This seems reasonable. The only stumbling block in your description is that you made the trade for pick 1.01 before the draft picks were created. But as you point out, that is also what happens when we trade future picks. Hmmm…
So in this situation that you thought was happening, the draft picks would have been created as follows:
Sorry, I’m back. Going to work on figuring out my draft pick before I double check that everything is correct with the draft process, but Jules generally understands the draft procedures we’ve worked out better than I remember, so he’s probably correct.
I came in to draft Shakir because I had looked at our last updated list and he wasn’t on there, but I forgot to check the few picks made since the last time the list was updated and Omni grabbed him.
So, instead, I’ll double down on the notoriously difficult Pats backfield
4.01 Mundi - Tyrion Davis-Price, RB, SF
4.02 Ellis - Ty Chandler, RB, Min
4.03 Justin - Greg Dulcich, TE, DEN
4.04 Omni - Khalil Shakir, WR, BUF
4.06 Beef - Pierre Strong Jr, RB, NE
4.08 Peteys -
4.10 RNATB -
5.01 Mundi -
5.02 Jules -
5.03 Peteys -
5.04 Omni -
5.06 dale -
5.10 RNATB -
Simple. Spiritus traded 1.01 to me, so I get that pick. Once I get that pick, I no longer am entitled to 4.11, because that would put me over the roster limit. So 4.11 disappears into the aether, and 4.10 moves directly to 5.01. Done and done. It seems a cleaner, more realistic scenario than turning pick 3.11 into 7.01.
Personally, I’ve never been much of a fan of the “last pick” system either.
If it were up to me, everyone would get a pick in every round, but only the number of picks needed to get you to 25 would be “active”.
So by starting the draft at 20, I would have gotten picks 1.03, 2.03, 3.03, 4.03, and 5.03. Trading for pick 1.08 would have made 5.03 disappear because i don’t need it. But now Peteys needs an extra pick, so his 5.08 would become “active”.
I don’t think it really has anything to do with the last pick situation.
The crux of the biscuit is that Hamlet was hoping his cuts would generate two first round picks for him. That’s just not how it works. Logistically it can’t work that way, as in it just plain doesn’t work, as seen in my enumerations above. The bookkeeping falls apart.
Also, what you describe is in fact how it works if you’re trading players. The problem arises when you start trading for picks; you can’t trade for someone else’s draft picks before generating your own. Can’t have your cake and eat it too.
The simplest way I can put it is this: Hamlet listed 23 players to keep. How many draft picks does that mean he gets? (Read as: How many ?.11 picks does that create? The correct answer is two.)
Note that what you propose still doesn’t work for Hamlet’s situation. There is no coherent mechanism that would allow Hamlet’s cuts to generate pick 1.01. That pick can only be generated by Mundi’s cuts.
Like in my live keeper draft, anyone without a complete roster when the draft is done gets a pick then. Its not rocket science or a metaphysical discussion about whether a draft pick can create a player so large it can’t lift it.
Mine is fine. Giving the guy who traded his pick the chance to jump in front of other drafters (for example, if you gave him 6.01) for that missing pick seems unfair. Give him one at the end seems fine. Not sure why it seems unreasonable to you.
You kept 23 guys, which means you get two draft picks. Let’s say for argument’s sake we go with 1.01 and 1.11. By the quoted logic, shouldn’t your other two picks you need to fill out your roster come at the end of the draft? Meaning your four picks would be 1.01, 1.11, 7.11, 8.11.
Why do your needed picks generate proper rounds while Mundi’s needed picks are tacked onto the end of the draft? What is different about his?