Would You Be In Favor Of Ranking Your Draft Spots?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:54 am

There seems to be a discussion on every message board for high-stakes events about the way draft spots are randomly selected. The discussion is strong in football right now because LaDainian Tomlinson is such a dominant first pick this year. Our own Gordon Gekko has even proposed a draft slot bidding process where you would use FAAB money in a blind bidding process to determine your draft slots before the leagues are picked. It's an idea I'm considering in football for 2006.

FAAB is too important over a 26-week season to try this idea in baseball (although we could do it in a satellite league), but I am interested in hearing from our participants about their thoughts on the random draft spot process and if they'd like to have more say in choosing their draft spots. Is the NFBC fine the way it is with random draft spots or would you like to see a change for the main event?

One potential change could be this:

Owners would be allowed to rank their draft spot preference and once Tom and I picked the leagues and random order, we'd then assign the draft spots according to each owners' preference. So if we picked Joe Smith with the No. 1 pick and Joe's top preference would be the third pick, we'd slot him third. If John Doe was No. 2 and his top preference was fifth, we'd slot him fifth. We'd do this for all 15 owners in each league and announce the order for each league after the changes were made. The No. 15 pick wouldn't get any say in choosing his favorite spot, obviously, but he also might not be slotted 15th if someone else wanted to control the ends.

The only way to do this would be to have a system in place online where you could rank your 15 preferences and change those rankings right up until our deadline. Tom and I would then take it from there. A system would have to be created like this:

1st Choice: No. 3

2nd Choice: No. 5

3rd Choice: No. 6

4th Choice: No. 1

5th Choice: No. 4

6th Choice: No. 7

7th Choice: No. 2

8th Choice: No. 8

9th Choice: No. 10

10th Choice: No. 15

11th Choice: No. 9

12th Choice: No. 11

13th Choice: No. 12

14th Choice: No. 13

15th Choice: No. 14

Someone said this is called the Kentucky Derby Style of drafting. Whatever it's called, it's a viable option and gives owners a "little" more say in their draft spots. I also think it would be easy to implement this year.

Again, I'm just looking for random thoughts on this idea and any other ideas you have as I want the draft to be as skillful as possible. There's no doubt that you can win this baseball league from any spot in the draft, but giving owners a little more say in where they draft isn't a bad idea if it doesn't change the rest of the contest at all. I'm open to ideas, so please give me your thoughts in this thread. Thanks everyone.

Nevadaman · Post by **Nevadaman** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:40 am

Greg, I think this is an excellent idea due to the ease of implementation. It doesn't require any extra time commitment (which seems to be a huge issue with several people) and will certainly result in more of us being happy than if nothing was done!

kd.gray · Post by **kd.gray** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:55 am

I agree with this idea. Actually, I think I brought it up right before last year's draft as an option (I at least remember mentioning the Derby).

I, for one, utilized most of my FAAB dollars this past year.

If nothing else, this would quiet those people that say they would rather have 15th and 16th players rather than 1st and 30th. I would be really surprised if more than 2-3 people end up choosing 15th over 1st...if any.

RotoSpin.com · Post by **RotoSpin.com** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:20 am

I like it.

viper · Post by **viper** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:27 am

Does this mean that every team would need to rank their draft slot preferences when they joined? You would need EVERYONE's preferences on the day you randomly selected draft slots.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:35 am

Originally posted by viper:

Does this mean that every team would need to rank their draft slot preferences when they joined? You would need EVERYONE's preferences on the day you randomly selected draft slots. Yes, again an added chore for us, but I think we can pull it off. I've just asked STATS to help with this process and if we can just make this a feature on everyone's game site, it shouldn't be hard to tell everyone to rank their draft preference before we pick the leagues. But you are right, everyone would have to do this and we'd have to stay on top of it.

kgrady · Post by **kgrady** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:18 am

I'm OK with this proposal. I suppose there would have to be a default order of preference in the event that someone fails to key-enter anything. I'm thinking the default should just be 1 thru 15?

Kevin

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:21 am

Originally posted by kgrady:

I'm OK with this proposal. I suppose there would have to be a default order of preference in the event that someone fails to key-enter anything. I'm thinking the default should just be 1 thru 15?

Kevin Absolutely.

Scans33 · Post by **Scans33** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:32 am

I think it's a great idea. It combines the luck of the draw with a degree of personal preference.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:46 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Our own Gordon Gekko has even proposed a draft slot bidding process where you would use FAAB money in a blind bidding process to determine your draft slots before the leagues are picked. It's an idea I'm considering in football for 2006.

FAAB is too important over a 26-week season to try this idea in baseball (although we could do it in a satellite league), but I am interested in hearing from our participants about their thoughts on the random draft spot process and if they'd like to have more say in choosing their draft spots. i don't like the kentucky derby way. it's still based on randomness.

is it better than the current system? NO WAY! why randomly give someone their first preference, and then possibly giving someone their 15th preference? that certainly doesn't seem fair. you don't run the weekly FA process the kentucky derby way.

keep it totally random or give each owner the same chance at getting the slot they prefer (blind bidding).

[ October 10, 2005, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:08 am

I think its a great idea. Blind bidding will never get off the ground with new folks so that idea is mute. This idea will let us have a little input as to our draft positions and maybe do some mocks with the thought of having that preferred drafting position.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:12 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

I think its a great idea. Blind bidding will never get off the ground with new folks so that idea is mute. why can new folks learn how to rank their draft preferences, but not be able to learn how to blind bid on their draft preferences? your point (or lackthereof) doesn't make any sense. how are new folks able to do WEEKLY blind bidding of free agents?

i'm afraid some of us need to sharpen the pencil...

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:43 am

Blind bidding is not familiar for new folks. It was my greatest concern when plunking down the $1350 entry fee. The first two weeks of the season I went with lowered bids to play safe. Gekko, you're asking new people to bid money in a game that is new to them, of course they will be intimidated and be inclined not to enter! On the other hand, simply listing your priority of draft choice is an easy task for anybody on any level. Common sense.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:14 pm

Preference:

1) Bidding

2) Random selection with slot preference

3) The way it is now

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:04 pm

1) Random Selection with slot preference

2) The way it is now

Bidding doesn't even make the list. I'd think twice about playing. Though I will say that it makes me kind of nervous that rules change after money has been plunked down. I haven't ponyed up anything yet but what if I do and then we decide to go with blind bidding or change something else I am uncomfortable with?

[ October 10, 2005, 08:06 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:56 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

1) Random Selection with slot preference

2) The way it is now

Bidding doesn't even make the list. I'd think twice about playing. Though I will say that it makes me kind of nervous that rules change after money has been plunked down. I haven't ponyed up anything yet but what if I do and then we decide to go with blind bidding or change something else I am uncomfortable with? why randomly give an owner their first preference, and then possibly giving someone their 15th preference? that certainly doesn't seem fair, does it? please answer the question. thanks.

p.s. the nfbc doesn't run the weekly FA process the kentucky derby way.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:04 pm

I'd just prefer to keep the two things (free agent money; draft position) seperate. I wouldn't want to give up a chance at a preferable draft position and I wouldn't want to lose a bunch of my free agent money before the season starts. Lose-lose situation. In a sense that system favors folks who want to draft in the bottom. I do think random is completely fair; it's somewhat better if we can take a chance at the positions we want. With last year's system, if you want to draft last, and you get picked for first, it doesn't work out for you or other players. I'd be okay with the ability to trade draft positions, btw. Beyond that, I agree with Doughboys.

Anyway, the purpose of this thread is to vote; I submitted mine. I don't feel that I am required to justify my position so I'm okay with your disagreement and I don't need to argue. Most people seem to agree with me anyway.

[ October 10, 2005, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:50 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

I'd just prefer to keep the two things (free agent money; draft position) seperate. curious as to why.

both draft slots and free agents are resources that need to be allocated. no better way than bidding.

Originally posted by bjoak:

Lose-lose situation. nah, it's win-win

Originally posted by bjoak:

I do think random is completely fair; it's somewhat better if we can take a chance at the positions we want. With last year's system, if you want to draft last, and you get picked for first, it doesn't work out for you or other players. someone must be drunk. you say that blind bidding on draft slots could favor the late spots, and that it's a lose-lose situation.

THEN you go on to say that you prefer the kentucky derby method which clearly favors the first randomly selected person who promptly gets his #1 preference. it seems to me that the early few who get THEIR preferences will have a BIG advantage over the other folks...who only get whatever trash is left. talk about unfair.

Originally posted by bjoak:

I'd be okay with the ability to trade draft positions, btw. would you be okay with collusion too? geez...the bar is open

Originally posted by bjoak:

Anyway, the purpose of this thread is to vote; I submitted mine. I don't feel that I am required to justify my position so I'm okay with your disagreement and I don't need to argue. Most people seem to agree with me anyway. i can tell why you don't want a healthy debate. you must be able to see it, mr bjoak. you must know it by now. it's pointless to keep arguing a point that has no merit.

p.s. the "most people" you mention are wrong

thanks. muuuhahahahaha!!!

[ October 10, 2005, 11:53 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:57 pm

btw, mr bjoak you never answered my question...not that anyone expected you to. in case you decide to "sac up", here it is...

why randomly give an owner their first preference, and then possibly giving someone their 15th preference? that certainly doesn't seem fair, does it? please answer the question. thanks.

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 1:30 am

I am not in favor of blind bidding, or random selection with draft preference, nor am I in favor of being able to trade draft positions. I am in favor of leaving it as is, luck of the draw. In my 2 years here I have ended up #7 and #15 so it is not like I have had early picks. I I was not entirely happy with either of the draft slots as I would always prefer #1 but you play the cards you are dealt. I'm sure you have heard the saying, if you have lemeons, then you make lemonade, you build your team based around your draft order. I don't believe that there are many out there that would trade their 1st pick for the number 8 slot regardless if that slots shows the most winners this year or any year. Why should the process be changed for the minority that might be stupid enough to trade down? Then again maybe we should do it just to see who would be silly enough to do so.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:19 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

1) Random Selection with slot preference

2) The way it is now

Bidding doesn't even make the list. I'd think twice about playing. Though I will say that it makes me kind of nervous that rules change after money has been plunked down. I haven't ponyed up anything yet but what if I do and then we decide to go with blind bidding or change something else I am uncomfortable with? Then I'd give you your money back. The rules currently state random selections of draft spots. That's what we'll have in 2006, no question about it. Blind draft slot bidding is not an option for the NFBC in 2006. We'll randomly pick the leagues and draft slots for 2006; the only other option is if we let you rank your preference for draft spots after we've randomly picked the order.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:45 am

Greg,

I like the idea it creates an additional element of strategy. I agree that free agent dollars should not be used and that if they were it would not be good for the event.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 3:19 am

why randomly give an owner their first preference, and then possibly giving someone their 15th preference? that certainly doesn't seem fair, does it? please answer the question. thanks.[/QB]No question this is the one drawback to doing the Kentucky Derby Style of drafting spots. It's a valid point. The first person would get their preferred spot and the ones near the bottom wouldn't have much say in their slot selections at all. But the person drawing the 15th spot might be getting a "better" spot through this system than just taking what he got.

It's not a perfect solution, I'll admit that, but I'm asking if it's a better solution than the straight random selection process. If the wide majority thinks that it is, I might use this process in 2006.

Just my opinion, GG, but the draft slot bidding process for baseball isn't perfect either. I see more merit for it in football. With 26 weeks of FAAB pickups in baseball, I'm reluctant to use FAAB money on draft spots because it might give some owners in other leagues an unfair advantage in the free agent process. Let's say you're in a league where all of the owners spent wildly on their draft spots and you didn't spend a dollar. That might allow you to pick up more free agents during the season than someone else in another league. The overall contest could be on a more uneven footing if we use FAAB money to determine draft spots.

Again, I think that's more prevelant in baseball over 26 weeks than football over 13 weeks. Just food for thought as we're talking about all three scenarios to determine draft spots.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 4:21 am

Greg – The current draft slot selection method (totally random) is better than the Kentucky Derby draft slot selection. If in a specific league, one owner was able to randomly receive their first draft slot preference, and another owner in the same league was to randomly receive their 13th or 14th or 15th draft slot preference, that is clearly not fair.

As for people bidding crazy $ on draft slots and having few FA $ throughout the year…why couldn’t a similar scenario happen where owners bid crazy FA$ in week one of the FA acquisition process (aka L.Gordon, etc…)? That concern is out there, yet you still use FA$ to determine weekly FA pick-ups.

If blind bidding is ok for the allocation of weekly free agents, it’s good enough for the allocation of draft slots. Let the market decide.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 4:38 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

Greg – The current draft slot selection method (totally random) is better than the Kentucky Derby draft slot selection. If in a specific league, one owner was able to randomly receive their first draft slot preference, and another owner in the same league was to randomly receive their 13th or 14th or 15th draft slot preference, that is clearly not fair.

As for people bidding crazy $ on draft slots and having few FA $ throughout the year…why couldn’t a similar scenario happen where owners bid crazy FA$ in week one of the FA acquisition process (aka L.Gordon, etc…)? That concern is out there, yet you still use FA$ to determine weekly FA pick-ups.

If blind bidding is ok for the allocation of weekly free agents, it’s good enough for the allocation of draft slots. Let the market decide. GG, it's not any less fair than our current system because that 14th or 15th pick could end up getting his/her 8th or 9th favorite spot. In our current setup, there is no alternative other than getting what you're assigned. That's not bad, but giving some input on where you draft has some merit. Again, baseball isn't as dependent on the first round picks as football, so I think this tweaking of the draft order process is easier to improve on than it is in football.

You are correct about the FA $s. King of Queens made the same argument on the NFFC boards and I concur. But over 26 weeks, people don't bid as wildly in baseball as they might in football, where finding one starter early in the season is key.

Yes, we need to let the market decide. There are good points on all sides and this discussion has plenty of life on here, the NFFC boards and thanks to you and Z-Men the WCOFF boards. We'll poll the participants soon and decide in baseball if any change is needed.