Crap, I thought Hamlet wrote this. My response doesn’t make sense in that context. I’ll try again.
Fantastic.
If the answer to my question “why did my 3.11 pick magically turn into 7.01” is “that’s the way it’s always been”, great. Whatever. I have no idea why it’s that way, and it seems more complicated than it needs to be, but whatever.
Bolding mine.
That bolded bit at the end is still the same way. By definition, excess picks being filled by keepers is the same thing as cutdowns creating draft picks. It does avoid the chronology issue, but it’s still the same mechanic that creates the draft picks: Having fewer than 25 players.
Yeah, exactly.
The key is that Yahoo won’t let us finish the draft unless everyone has 25 players. So we instituted rules to ensure that happening in the simplest way possible. That rule being that trades have to be balanced; can’t do two for one. That’s it, that’s the entire rule.
The way that insured everyone had 25 in this instance was that your two for one imbalanced trade was modified to include Mundi’s last pick.
You could think of it this way: You traded away two players for a single pick. Why do you then get a second pick from one of those players you already traded for a pick?
In other words, the trade itself already realized the pick value of the two players you traded away. Quite literally; you traded those two guys for one pick. So you get one pick for those two guys. Specifically, 1.01. You can’t also get 3.11 for one of the guys you traded away for 1.01. He gave you 1.01; his draft pick value for you has already been realized.
No, I’m saying that the lack of a keeper generates a pick. Which is how Yahoo does it.
So if Hamlet cuts two players and sends over two players for 1.01, having no keeper in the third round would generate that pick.
To me, this would simplify bookkeeping.
So if I traded Michael Pittman to you right now for your next year’s second round pick, let’s say, that would create a new draft pick for me right now at 5.02?
Crap, lemme refresh the draft list. Major PITA to scroll that far back.
I see that there’s a bunch of planning going on, but @Really_Not_All_That_Bright has been on the clock for 17+ hours.
Perhaps the note has been buried by the discussion. Would be good to get the draft finished before we try to redesign the league.
First three rounds
1.01 Hamlet - Breece Hall, RB, NYJ
1.02 Ellis - Kenneth Walker III, RB, Sea
1.03 Justin - Drake London, WR, Atl
1.04 Omni - Dameon Pierce, RB, Hou
1.05 Gaffer - Garrett Wilson, WR, NYJ
1.06 Jules - Jameson Williams, WR, Det
1.07 Retro - Treylon Burks, WR, Ten
1.08 Justin - James Cook, RB, Buf
1.09 Ellis - Skyy Moore, WR, KC
1.10 RNATB - Chris Olave, WR, NO
1.11 Hamlet - George Pickens, WR, Pit
1.12 Beef - Jahan Dotson, WR, Was
2.01 Mundi - Brian Robinson Jr., RB, Was
2.02 Jules - Rachaad White, RB, TB
2.03 Justin - Zamir White, RB, LV
2.04 Omni - Malik Willis, QB, Ten
2.05 Gaffer - Wan’Dale Robinson, WR, NYG
2.06 dale - David Bell, WR, Cle
2.07 Retro - Tyler Allgeier, RB, Atl
2.08 Peteys - Isaih Pacheco, RB, KC
2.09 Beef - Isaiah Spiller, RB, LAC
2.10 RNATB - Hassan Haskins, RB, Ten
2.11 Hamlet - Romeo Doubs, WR, GB
2.12 dale - Jalen Tolbert, WR, Dal
3.01 Mundi - Christian Watson, WR, GB
3.02 Ellis - Trey McBride, TE, Ari
3.03 Justin - Kenny Pickett, QB, Pit
3.04 Omni - Alec Pierce, WR, Ind
3.06 dale - Desmond Ridder, QB, Atl
3.07 Retro - Isaiah Likely, TE, Bal
3.08 Peteys - Kyle Philips, WR, Ten
3.10 RNATB - Isaiah McKenzie, WR, Buf
3.12 dale - Jerome Ford, RB, Cle
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, RB, NE
4.08 Peteys - Sammy Watkins, WR, GB
4.10 RNATB -
5.01 Mundi -
5.02 Jules -
5.03 Peteys -
5.04 Omni -
5.06 dale -
5.10 RNATB -
6.01 Mundi -
6.04 Omni -
7.01 Hamlet -
@Really_Not_All_That_Bright is (still) on the clock.
Yes.
He would have been a keeper at 5.02. Trading him away should give you a pick at 5.02.
Okay, just checking. Hmmm.
Yeah, I don’t see an issue with that. It’s essentially what Hamlet thought was happening, correct? The only difference being Spiritus would get 6.01, not a post-draft makeup pick, right?
I don’t see any reason it wouldn’t work. You wanna vote for that for next year?
I personally lean toward no. Here’s how I see it:
Hamlet wanted to trade 2 players for 1.01 and nothing else. Under the system we have, that got corrected to 1.01 and 7.01, which is effectively “nothing else” like he wanted.
This new system would instead get him 1.01 and 3.11 for his two players, which seems like a whole bunch of free value coming from nowhere. 3.11 is certainly more than the “nothing else” he traded for beyond 1.01. (Note: This “free value” would be available to everyone, not just Hamlet, obviously. I would find it an interesting exercise to try and figure out how to maximize the value gained.)
Alright, I’m going to have to re-read all the draft pick stuff before I weigh in on that because I’ve kind of lost the thread on that, but I did lose track of it being @Really_Not_All_That_Bright pick for a long time. I’m going to say let’s give him an hour to get his pick in just in case, but at 3pm eastern @Spiritus_Mundi cam tale his 5.01 pick. As always, RNATB can jump in at any time and make any pick that’s still available.
Yeah. I would definitely like to put this proposal to a vote next year.
Yeah, I mean, 5th round. A couple skips won’t kill him.
We should try to figure out how to convey it clearly in as few words as possible for next year when we’ve totally spaced this whole conversation.
I appreciate you trying to explain how it makes sense to do it this way, but it keeps making it worse. The picks I get are based on available spots on my roster, not whether I made a trade. However I get rid of a guy, whether by drop or trade, I get a pick (which should be according to draft order, not this last Mundi pick) in the draft.
I dont get that pick because I made a trade. I get it because I have an empty roster spot.
Back when the trade was made, Mundi asked about just adding one of his to be cut guys to the trade. Had we done that, and I cut him, I would have had my pick 3.11. But since we didnt, I now have pick 7.01 instead.
Maybe I’ll just adopt Vonnegut’s “So it goes” rather than worry about this anymore.
So I understand better what you guys are proposing, what would happen if one player tried to swap, say, 1.06 and 2.06 for the 1.01? No players involved, just picks.
Wheels already turning:
Let’s say I’m drafting 4th.
Let’s also say I like all 25 guys I have. I keep them all. Now I trade two of them – let’s say Joe Mixon and DJ Moore – for 1.01. Two first round picks, baby! I now get to draft at 1.01 and 1.04. (Our current system prevents this by adjusting the trade to include the original 1.01 holder’s last pick for my second player.)
I’m not trading Mixon+Moore for 1.01 and 7.01. But if I’m getting 1.01 and 1.04 out of the deal, seems kind of like a no-brainer.
It’s less helpful the fewer guys want to keep. If you only want to keep 20, this technique only gets you a free 6th rounder, for example. So a mechanism for the rich to get richer, looks like.
Holy crap, what a great question. I have no idea, I need to go smoke and think about it.
The person who traded 1.01 would lose a pick at the end of his draft because he no longer needs that pick since he received two players in return.
The person who traded 1.06 and 2.06 would gain a pick at the end of his draft because there’s now no keeper there.
I can’t believe we have this exact same conversation every 4 years or so, and the people in the league haven’t changed. We have a system that works and has logical consistency. People are asking questions that were solved years ago.
I now have to vote for whatever hamlet wants by virtue of superior literary reference.
Damn
Yes, because we’re not worried about cuts anymore. Everyone is issued 25 picks after the previous season ends. What happens with them (whether cuts, keepers, or trades) is up to you.