Via proxy, dorkster takes
Huston Street

Padres (24) - Clay Hensley

Astros (1a) - Justin Verlander
Astros (1b) - Roger Clemens

Mike Scott Thanks

Sigh...there are some franchises that would be perfect to get the 3-5th pick for. Getting the Top 2 for a franchise like the Astros (or Reds, which I have) makes the choice excruciating, knowing you're leaving a couple studs for the people right behind you.

100% - Scott was on the list with the two I took and like three others. Ultimately their IP just fit better with what I already had on my roster but it was painful.

This is why this draft format is a disadvantage for those drafting 17-25 first. The 17th - 25th picks from previous franchises dictated your #1 and 2 picks from the Astros. Theoretically, you’d probably rather have your #1 choice dictate your bottom end of the bullpen and bench spots.

Posted by chewy3344 on 2/6/2025 10:23:00 AM (view original):
This is why this draft format is a disadvantage for those drafting 17-25 first. The 17th - 25th picks from previous franchises dictated your #1 and 2 picks from the Astros. Theoretically, you’d probably rather have your #1 choice dictate your bottom end of the bullpen and bench spots.

Or you could just plan your picks when you’re at the top of the rounds and then fill in below.

Honestly, it can go both ways. If I have the top three picks for my franchise ranked as P, then 2B, then C, but I unexpectedly get a decent 2B available to me at 17 for another franchise, do I risk letting that player pass and hoping I can get a good C still? Or do I take that 2B and just take players 1 and 3 from my double-up franchise?

Everyone approaches it differently. Just gotta hope you end up with a few surprise players dropping due to not meeting the needs of people drafting ahead of you.

I'd like to see this theme run with the rounds being based on draft pick, instead of franchise.

Round 1, everybody takes their 2 players from their randomly assigned franchise.
Round 2, everybody takes their player from their 2nd franchise assigned.
Etc.

This way, everybody gets to draft their studs early, and can then fill in the end of the roster with cheaper players from the franchises they got assigned 22nd, 23rd, 24th. Makes way more sense and is fairer to everybody.

Dictated by my initial pick order...

Carlos Correa

Posted by schwarze on 2/6/2025 10:54:00 AM (view original):
I'd like to see this theme run with the rounds being based on draft pick, instead of franchise.

Round 1, everybody takes their 2 players from their randomly assigned franchise.
Round 2, everybody takes their player from their 2nd franchise assigned.
Etc.

This way, everybody gets to draft their studs early, and can then fill in the end of the roster with cheaper players from the franchises they got assigned 22nd, 23rd, 24th. Makes way more sense and is fairer to everybody.

If fairness is the goal, absolutely.

But I think one element that makes this fun is strategy. Do you stick to a plan and assume you'll get the players you want from each subsequent franchise? Or do you gamble and take a player now, and take a lesser player from your double-dip franchise to maximize your roster? In the current format, you could potentially see a player unexpectedly drop to you due to the remaining needs of those ahead of you. In your suggested approach, this is unlikely to happen.

There are pros and cons to each approach.

Craig Biggio
unable to sm

I agree that this is an interesting concept, and it makes tracking teams picking in front of you important.

Site-mailed

Nolan Ryan