I’m all for simply just using the quadrant idea. As long as a team can’t get back to back top6 or bottom6 picks, I think that’s sufficient.

Posted by dBKC on 4/24/2020 10:53:00 AM (view original):
I’m all for simply just using the quadrant idea. As long as a team can’t get back to back top6 or bottom6 picks, I think that’s sufficient.

+1

Posted by all3 on 4/24/2020 10:44:00 AM (view original):
Have any of you guys really stopped to think about how deep these drafts will be? First of all, there will be (borrowing from LBJ) not one, not two, not three, but 4 full years of NBA draftees. That will account for 40-50 "good" players. There will then be 36 players who recently graduated out of the CAP League. At least around half of them (18) will probably be worth drafting back into the League. In every draft after the 2nd, there will also be 36 player who graduated out of the CAP League and had to sit a year. Again, at least half of them (18 more) will be worth drafting back into the League. That's at least 90 players, which is more than the 3 full scheduled rounds of drafting.
In addition, didn't we say that drafts are ABBA? That will help too.
If we limit each owner to 1 top or bottom 6 pick every two years, I don't see what else we could possibly do. Again, I'm all for anything that eliminates record from the past season factoring into draft position, since a large part of this League is supposed to be advanced planning.
No Commish is ever going to make every owner in the League happy, so why don't we just let the person who came up with this concept, and who has put a lot of thought and effort into it, take care of things, at the very least until we do see how it works, before clammering for changes?

Elite wins. I know you know that, so I am not sure why you're trying to spin this. Nobody is arguing there won't be good players at the end of rd 1 (especially since people loaded up on stud seniors in the first rd of this draft). The point is that if you don't have one of the maybe 8 elite players, everything has to fall into place perfectly for you to have any chance of winning.

I never brought any of this up...I was content to follow the rules (misguided as they may be), but I'm not going to stay silent when someone does bring it up. I've never talked to anyone who is good at something that said "you know what this game needs? More luck!" I've never had that conversation about ANYTHING until now. It's mindblowing.

Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's, but at this point, you seem to be the proverbial "army of one". Everyone else seems good with trying all the other provisions put in place the the creator and Commissioner of the League. As stated before (and I know first-hand from running Leagues for years), no Commissioner is ever going to make every owner happy with everything.

Posted by all3 on 4/24/2020 5:51:00 PM (view original):
Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's, but at this point, you seem to be the proverbial "army of one". Everyone else seems good with trying all the other provisions put in place the the creator and Commissioner of the League. As stated before (and I know first-hand from running Leagues for years), no Commissioner is ever going to make every owner happy with everything.

Well that's interesting since this topic didn't get brought up by me. Army of one? Try again.

Posted by slashtc on 4/24/2020 6:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/24/2020 5:51:00 PM (view original):
Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's, but at this point, you seem to be the proverbial "army of one". Everyone else seems good with trying all the other provisions put in place the the creator and Commissioner of the League. As stated before (and I know first-hand from running Leagues for years), no Commissioner is ever going to make every owner happy with everything.

Well that's interesting since this topic didn't get brought up by me. Army of one? Try again.

You're not? Who else is still going on-and-on against it?

is there a way to punish tanking another way? How about a rule that specifically addresses tanking. maybe "minus one draft spot in the next draft for every game purposefully tanked by non-playoff teams in the last 10 games of the regular season". or something like that.

Who gets to detremine "purposeful" tanking? Why only the last 10 games - what about the other 72? Who would monitor this? More work for the Commish, who is already doing so much else?
A am always all for whatever the majority of League owners want, and that seems to be at least trying the "Top and Bottom 6" ban. It's probably the easiest proposal, work-wise, plus it keeps in tact both the "Why tank?" and random draft (mostly) thoughts, which, as I understand it, were two big things for the Commish when he created the rules

Posted by all3 on 4/25/2020 9:48:00 AM (view original):

Posted by slashtc on 4/24/2020 6:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/24/2020 5:51:00 PM (view original):
Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's, but at this point, you seem to be the proverbial "army of one". Everyone else seems good with trying all the other provisions put in place the the creator and Commissioner of the League. As stated before (and I know first-hand from running Leagues for years), no Commissioner is ever going to make every owner happy with everything.

Well that's interesting since this topic didn't get brought up by me. Army of one? Try again.

You're not? Who else is still going on-and-on against it?

Not many people are willing to stand up to people bullying other opinions. Since I didn't bring it up and several others have been supportive of other options, I'll leave you to answer you'r own question with a little research.

So when others express their opinions, it's bullying, but when you do it, it's all good. Now I see things much clearer. Thanks.

Ultimately, the Commish gets to "bully" us all. He's already stated he doesn't want tanking in this League, so changing his original rules to anything that involves prior year results seems out. The "Top and Botton 6" and other proposals were only thrown-out there to address a few people's (rightful) concerns over any owner getting too lucky. We should all just be glad our Commish created this League and is putting so much time and effort into it, instead of fighting him on the rules he has in-place.

I don't get why we had rules in place in the Forums BEFORE the draft and people want to change after.

The One and Done rule was asked and answered before the draft.
The Random Draft order was part of league rules before the draft.

I get wanting to tweak things, like, keeping it random but with a disclaimer for back-to-back seasons of fortune or misfortune, but any change to the random nature of the draft, in general, isn't what the commish wanted or what we signed up for.

Posted by all3 on 4/25/2020 11:20:00 AM (view original):
So when others express their opinions, it's bullying, but when you do it, it's all good. Now I see things much clearer. Thanks.

Ultimately, the Commish gets to "bully" us all. He's already stated he doesn't want tanking in this League, so changing his original rules to anything that involves prior year results seems out. The "Top and Botton 6" and other proposals were only thrown-out there to address a few people's (rightful) concerns over any owner getting too lucky. We should all just be glad our Commish created this League and is putting so much time and effort into it, instead of fighting him on the rules he has in-place.

No. See you keep coming at me when I state my opinion. The most I have said is I can't believe people want more luck. See the difference? My guess is you don't.

"Coming at you"? Seriously? Sorry you've taken it that way, but I don't see anywhere where I've even remotely "come at you" with anything except my opinions and some facts. I haven't called you any names or used any foul language. In fact, it is you who threw a false label on me (bully). I'm done after this as I think the Commish's decision is pretty easy at this point, but once again I ask, who, other than you, is still arguing for performance-based drafts, because I don't see anybody else.

Posted by all3 on 4/25/2020 5:27:00 PM (view original):
"Coming at you"? Seriously? Sorry you've taken it that way, but I don't see anywhere where I've even remotely "come at you" with anything except my opinions and some facts. I haven't called you any names or used any foul language. In fact, it is you who threw a false label on me (bully). I'm done after this as I think the Commish's decision is pretty easy at this point, but once again I ask, who, other than you, is still arguing for performance-based drafts, because I don't see anybody else.

Selective reading seems to be your strong point. On top of that, I am pretty sure I never said anything demanding performance based drafts. I don't care enough to go back and look, but again...you're seeing what you want to see. I'm against random. I will always be against random and I took opportunities where other people voiced opinions against random to back them. Have a great day.

Perhaps you prefer passive-aggressive over bulling. Either way, if the shoe fits...

"I think the commish's decision is pretty easy at this point" - classic passive-aggressive behavior (bullying behavior too, but I'll soften it up if it hurts your feelings).

I assume someone is going to email the league number so I don't have to read misinformed posts in this thread?