I’m not totally opposed to the idea, but I wonder if it would be satisfying for such a deep draft. I don’t know if we can alter the money amounts available in an ESPN league, but the way it works is that the last fifth or so of the draft usually ends up being uncontested 1 dollar bids - if we’re drafting 50-70% more players than a typical 12 man league, we could potentially have a very long period of uncontested 1 dollar bids.
Edit: I don’t think the standard serpentine system is some game-breaking imbalance that needs to be fixed - I just think my ABCD DCBA DCBA proposal is a little more balanced.
I love auction drafts (I suck at them, but I love 'em), but I really don’t think one would work for this league. They take longer than regular drafts, there’s no opportunity to go to go to the can or grab a snack between picks, and we’ve got about 300 players to draft. We’d all be sitting at the computer for 6 hours.
It would be random either way, in the sense that everyone has an equal chance of getting any draft position. We’re just debating on what picks to give each position in the name of fairness.
The argument is that it’s advantageous to draft high, because for example comparing the guy drafting 2nd who has the #2 and #23 picks is better off than the guy drafting #8 who has the #8 and #17 picks, because the #2 is better than the #8 by a greater margin than the #17 is greater than the #23.
It gets even worse when the draft snakes again in round 3, as the first person to draft, who already had the advantage, gets to pick at the top of the round again. So now that person has the #2, #23, and #26 picks, compared to the other guy who has #8, #17, and #32.
My proposal was to have the order go one way, in the first round, where the advantage of picking high is greater, snake once (reverse the order) and then stay with that draft order for the rest of the draft. That way the person having a high pick in round 1 where it’s most advantageous to have a high pick will be offset by having a later pick in every other round. This approach does not favor anyone in any particular way, since none of us yet know whether we’ll have a high, middle, or low place in the draft order. We can discuss it from the hypothetical position of what would be the most fair design.
Another issue - and this is just personal preference - is that I’m not a big fan of how the draft can play out from different positions. If you’re drafting first, you wait 22 picks in between your picks and then you draft two in a row, whereas someone drafting 6th essentially gets one pick at the same spot in every round. I always thought it was kind of weird how much you can go up or down a tier when drafting at the ends, whereas drafting in the middle gives you something of a more natural feel of balance.
That’s just a preference thing, I wouldn’t argue that it was objectively better - but in my eyes, the system proposed means that every team is drafting in the same spot in every round, so everyone is waiting 11 picks after every time they draft, rather than some people waiting 20-23 picks and then waiting 0-3 and then waiting 20-23 again.
I finally understand what this was in reference to. At least I think I do. As opposed to the people who were volunteering for specific positions. (eg: “I’ll draft last.”)
I prefer drafting on the turn, personally. I can catch a quick smoke between picks as needed. Plus I really like being able to draft two players at a time.
Either that, or he’s making a reference to how we determined the draft order well before the draft in the other leagues. But they were still random - they just weren’t randomly determined a half hour prior to the draft.
Draft pick value results are in. Infrastructure is now in place to run any other scenarios you guys come up with, so fire away if you have any. The analysis spits out the total value of all your picks based on your starting draft position. Because the value chart only goes up to pick 190, this analysis assumes 12 owners in a 16 round draft. (192 total picks, with the last two worth zero.)
The four systems run are:
Default: Just like the NFL, where everyone drafts in the same spot every round.
Serpent: Standard serpentine fantasy draft.
SenorBeef: Round 1 in standard order, all subsequent rounds in reverse order.
VarlosZ: Serpentine draft where the order gets reversed in between rounds 2 and 3. So if you have the top pick, you draft first in rounds 1, 4, 6, 8, etc… Another way to look at it is if you draft last, you get the turn in rounds 1&2, 4&5, 6&8, etc…
I have no idea where the linked table gets its decimal values from, since there are no decimals in the fantasy trade calculator which is the basis of both the linked tables and mine. Our results are sufficiently close that I’m confident my results are being generated correctly. Those decimals freak me out, though.
I have no problems using varlos’ system then (it looks like a definite improvement oved standard serpentine). I would in general still prefer a non-snaking (or one that snakes once or twice) draft for the “draft every 12 picks” factor - but again, that’s just preference.
I definitely appreciate the number crunching, but I’d just like to point out that there’s nothing official about the fantasy calculator we’re using - it’s essentially someone’s educated opinion on the relative value of picks, so it’s not objectively conclusive.
Beef2 is remarkably balanced in picks 1-6 but (20 points max difference) but starts to fall apart towards the end. Hmm…
I hear what you’re saying, and on one level I agree. But on a deeper level I disagree, for a couple reasons. First and foremost, it would appear to be the only game in town; there is no competing chart/calculator to point to that I’m aware of. And the number of people who buy into it is non-zero. On a philosophical level, it’s sort of like paper money; its intrinsic value is both zero and irrelevant. It’s the fact that people believe in it that makes it real.
Consider the NFL chart. It’s every bit as made up as the fantasy chart, but because NFL teams buy into it, in a very real sense the NFL chart is an accurate measure of the relative value of NFL draft picks.
What’s interesting about the NFL chart is that the fans buy into it. I bet every GM in the league absolutely hates that damn chart, because it was written in a different time where picks had different values. I’m sure they have their own charts. And I think GMs are scared to make any trade that doesn’t precisely conform to the value chart because the don’t want their fanbase to accuse them of getting ripped off.
This is especially true of high picks, where there’s a lot of value in just not getting stuck with an 8 gazillion dollar contract on a rookie. If I were a GM, unless the Prospect Of The Century was available, I’d trade out of the top 8 or so for a case of beer and worn out hooker. Like when the Browns traded with the Jets but arguably didn’t get “proper” value for something as high as the #5 pick… once Curry was gone I was just happy to not be stuck with a top 5 contract.
As far as the currency analogy - we’ve got a pretty widespread acceptance what a dollar is worth - but I don’t know the story of this fantasy calculator or who uses it. I admit at first glance it looks pretty reasonable, and I don’t really have a problem using its conclusions in our implementations, but I felt like I should point out that there’s nothing intrinsically correct about it.
Right now our rosters are:
QB
RB
RB
WR
WR
WR
TE
K
DEF
with 16 bench slots, giving a total of 25 slots each
12x25=300 players drafted.
Seems like a decent roster to me. Anyone have any suggestions as to how we might change it?
As for the division/scheduling thing, the 12 man/3 divisions/14 week schedule seems perfect. You play everyone in your division twice, and everyone else in the rest of the league once. The three division winners get playoff spots, and 1 wildcard. The playoffs occur on weeks 15/16.
Does anyone have any meaningful suggestions as to how we could group the divisions better than randomly?