$250 TEAM Satellite Draft

[KJ Duke]

Dan kicked off this discussion in the other thread ... which sounded to me like an opening for an interesting fantasy concept. Below is what we came up with ... if there are 15 interested players I'd like to do it once the new draft room is ready to roll (possibly next week).

Fantasy Art Resembles Real Life, by DOUGHBOYS, "I like to think about real baseball teams in fantasy terms".

• Each owner will build his 30-man roster from One NL Pitching staff, One AL Pitching Staff, One NL Lineup and One AL Lineup. The TEAM draft will take place on the message board and Draft Order will be as follows:
○ Round 1: 1-15
○ Round 2: 15-1
○ Round 3: 15-1
○ Round 4: 15-1
• Everyone can email their KDS preferences to Greg and he will assign draft slots. Once everyone has selected their "TEAMS" we will pick players in the draft room. The draft order for players doesn't matter since everyone will be limited to selecting players assigned to their team.
• The league will have a non-competitive FAAB setup, meaning each owner will have $1000 to make add/drops during the season, but each player can be purchased for only $1 since each team can bid only on the players that are aligned with their pitching staffs and batter lineups. Players must be "officially" eligible to your team at the FAAB deadline to be picked up (pending trades and/or pending signees would remain ineligible until officially reported).
• If a player is officially traded or released prior to any Friday @ midnight PT, he must be dropped during the first available FAAB period. He then would be eligible for his new team in the subsequent FAAB period. If a player is traded after the Friday deadline in any given week, he must be dropped by the second upcoming weekend. Likewise, once a player is officially removed from your MLB franchise he must be removed from your starting lineup for the upcoming scoring period.
• Standard NFBC satellite roster size and scoring rules
• $250 Entry; NFBC Pays Top 3 ▬ $2000/ $750/ $250

Complete 4-Round TEAM Draft
1. Matt Modica • WAS Nationals Pitching • NYY Yankees Batting • NYM Mets Batting • HOU Astros Pitching
2. Thomas Warner • LA Dodgers Pitching • HOU Astros Batting • TOR Blue Jays Pitching • ATL Braves Batting
3. Russel Wyatt • SD Padres Pitching • BAL Orioles Batting • SF Giants Batting • BOS Red Sox Pitching
4. Ted Cohan • TOR Blue Jays Batting • ATL Braves Pitching • SD Padres Batting • TEX Rangers Pitching
5. Roy Ericson • CWS White Sox Batting • ARI D'backs Batting • NYY Yankees Pitching • COL Rockies Pitching
6. Eric Albright • COL Rockies Batting • NYM Mets Pitching • KC Royals Batting • MIN Twins Pitching
7. Rick Hayden • BOS Red Sox Batting • STL Cardinals Batting • PIT Pirates Pitching • KC Royals Pitching
8. Zola/Perry Van Hook • SEA Mariners Pitching • MIA Marlins Batting • MIA Marlins Pitching • TB Rays Batting
9. Ken Gill • PIT Pirates Batting • SEA Mariners Batting • LAA Angels Pitching • ARI D'backs Pitching
10. Jason Duponte • WAS Nationals Batting • TB Rays Pitching • CLE Indians Batting • PHL Phillies Pitching
11. KJ Duke • CHI Cubs Batting • TEX Rangers Batting • DET Tigers Pitching • MIL Brewers Pitching
12. Jay Lyons • DET Tigers Batting • CWS White Sox Pitching • CIN Reds Pitching • PHL Phillies Batting
13. Mike Mager • MIL Brewers Batting • CLE Indians Pitching • SF Giants Pitching • OAK A's Batting
14. Scott Butterworth • STL Cardinals Pitching • LA Dodger Batting • OAK A's Pitching • MIN Twins Batting
15. George Kleemann • LAA Angels Batting • CHI Cubs Pitching • CIN Reds Batting • BAL Orioles Pitching

[EA Sports]

In!

[Deadheadz]

.

Help me and those like me understand Duke...

Are there more than 4 rounds for a reason? With a team's 25 man roster, aren't you eventually going to get all those players or are you saying we would be drafting minor leaguers who are signed but not on the 25 man roster.

I didn't catch it but did you have a rule that a GM must have one AL Pitching Staff only not both staves from the same league?

Also the KDS would be a challenge to bid on since the #1 guy would also be choosing #60. Just a guess but would the #60 pick be the Rockies pitchers?

What happens when a player is traded in real life? You lose him but gain the rights to FAAB the player coming back?


Very interesting indeed.



.

[KJ Duke]

.

Help me and those like me understand Duke...

Are there more than 4 rounds for a reason? With a team's 25 man roster, aren't you eventually going to get all those players or are you saying we would be drafting minor leaguers who are signed but not on the 25 man roster.

I didn't catch it but did you have a rule that a GM must have one AL Pitching Staff only not both staves from the same league?

Also the KDS would be a challenge to bid on since the #1 guy would also be choosing #60. Just a guess but would the #60 pick be the Rockies pitchers?

What happens when a player is traded in real life? You lose him but gain the rights to FAAB the player coming back?

Very interesting indeed.

.

Between your 2 teams you will have access to 50 active players each week, but can roster only 30 at a time. Who you pick in the draft are the only players you'll have available until the first FAAB runs, then you can do add/drops among the rest of your eligible players that are in the faab pool. As noted above, must have one pitching staff from each league and same for hitters.

[Bronx Yankees]

Fantasy Art Resembles Real Life, by DOUGHBOYS, "I like to think about real baseball teams in fantasy terms".

So Dan kicked off this discussion in the other thread ... which sounded to me like an opening for an interesting fantasy concept. Below is what we came up with ... if there are 15 interested players I'd like to do it once the new draft room is ready to roll (possibly next week).

• Each owner will build his roster from One NL Pitching staff, One AL Pitching Staff, One NL Lineup and One AL Lineup

$250 • TEAM Satellite • Slow-draft (standard NFBC payout)
1. KJ Duke
2. Dan Kenyon (?reserved?)
3. Mike Mager (?reserved?)
4. Russel Wyatt
5. Eric Albright
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

Yes, I'm in. Thanks, KJ. Sounds very interesting and relatively low maintenance.

Mike

[Tcohan]

Interesting format and I'll do it KJ

Ted

[CC's Desperados]

This should really be an auction. $100 for each team with a max bid of $97.

[KJ Duke]

This should really be an auction. $100 for each team with a max bid of $97.

Seemed like it had enough moving parts already.
Proof-of-concept draft slips right into a satellite setup with no intervention.

[Teufel Hunden]

Seems like you would be better off allowing each owner to draft any two pitching/hitting rosters.

If you keep it setup as is, not only would the #1 pick be able to select Nats pitching at 1/1, but they would also be excluded from taking Colorado pitching at 4/15.

But, if you switched to two of each pretty good chance #1 pick gets stuck with Colorado pitching at 4/15 unless they draft their second pitching staff at 2/15 or 3/1.

[KJ Duke]

Seems like you would be better off allowing each owner to draft any two pitching/hitting rosters.

If you keep it setup as is, not only would the #1 pick be able to select Nats pitching at 1/1, but they would also be excluded from taking Colorado pitching at 4/15.

But, if you switched to two of each pretty good chance #1 pick gets stuck with Colorado pitching at 4/15 unless they draft their second pitching staff at 2/15 or 3/1.

Colorado pitchers aside, because the AL has DH which is an edge for hitting and a minus for pitching, I liked having one on each side. Plus, who's to say the Nats pitching goes first? Maybe it is the Rockies hitters or ... who knows, really, I haven't even begun to think about how I'd want to assemble my team.

[Deadheadz]

Seems like you would be better off allowing each owner to draft any two pitching/hitting rosters.

If you keep it setup as is, not only would the #1 pick be able to select Nats pitching at 1/1, but they would also be excluded from taking Colorado pitching at 4/15.

But, if you switched to two of each pretty good chance #1 pick gets stuck with Colorado pitching at 4/15 unless they draft their second pitching staff at 2/15 or 3/1.

I thought the same thing until I realized at pick 4.15 the Rockies pitching would be gone because another GM with the NL staff slot to fill would have to have taken him before that. Am I making sense or did I miss something?


.

[Teufel Hunden]

Seems like you would be better off allowing each owner to draft any two pitching/hitting rosters.

If you keep it setup as is, not only would the #1 pick be able to select Nats pitching at 1/1, but they would also be excluded from taking Colorado pitching at 4/15.

But, if you switched to two of each pretty good chance #1 pick gets stuck with Colorado pitching at 4/15 unless they draft their second pitching staff at 2/15 or 3/1.

I thought the same thing until I realized at pick 4.15 the Rockies pitching would be gone because another GM with the NL staff slot to fill would have to have taken him before that. Am I making sense or did I miss something?


.

The Rockies pitching staff would go to the last team that drafted a NL pitching staff under current design.

[KJ Duke]

Yeah, the Rockies would probably be the last pick among NL staffs, but that wouldn't necessarily be pick 4.15.

[KJ Duke]

Sorry, I have made several edits on the trade rule. It is a little tricky thinking through different scenarios based on the timing of a trade and what is most equitable. Still working on it ...

[Gekko]

I'm waiting for the baseball league where we bid real dollars on first couple rounds, like in football gridiron

[Deadheadz]

Sorry, I have made several edits on the trade rule. It is a little tricky thinking through different scenarios based on the timing of a trade. I think I have it down now. The rule will be as follows ...

• Players that change teams via trade/release/etc, cannot be in their owner's lineup for any new scoring period once they have officially been removed from that MLB team's organization. The owner has the option of keeping them on his bench, but cannot start them. If the player is dropped by the original owner, the new team owner can pick them up via FAAB.

This means the GM loses the use of the player BUT has the option to keep that player off his opponents roster?
Clever.

Could be useful if an elite player moves at the trade deadline.
What would be interesting is if two GMs had players they each wanted to keep from each other. You could see a negotiation where they could eventually agree to release those players. Or a 3 team deal. Wow.


.

[KJ Duke]

I'm waiting for the baseball league where we bid real dollars on first couple rounds, like in football gridiron

Many different directions to go in a baseball draft, might not work quite as well as in a league where points are just points.

Still doable, but the biggest problem is finding a draft time in Vegas to squeeze in one more draft.

[KJ Duke]

This means the GM loses the use of the player BUT has the option to keep that player off his opponents roster?
Clever.

Could be useful if an elite player moves at the trade deadline. .

My original thought was that the player should move to his new team once traded, but that would require forcing the existing owner to drop the player which could be problematic based on the timing of the trade. So my next idea was to allow the original owner to keep the player, just to avoid questions around the drop/add transactions.

Then I come to a middle ground with a resolution that doesn't force the original owner to do a drop but doesn't allow the owner to start him once traded ... if the player is officially traded prior to that player being locked into your lineup for the upcoming period, you must bench him. If he is traded after he is locked, you must bench him for the following period.

More edits forthcoming ... getting closer.

[KJ Duke]

Ok, how about this for traded/released players ...

If a player is officially traded or released prior to any Friday @ midnight PT, he must be dropped during the first available FAAB period. He then would be eligible for his new team in the subsequent FAAB period. If a player is traded after the Friday deadline in any given week, he must be dropped by the second upcoming weekend. Likewise, once a player is officially removed from an organization he must be removed from your starting lineup for the upcoming scoring period.

I think I like that better. Anyone see a problem with that?

[Tcohan]

Personally I liked the first rule better that if a player is traded the original team owner gets to keep him. That way if any stars such as hamels or others are traded no team takes a huge hit or gets a huge unexpected boost. I realize the original team may a get a small boost if hamels gets a better lineup and more wins potential but the change does not seem as great. I can live with either way but like this one better.

[KJ Duke]

Personally I liked the first rule better that if a player is traded the original team owner gets to keep him. That way if any stars such as hamels or others are traded no team takes a huge hit or gets a huge unexpected boost. I realize the original team may a get a small boost if hamels gets a better lineup and more wins potential but the change does not seem as great. I can live with either way but like this one better.

Suppose a SS gets traded ... now instead of everyone having 2 starting SS's each week, one owner has 3 SS's and the other has only 1. I think that's worse, because if you lose Hamels as the Philly owner you at least get another guy for the rotation. That's the beauty of the setup, if you lose a player to injury (or in this case trade) you have a starter replacing him, even if it's a lesser starter. And it's purer from the standpoint of having one entire team rather than pieces of many teams.

[Tcohan]

Good point on position player being traded, so agree with your proposal.

[ctmbaseball]

Sign me up.

[TOXIC ASSETS]

Sign me up. Good thinking on this one.
I'll do one more league....

RE: player trades. I vote that the original team & owner has OPTION to keep on their roster rather than being forced to drop. Leave it in the control of the owner who drafted. And they get to keep all stats as well. From a record keeping perspective, this has to make things much easier!


Ken Gill

[jaybvl]

I would like to sign up!

Thank you,

Jay Lyons