All-Time Draft #2 [Archive]

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 12:10 AM

There's been some talk of doing another draft.

There are a lot of different ways to go about it. We could mix up the leagues or keep them the same. We could have some of the players carry over. The draft order could be based on how the teams do, decided randomly, reversed, or anything else. We can allow AA players, Japanese leaguers, Negro Leaguers, or just the people we already allow. We could be more flexible with the requirements (100 games to qualify at a position, or whatever). It'd be interesting to do an auction, but I can't think of any way for that to work with the schedules everyone has.

I know it's kind of early to be talking about the next draft, but I'm bored and impatient :p . Besides, the sooner we establish the rules, the more time people will have to prepare (I know some people weren't as prepared as they should have been when their pick came up...). This thread is to discuss the rules and such.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Personally, I don't want players carrying over to the new draft. I don't really have an opinion about AA players. My stance on Japanese league and Negro League players has changed from earlier - if someone gives me a website where I can find their stats (including Warp, OPS+, FRAA, etc), I'm fine with them being allowed. I think the number of games required to qualify at a position should be lowered, although I'm not sure by how much. I'm pretty convinced that a 100 games at a position is enough to establish that they know how to play there. Also, I want to allow us to choose any year that they played enough. So what if it's a fluke? They really put up those numbers, so I say let us use them.

Discuss.

Disgruntaledmarinerfan

03-08-2007, 01:23 AM

Although it may be a little premature discussing another draft, I do have an opinion.
I think that we should eliminate one of the leagues. This would make us dig deeper in to stat books and really test our historical knowlege.Also i think we shoud be able to draft any player, this includes negro leagers, japanese player, and things like the AA. another thing we should change is that we should be able to use any year for a player... rather than using a player's 3rd bst worp or lower.

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 01:27 AM

I don't think leagues should be much bigger than they are, since otherwise the difference in talent will be too significant. After a while, no matter how much you dig, you'll only find scrubs. Although adding to the pool of players with the NeL and Japanese league makes it so we could have a couple more teams per league.

Disgruntaledmarinerfan

03-08-2007, 01:34 AM

Perhaps we could expand the leagues, allow other BBFer's the oppourtunity to join in on the fun.

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 01:40 AM

I assume we would allow others to join (unless we have some players carry over).

Disgruntaledmarinerfan

03-08-2007, 01:44 AM

I assume we would allow others to join (unless we have some players carry over).
I rather not have players carry over. Just start from a clean slate.

-Kyle-

03-08-2007, 01:21 PM

I rather not have players carry over. Just start from a clean slate.
Same

Maybe throw in some quirky rule, like only lefties or something along that line? Just a type of draft that probably nobody has ever done.

Disgruntaledmarinerfan

03-08-2007, 01:25 PM

Same

Maybe throw in some quirky rule, like only lefties or something along that line? Just a type of draft that probably nobody has ever done.
That would definatly make things interesting.

SamtheBravesFan

03-08-2007, 01:55 PM

Well, I'm in, no matter what it is. ;)

Sockeye

03-08-2007, 02:11 PM

I'd definitely be interested in another draft so count me in if you do it. My thoughts are this.

Start from scratch and add more teams. Attempt to find the most dedicated and knowledgable owners possible so the draft will move along at a fair clip.

Keep the pool of players from both league. Shoot for 30 teams total.

No real opinion on AA, Japanese, or negro league players. I have no problem with it as long as reasonable stats can be provided for that player. In some cases the stats may have to be translated to equal major leaguers. I don't like using the comparison idea for negro leaguers to major leaguers. Just because a player may have been compared in ability to an all time great player it doesn't mean their stats would have been the same.

I strongly agree with either using the players best season or their overall career averages. If picking and using one season for a player I think that player should have played at least one game at that position during that season to be eligible at that position.

Just a shot in the dark but I thought I'd throw it out there. How about using translated stats? Might be a better way of comparing AA players to major leaguers and players from other eras such as the 1800's and deadball era's the major leaguers of today. Just a thought.

Erik Bedard

03-08-2007, 02:20 PM

I'm not sure if I'd be up for another one so soon, but here's my two cents on the matter:

I loved the way the ATD before this one operated. Any player is eligible for any position, but play them there at your own risk. Negro Leaguers are eligible, but only two per team. No Japanese-league players, or other leagues besides NAPBBP, NL, AA, UA, PL, FL, AL, and NgL. Leave the years up to the person who sims (I basically chose everyone's best OPS+ or ERA+ year to save time). Negro Leaguers were based on their MLB comps (some of which were good, some of which were not), except for Satchel Paige, who was created by the DB creators. I also own an alternate DB containing 55 Japanese HoFers.

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 02:49 PM

Maybe throw in some quirky rule, like only lefties or something along that line? Just a type of draft that probably nobody has ever done. I was thinking that it'd be cool to have some quirky rule, but if we did only lefties, people would probably be stuck with scrubs matched up against Ruth.

Maybe throw in some quirky rule, like only lefties or something along that line? Just a type of draft that probably nobody has ever done. It wouldn't have to be very soon (although we'd have to start before May if we want Westlake to be available - but that's a couple months away. More than enough time between them). Of course, maybe we're addicted, and instead of taking a break, we'll do two drafts, and you can just choose to sit out the first one, if you want a break...

Westlake

03-08-2007, 03:00 PM

Negro Leaguers are eligible, but only two per team. No Japanese-league players.

Why Negro Leaguers, but no Japanese leaguers?

Erik Bedard

03-08-2007, 03:09 PM

Those are just the rules that the one Magicfan39126 ran. I'd actually prefer to have everyone eligible that you'd ever want to take.

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 05:56 PM

Also, during the current draft, people seemed to indicate they'd rather we allowed players during strike years, as long as they had enough games/at bats. Do we still feel that way?

Erik Bedard

03-08-2007, 06:03 PM

I don't think any players should be excluded at all.

Westlake

03-08-2007, 06:05 PM

I don't think any players should be excluded at all.

So can I pick Drew Stubbs? How would that work in the sim?

Erik Bedard

03-08-2007, 06:06 PM

I believe there's a DB out there that includes college players as well. Not like you'd want to use them, though.

plask_stirlac

03-08-2007, 06:38 PM

Sim again?

If we could use any one singular season we could do a 30-person snake. Get Kevin Millwood, Bobby Thigpen, Kevin Mitchell, Rico Petrocelli in on it.

I'm not saying it captures their true talent, but it's their peak year... isn't this a corn field?

-Kyle-

03-08-2007, 06:40 PM

Maybe like the 10th best WARP season per player...longevity counts.:laugh

Huntington Avenue

03-08-2007, 07:07 PM

Definitely good ideas here. I'd like some weird rule to make it more interesting and to dig deeper, like to limit or exclude a certain time period, etc. I figure I can't do any worse a second time....

Minstrel

03-08-2007, 07:28 PM

Erik Bedard

03-08-2007, 07:30 PM

I like that... except it would include three of the top five pitchers of all time in Maddux, Pedro, and Clemens.

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 07:52 PM

We could have it go the same way, but allow trades between the two leagues (so theoretically, Ruth could be in one league twice, and not in the other league).

Or we could be really insane and allow a player to be picked more than once. We could allow any player to be picked twice. Or we could have it that you pick a specific year for a player - that player's other years are still available. That would mean if I picked Ruth '20, someone else could pick Ruth '27. If we did that, we'd almost certainly need to combine the leagues, to dilute the pool somewhat. And maybe say you can't have the same person on your team more than twice, or something. :crazy

ChrisLDuncan

03-08-2007, 08:14 PM

I'm in no matter what. However I think we should wait until the end of next season. I mean that way a lot more players would be available.

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 08:18 PM

We can do a few drafts between now and the end of the seaon. That way, we get all the advantage of doing drafts now, and we can also have a draft when the new years are available.

Washizzle Express

03-08-2007, 08:24 PM

I think we should wait to do a draft until we figure out how defense works in the sim. There are a bunch of variables that aren't recorded in stat sheets, like mental lapses, limiting the number of bases on a EBH, that sort of thing.

Wade8813

03-08-2007, 08:30 PM

I agree completely, except I'm not sure if we'll ever really know how the sim decides that.

Minstrel

03-08-2007, 08:37 PM

I like that... except it would include three of the top five pitchers of all time in Maddux, Pedro, and Clemens.

And another top-ten'er in The Unit, IMO.

Minstrel

03-08-2007, 08:41 PM

At some point (maybe after the 2007 baseball season), I think it would be fun to try an all-time keeper league.

Every season, a new group of players would be eligible to be drafted into the league (players who have reached their third year in the league, or whatever our minimum tenure is) and if people want to draft them, they'll have to drop players they already have.

The pool just keeps growing, since no one ever "declines" so there'll always be more good players than roster spots open and people can shift personnel based on changing preferences, strategies, etc.

Just seems interesting.

Washizzle Express

03-08-2007, 08:41 PM

I don't think that we should have more than one draft pool, i.e. all 30 teams would have to pick from the same pool. Plus, if possible, we should draft more than 25 players, maybe 30 or 35, so we would have injury replacements or an easy way to change the style of our team if we didn't like it.

plask_stirlac

03-08-2007, 11:24 PM

We could do an automatic or list draft, everyone sends in their lists to ____(rotates) and then the whole round gets picked, then adjust.

We could do a WhatifSports pay league, with this draft or another (or just set rules and pick teams in their draft center).

We could do a 15-man snake of drafting franchises, maybe? Okay maybe 12-man or so, not Tampa Bay or Colorado (only hitters).

ronnie5

03-08-2007, 11:52 PM

I like that... except it would include three of the top five pitchers of all time in Maddux, Pedro, and Clemens.

Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson, Lefty Grove, Pete Alexander, Cy Young and Tom Seaver are all pretty upset at you right now that you think only two of them are better than Clemens, Maddux and Pedro

Minstrel

03-09-2007, 12:00 AM

Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson, Lefty Grove, Pete Alexander, Cy Young and Tom Seaver are all pretty upset at you right now that you think only two of them are better than Clemens, Maddux and Pedro

Well, I think Clemens and Maddux are better than all but Johnson and Grove. I think Martinez and Alexander could both vie for the top-five, depending on whether you esteem peak over career value or vice versa.

Wade8813

03-09-2007, 12:04 AM

I'd rather not do an automatic/list draft. Part of the fun is seeing the trends, and adjusting accordingly. Also, who I want varies with who's been taken. When giving Washizzle a list of who I wanted one time, it was something like "I want player A for pick one, B for pick two, and C for pick 3. If A is not available, I want D for my first pick. If I get A, but B is unavailable, I want C for my second pick. If I get D and B, but C is unavailable, I want E." Things just get too complicated that way.

Also, I'm stingy, and would rather not pay.

Drafting franchises might be interesting. Getting a team that's been around forever would be a huge advantage, but by you got back to your 2nd pick, you wouldn't have much left to choose from, so that might be fair.

Erik Bedard

03-09-2007, 07:05 AM

I vote for a franchise draft to be the next one.

Disgruntaledmarinerfan

03-09-2007, 10:47 AM

regardless what the details are for the next draft are, I'm in.

Minstrel

03-09-2007, 11:59 AM

How does a "franchise draft" work?

Wade8813

03-09-2007, 12:00 PM

My guess is instead of picking players, you pick entire teams, then assemble a single roster out of all the players you get.

Sockeye

03-09-2007, 12:32 PM

Franchise draft is an interesting idea. If we do that I'll draft for the Yankees :D Tough job but someone's gotta do it.

-Kyle-

03-09-2007, 12:36 PM

Or we could have it that you pick a specific year for a player - that player's other years are still available. That would mean if I picked Ruth '20, someone else could pick Ruth '27. If we did that, we'd almost certainly need to combine the leagues, to dilute the pool somewhat. And maybe say you can't have the same person on your team more than twice, or something. :crazy
I'll take my lineup of Honus Wagners.:laugh

Wade8813

03-09-2007, 12:48 PM

Well, if we have 30 people picking, and he has at most 19 years you can choose from - most of his available years will probably be gone before you can pick more than one or two of him. And of course, if we limit it so you can't have the same person on your team more than twice (or even limit it so that any one player can only be picked twice)...

plask_stirlac

03-09-2007, 12:49 PM

Franchise draft is an interesting idea. If we do that I'll draft for the Yankees :D Tough job but someone's gotta do it.

You would get the Yankees, but then probably a team like the Rangers (Twins get early Sens) that would hardly help your pitching or hitting, basically a handicap match against New York (by, say, Orioles and Mets). Maybe the teams would be any season (though clones would need a cap somehow) but 13-12 by franchise.

Minstrel

03-09-2007, 01:20 PM

You would get the Yankees, but then probably a team like the Rangers (Twins get early Sens) that would hardly help your pitching or hitting, basically a handicap match against New York (by, say, Orioles and Mets). Maybe the teams would be any season (though clones would need a cap somehow) but 13-12 by franchise.

So such a draft would be like 2 rounds for around 15 people? So each person gets two franchises (like Yankees/Rangers) to build their team from?

Wade8813

03-09-2007, 01:24 PM

We could do the entire thing while Westlake is gone on vacation. We'd be talking about draft #3, and he'd just be confused. Heck, this might be ideal, if the AL does a franchise draft for draft #2 while waiting for the NL to finish.

Erik Bedard

03-09-2007, 02:51 PM

IMO, in a franchise draft, you should be able to split it however you want among your two teams, provided you have at least five from each team.

Wade8813

03-09-2007, 02:59 PM

Sounds fair.

Why don't we do that? It would give us something different from the last draft, and give us something to do while waiting for the Senior (citizen) League. They could be in on this too, as long as they don't slow down either of the drafts to do so.

It'll be a snake draft. You pick a team, and can use any player who's been on that team, and any year they had while on that team. You must have at least 5 players from both of your teams on your final team. We'll have to come up with certain minimums again (we might try AB/IP instead of games).

Erik Bedard

03-09-2007, 03:09 PM

I'm definitely up for it. Just a few suggestions:

1: Players who split time between teams should be eligible for play on both teams, but they must use a year they were on the franchise picked by a certaint team. For example, Babe Ruth could be picked by the Red Sox, Braves, and Yankees, but the Red Sox and Braves teams could not use his 1927 season.

2: We need a different order.

Wade8813

03-09-2007, 03:11 PM

I agree with both of those.

Also, we probably shouldn't use NeL teams or Japanese teams for this sort of thing.

Erik Bedard

03-10-2007, 09:19 AM

Obviously. And no defunct franchises, or FL, UA, or PL teams. However, as long as the franchise has been continuous, we should be allowed to go back as far as we want, but nothing before 1871.

BTW, another thing we could do is an auction. Each team has, say, a $150 budget, and you can bid on players. Each time someone wins a player, they get to choose the next one. It can go in a rotating position kind of thing (ex. Draftor A wins the bidding for a catcher. A must start the bidding on a 1Bman of A's choice), or just a free-for-all. These can be a lot of fun, since you have to manage both your money and your team.

Sockeye

03-10-2007, 11:42 AM

In that case can I switch the AL league? I check the draft progress 10 times daily and and this 2-3 picks a day is driving me nuts. C'mon NL people!!

Wade8813

03-10-2007, 03:12 PM

The auction might be a good idea, but I think we should do this franchise thing first, while waiting for the NL to finish, then we can do the auction, or whatever.

Erik Bedard

03-11-2007, 07:38 AM

Cool with me.

Wade8813

03-11-2007, 09:45 PM

I've been thinking about this, and a franchise draft might not work as well as I thought. If we have 15 people choosing teams, some of the final teams are going to be incredibly lopsided. Two middle picks doesn't compare with the best pick. We should use some other amount of pickers, although I'm not sure how many would balance it out.

The Splendid Splinter

03-11-2007, 09:55 PM

I really wouldn't mind doing another draft with you guys next time as long as you guys are cool with my friend Kyle (Wolverineman) picking for me quite a bit cuz I have an internship over the summer... If you guys dont mind, then i will join again. This time i want to be on the AL league if we have enough teams.

Erik Bedard

03-11-2007, 09:59 PM

IMO, thirteen would be perfect, in order to eliminate the most recent expansion teams - Arizona, Colorado, Florida, and Tampa Bay. Prior to that, the most recent expansion teams were the Blue Jays and Mariners, two teams with at least five people who could reasonably be picked (Jays - Clemens, Stieb, Molitor, Alomar, Halladay. Mariners - RJohnson, Ichiro, EMartinez, Moyer, Griffey), and then the person who took one of the weaker teams would then get a strong team to balance it out. There are at least sixteen teams strong enough to get ten to fifteen all-time greats from, probably more.

Wade8813

03-11-2007, 11:04 PM

While the Mariners and Jays are both solid choices, getting two solid teams can't even compare to getting a dynasty.

Probably the most obvious team to pick, the Yanks, have Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle, DiMag, A-Rod, and probably half a dozen more. Whoever has the 13th and 14th pick can't compete with that, even if the person with the Yankees has to have the D-Rays, it's just too much advantage to have the first couple picks.

I'm still open to doing it, but I don't think it'll be fair with that many people picking. Of course, if I'm the only one who feels that way, I'm perfectly willing to participate anyway if I get one of the first picks. If you think the teams will be somewhat fair, you shouldn't mind letting me have an early pick ;) .

BTW - the Mariners have way more (and better) options than that... :gt

Erik Bedard

03-12-2007, 05:33 AM

I know, just the first that came to mind. ;)

16 teams in the MLB have been around since 1901. It should be easy enough to get a few all-time greats, and a few all-time very goods out of them. But maybe the benefit of having the Yankees is too great, even if you are stuck with the Rangers at the end. Perhaps changing the players rule to ten from each franchise, instead of five?

Wade8813

03-12-2007, 11:16 AM

16 teams in the MLB have been around since 1901. It should be easy enough to get a few all-time greats, and a few all-time very goods out of them. But maybe the benefit of having the Yankees is too great, even if you are stuck with the Rangers at the end. Perhaps changing the players rule to ten from each franchise, instead of five? Except people would just stick a bunch of the worse players on their bench.

Windy City Fan

03-12-2007, 02:13 PM

I think a 16 man draft is the way to go. It negates the advantages of the top picks since you're left with really thin franchises. Also, with 16 owners, everyone is guaranteed one of the original franchises (if they want) and the owner with the 16th pick gets to take the best of the expansion teams.

Wade8813

03-12-2007, 05:17 PM

The thing is, having the Yankees + D Rays is probably much better than having the 16th and 17th best teams. Some of those teams that have been around for over a century are rather unimpressive compared to how long they've been around.

Windy City Fan

03-12-2007, 05:41 PM

I don't know about that. Remember we only need a player's best season in that given uniform. Fluke or career seasons all count. I think the back end of the draft can be competitive.

Wade8813

03-12-2007, 06:17 PM

Right, but that applies for the front end of the draft as well.

As I said before, if everyone else thinks it'll be fair, just give me one of the first picks. You won't mind me having an early pick because they're about even, and I'll be happy because I'll be thinking I get a better pick.

Of course, people with the first few picks probably will have an advantage in any draft we decide to do, just not as much of one.