Trades that occurred after the draft order/number of picks is finalized (mostly this means during the draft) would still have to be an equal number of picks swapped (and thus include picks if it’s any sort of 2 for 1 deal). Jules is really good with this stuff so I’ll let him weigh in on it.
I’d have to think about specific scenarios, but generally no one gets screwed by “and so and so’s last round pick” stuff. Those players couldn’t have used that pick anyway since they filled up their empty slots early by having some sort of 2 for 1 (or 3 for 2) trade, so they simply would not have used that pick. I don’t remember what happened with Hamlet that you’re talking about. How did Hamlet get screwed by our system?
My memory is that his last pick ended up being in like the 6th or 7th round instead of the 2nd. It would have been in the 2nd if they had done the same trade before cutdowns even using the old rules. That’s why I feel he got screwed.
Nothing materially changes in terms of the trade, but if done before our arbitrary, artificial deadline, his final pick is in the second round. If done after the deadline, his final pick is many rounds later. The only reason for that difference is supposed to be irrelevant bookkeeping; just tacking on last picks that no one cares about.
The goal of this rule change is to make the trades the same regardless if you do them before or after the deadline.
It goes on for dozens of posts, with a multi-post diversion thrown in here and there. You can see I start firmly on the side of the existing rules, but Hamlet pointed out that if he had made the same trade before cutdowns it would have used the future draft pick rules, giving him the high final pick he expected. Why couldn’t he have just done the exact same trade before the cutdown? (By the old rules he absolutely was allowed to.)
I found this argument compelling, and thanks much to Justin for reminding us of this issue.
I vote to keep whatever system allowed me to be champion so I can try to re-pete the Re-Petey.
On a side note, I’m in the championship game of my money league (which I won last year). If I win, I will be on an all time fantasy heater as I’m only in these two leagues (3 wins in 2 years). And it’s not a dynasty league which I think is impressive.
I’ve made the bold move of benching Josh Jacobs against the Niners D. Let’s see if this pays off Cotton.
I fucked up the examples above. With the concrete example now linked, here’s the situation:
Old rules, if trade was before cutdowns:
Hamlet drafts 1.01, 1.11, 2.11, 3.11
Mundi drafts 2.01, 3.01, 4.01, 5.01, 6.01
Old rules, if trade was after cutdowns:
Hamlet drafts 1.01, 1.11, 2.11, 7.01
Mundi drafts 2.01, 3.01, 4.01, 5.01, 6.01
There is no Yahoo, fantasy, or parity reason why that 3.11 pick should become 7.01.
This rule change wouldn’t be adding something that didn’t already exist. Hamlet could have just made the trade before cutdowns. The only reason he didn’t is because nobody was aware of this obscure side effect of our “and x’s last pick” mechanic. (Justin might have sensed it.)
The short and sweet description of the new rule is “Trades no longer have to be balanced, 2 for 1 is fine.” The person who ends up with the roster that’s too big simply loses their last pick, while the person who’s roster is short gets a brand new last pick in their natural draft slot.
In your example, where is the 3.11 pick coming from? It would otherwise be holding a player, right?
You can’t create arbitrary picks on yahoo. Once we enter cuts and keepers, that’s when we figure out what the draft order is and who has picks. The number of draft picks and keepers becomes fixed. So the only draft picks we have to work with are the ones created at the start of the draft. This is important: everyone gets 25 draft picks, but most of those picks are used to keep their players. This starts from the back - the 25th round pick is filled first, so that the open slots are from the top rounds. Only the players they cut create empty draft slots, which they can then use to draft players. Everyone must finish the yahoo draft with 25 players, no more, no less. It might help to conceptualize it as thinking every player has 25 draft picks, but they use most of them to “draft” players from last year’s roster.
So let’s imagine for a moment that we have 2 teams and their rosters are 6 players deep. They can cut as many players as they want to gain draft picks. They both keep 3 players, and gain 2 draft picks.
Team A has draft picks 1.1, 2.1, and 3.1 as well as kept players A1, A2, and A3. Team A has draft picks 4.1, 5.1, and 6.1, but they’re used to keep A1, A2, and A3.
Team B has draft picks 1.2, 2.2, and 3.2, as well as kept players B1 B2 and B3.
Team B decides he wants the first overall pick, so he offers his first and second rounders (1.2 and 2.2) for the 1.1 pick.
Under our current system, the 3.2 pick would have to be included to balance the pick, so the trade would actually be 1.2 and 2.2 for 1.1 and 3.2.
In that situation you end up with
Team A: 1.2, 2.1, 2.2
Team B 1.1, 3.1, 3.2
But under your proposal, if I’m understanding correctly, you have
Team A: 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, A1, A2, A3
Team B: 1.1, 3.1, B1, B2, B3
Team A has 7 players for 6 roster slots and team B has 5 players for 6 roster slots. Neither can finish the draft.
If I understand you correctly, you seem to be saying that team B should be able to draft another player at 4.2, but then what pick is holding player B1? We still have the problem of Team A having too many picks/players.
I may be misunderstanding your proposal. Using my example (with 2 teams with 6 player rosters), how would a 2 for 1 trade work after the draft started?
Team B should have pick 3.2, not 3.1. (You listed 3.1 twice.) Including that correction, here’s how the new system would leave that trade:
Team A: 1.2, 2.1, 2.2, A1, A2, A3
Team B: 1.1, 3.2, 4.2, B1, B2, B3
Team A’s last pick gets removed because he had too many, while team B gets a brand new last pick at his natural position. Everyone finishes the draft with 25.
Pretty sure it would work exactly the same. Not 100% positive, just pretty sure.
Yeah, it even works during the draft. Imagine it’s the end of the first round, you and I both started the draft with three picks each and neither of us did any trades. Let’s say I’m drafting first and you sixth, and you want to trade your 2.6 and 3.6 for my 2.1.
This new rule states that the results should be:
Ellis: 2.6, 3.1
Beef: 2.1, 4.6
Net result is that the 3.6 I just traded for gets dropped because I can’t fit that many people on my roster. Meanwhile, you get a brand new 4.6 pick to fill the brand new hole in your roster.
Yahoo gets corrected by moving the keeper originally slotted in 4.6 (which is now a draft pick) to the pick that just got removed (3.6).
Obviously nobody would ever want to do this trade, but it does work logistically.
Now that it looks like Hamlin is going to be ok, I can report that I won my other fantasy league championship 54-50. My opponent had Josh Allen, Jamar Chase, and Bills kicker while I had Joe Burrow. I had a 90 percent chance of losing.
I’m never going to top this in fantasy. I really should retire.
I haven’t forgot about getting everything going this year but I did forget to take care of it before I went on a 2 week vacation with spotty internet. I’m hoping @Jules_Andre will do his normal bang up job organizing the new thread but he hasn’t been on the board for a few months. Either way we’ll get stuff organized soon.