Tim Raines to 3B (he's got a better fielding pct in performance history than Schmidt) and then move Schmidt to SS (and use no-bat Campaneris as a late inning pinch-runner.)

At least in theory it should all work out. Real life, hardly ever.

Posted by schwarze on 8/7/2022 2:45:00 PM (view original):
It's going to be interesting to see how the different strategies pan out. Drafting high-priced players and picking last (or near last) every round means one could be more likely to get stuck and/or not get anybody useful in round 25, but also means there isn't any wasted salary on the roster. Keeping a low salary gives you the advantage of picking early each round and gives you a little more certainty over your round 25 player, but is the extra $10-15 million in team salary you are giving up to those picking late worth that round 25 upgrade? I think carrying a mid-range salary has to be the toughest. Bouncing around from pick 8 to 16 each round and then not really knowing who your bonus player will be, trying to keep as many options open as possible... seems like a daunting task.

I was in the latter category, and ultimately what winds up being the biggest frustration is not knowing your final cap even when you have to make your last pick. So there's a bit of a shooting blind nature that isn't totally ideal for roster maximization ...

Posted by njbigwig on 8/7/2022 2:37:00 PM (view original):
Since our salary cap is reduced by the undrafted salary of our nominated players, with pick 25, we should be able to either select a bonus player or an undrafted player from our nominated team that we provided from each of our seasons.
(The ungrateful owners rule) maybe next time... (yes, I'm bitter)

Interesting suggestion. Need to give this some thought.

On the next version, if the rules were similar, I wonder how differently people will build their rosters. I bet we won't see so many people drafting 1100+ SP innings again. No need to roster that many innings. High-priced "mediocre" starting pitchers with 280+ innings just aren't that desirable. Guys with 150-180 innings that have better stats (than the 280-ip mediocre pitcher) are just more desirable.

via proxy, happyhours is selecting 1970 Roberto Clemente, $4,350,939

Posted by thejuice6 on 8/7/2022 2:47:00 PM (view original):

Common sense is telling me to grab 1963 Gary Peters to help my pitching, but I've never listened to common sense in my life. Gotta go with offense...

1964 Mickey Mantle (my pick here) in the outfield allows me to move Tim Raines to 3B (he's got a better fielding pct in performance history than Schmidt) and then move Schmidt to SS (and use no-bat Campaneris as a late inning pinch-runner.)

At least in theory it should all work out. Real life, hardly ever.

You're a riddle wrapped in an enigma, and I hope you like errors and minus plays ... but you might score enough runs that it won't matter.

Posted by schwarze on 8/7/2022 2:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by njbigwig on 8/7/2022 2:37:00 PM (view original):
Since our salary cap is reduced by the undrafted salary of our nominated players, with pick 25, we should be able to either select a bonus player or an undrafted player from our nominated team that we provided from each of our seasons.
(The ungrateful owners rule) maybe next time... (yes, I'm bitter)

Interesting suggestion. Need to give this some thought.

On the next version, if the rules were similar, I wonder how differently people will build their rosters. I bet we won't see so many people drafting 1100+ SP innings again. No need to roster that many innings. High-priced "mediocre" starting pitchers with 280+ innings just aren't that desirable. Guys with 150-180 innings that have better stats (than the 280-ip mediocre pitcher) are just more desirable.

Interesting strategy to not draft anyone from the list you nominated. Otherwise, you would not have 25 unique seasons if you took one of your own nominees in Round 25. However, I am all in favor of adding yet another convoluted nuance.

Well this eases the sting a little bit. I totally missed the mid-draft rule addition/change regarding salary if you get stuck (I went back and read the original rules before risking it). I don't always read all of the "chat" posts especially if I'm trying to catch up after a bunch of picks. I thought by getting stuck in round 25 I would then have enough cap for 90 Eck, and it looked like he might be pretty open. But after the surprise (to me) penalty, Eck was a no-go. So it all came down to happyhours. If he takes 77 Goose I am in a world of hurt. After much gnashing of teeth, he takes Clemente, thank you sir your check is in the mail. With nobody else having 77 open or enough cap space I can take:

1977 Rich Gossage