All Time Baseball Draft

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:55 am

What's the clock on each pick?

mbendar16 · Post by **mbendar16** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:50 am

I would be in favor of making our picks without revealing a year and just having the right to each player's career. I think the group playing this will either track the standings on their own and/or have a pretty good idea where they stand when making picks. Guessing the year of each's player's selection I think adds fun and strategy to this draft. If there is an element of surprise for some of the greatest in history that have multiple seasons to pick from, that should avoid the late round standings concern a little.

This being said, I'm fine with whatever is decided by the group, just my thoughts above.

Mark

Likewhat17 · Post by **Likewhat17** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:52 am

Originally posted by mbendar16:

I would be in favor of making our picks without revealing a year and just having the right to each player's career. I think the group playing this will either track the standings on their own and/or have a pretty good idea where they stand when making picks. Guessing the year of each's player's selection I think adds fun and strategy to this draft. If there is an element of surprise for some of the greatest in history that have multiple seasons to pick from, that should avoid the late round standings concern a little.

This being said, I'm fine with whatever is decided by the group, just my thoughts above.

Mark Im also good either way, but this is my preference also.

mbendar16 · Post by **mbendar16** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:52 am

One piece I forgot to mention.

If we want to utilize Dan's kind offer to help us out as needed, we can all e-mail our years to him so no one else knows what we have selected. He can release them once all teams have submitted their rosters.

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 7:59 am

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

What's the clock on each pick? Lowy's in for some PAIN

vpokrnut · Post by **vpokrnut** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:00 am

Please add me to the league. My name is Bruce Dahl. I have been in the NFBC for 5 years playing in satellites. I will take the last spot if it is still available

Nevadaman · Post by **Nevadaman** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:38 am

Playing through 23 rounds without knowing where you are at is completely pointless. All the picks you make will be pointless if you don't know what numbers you need. We have to see the standings after each round. If a few rounds are blind as has been discussed, fine, but going through the whole draft without any stats? That's no fun at all.

Asumijet · Post by **Asumijet** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 8:40 am

Originally posted by mbendar16:

I would be in favor of making our picks without revealing a year and just having the right to each player's career. I think the group playing this will either track the standings on their own and/or have a pretty good idea where they stand when making picks. Guessing the year of each's player's selection I think adds fun and strategy to this draft. If there is an element of surprise for some of the greatest in history that have multiple seasons to pick from, that should avoid the late round standings concern a little.

This being said, I'm fine with whatever is decided by the group, just my thoughts above.

Mark This is my vote as well. At the end of the game, I can decide if I want 2011 Ellsbury with 30HRs or 2009 Ellsbury with 70SB. The end game decisions will require some significant thought and challenge.

I also vote for the 1300 innings.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:39 am

Originally posted by Asumijet:

quote:Originally posted by mbendar16:

I would be in favor of making our picks without revealing a year and just having the right to each player's career. I think the group playing this will either track the standings on their own and/or have a pretty good idea where they stand when making picks. Guessing the year of each's player's selection I think adds fun and strategy to this draft. If there is an element of surprise for some of the greatest in history that have multiple seasons to pick from, that should avoid the late round standings concern a little.

This being said, I'm fine with whatever is decided by the group, just my thoughts above.

Mark This is my vote as well. At the end of the game, I can decide if I want 2011 Ellsbury with 30HRs or 2009 Ellsbury with 70SB. The end game decisions will require some significant thought and challenge.

[/QUOTE]Not a fan of this. Mainly because I believe we would then have to reveal the individual season we want for each player on a round by round basis as they were taken after the entire 23 round draft was completed.

Ex. After all 23 rounds of player selection, each owner would have to announce in a round by round fashion the season they are choosing for the player they took in Rd1, then Rd2……etc.

How else would you do it and still keep it fair? After all, If you announce the 23 player seasons that you are using all at once because you had overall pick number 1, I can then pick my best 23 player season that would hopefully top yours.

[ October 15, 2011, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: Navel Lint ]

JohnP · Post by **JohnP** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:44 am

Originally posted by Nevadaman:

Playing through 23 rounds without knowing where you are at is completely pointless. All the picks you make will be pointless if you don't know what numbers you need. We have to see the standings after each round. If a few rounds are blind as has been discussed, fine, but going through the whole draft without any stats? That's no fun at all. Agree. Let's just announce the picks, put in the stats, maintain position flexibility as warranted, etc. I think it would be more fun to see the exact stats as we go and not have to guess at a blind pick or a blind year. The standings are all going to be skewed at the beginning anyways due to inequitable sticks / arms. If this group is insistent on the blind rounds - I think it should be as few rounds as possible and as late as possible. I like Mark's suggestion of paying 2nd place. Not so worried about the last guy determining who wins - this group will be all about finishing as high as possible and learning some cool baseball stuff along the way.

mbendar16 · Post by **mbendar16** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:49 am

The 1st pick would not need to reveal 1st. Everyone would decide their team at the end of the draft, with no advantage/disadvantage to any of the 15 teams.

The key here is everyone having an idea of what the standings are on their own. I am likely the most "Excel challenged" of the teams here, but most that are better can likely set up 15 tabs and have formulas/links that add up the stats automically after each pick is entered.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:52 am

Originally posted by JohnP:

quote:Originally posted by Nevadaman:

Playing through 23 rounds without knowing where you are at is completely pointless. All the picks you make will be pointless if you don't know what numbers you need. We have to see the standings after each round. If a few rounds are blind as has been discussed, fine, but going through the whole draft without any stats? That's no fun at all. Agree. Let's just announce the picks, put in the stats, maintain position flexibility as warranted, etc. I think it would be more fun to see the exact stats as we go and not have to guess at a blind pick or a blind year. The standings are all going to be skewed at the beginning anyways due to inequitable sticks / arms. If this group is insistent on the blind rounds - I think it should be as few rounds as possible and as late as possible. I like Mark's suggestion of paying 2nd place. Not so worried about the last guy determining who wins - this group will be all about finishing as high as possible and learning some cool baseball stuff along the way. [/QUOTE]Agree also.

I'm also on record as liking 3/4 blind rounds. I like Shawn's idea of rounds 5/10/15 and I would go with rd 23.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:54 am

Originally posted by mbendar16:

The 1st pick would not need to reveal 1st. Everyone would decide their team at the end of the draft, with no advantage/disadvantage to any of the 15 teams.

But in the end. we all would have to tell each other what seasons we are using and Someone would have to reveal first. It's not all gonna happen at once.

{Let me edit that statement. I suppose we all could send our picks for the seasons we are choosing to our neutral source Dan and then he could reveal all 15 teams at once. I’m just not sure that that is what Shawn had in mind at the outset}

Remember. One of the original points of this league set up by Shawn was to post great player seasons throughout the history of baseball on the MB for all of us to see and talk about........maybe even learn something about the game.

[ October 15, 2011, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Navel Lint ]

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:23 am

as someone who doesn't have passion for baseball or follow the history of baseball, i'm doing some condensed reading this weekend

i've heard of ruth and cobb, but not more than maybe 20 - 25 players pre-1970's

GLG20 · Post by **GLG20** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:29 am

For what it's worth, I'm good with the rules any which way they turn out... just glad we got 15!

The one thing I thought I'd bring up, with the caveat that I could be completely off base here: since the seasons have already transpired and the owner runs no injury risk or "bust" risk when drafting, I wonder if the point totals are going to be more clumped together (or, put differently, even though I'm terrible I still shouldn't be THAT terrible)... which may increase the likelihood of punting a category (or two).

I understand punting is part of most games, but not sure if it's in line with the essence of this one in particular. At least I assumed it wasn't. That being said, I would vote for a 2 (or 3) point minimum in every category in order to take home the trophy...

Just a thought. But again, good to go either way.

Thanks,

Brian

ps: the winner does get a trophy, right?

Nevadaman · Post by **Nevadaman** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:45 am

The 5/10/15/23 proposal should satisfy all parties. KJ is getting a free entry in exchange for keeping track of the teams/stats and I'm thrilled he is willing to do this. It is insane to suggest that all of us should duplicate his work. I have neither the time or inclination to do that. We've had a robust discussion, but now it's time for Shawn to decide what the final rules are and we can go from there. Let's not overcomplicate this!

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:50 am

Originally posted by Nevadaman:

The 5/10/15/23 proposal should satisfy all parties. KJ is getting a free entry in exchange for keeping track of the teams/stats and I'm thrilled he is willing to do this. It is insane to suggest that all of us should duplicate his work. I have neither the time or inclination to do that. We've had a robust discussion, but now it's time for Shawn to decide what the final rules are and we can go from there. Let's not overcomplicate this! Not for nothing, but after the season KJ had, he can afford the entry -- I'm your spreadsheet bitch

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:57 am

1-Shawn Childs

2-Bruce Dahl

3-Todd Zola (Spreadsheet)

4-Dave Shovein

5-Mark (Mbendar16)

6-Russel (Naval Lint)

7-Steve Wells

8-Kelly (Suburban Strugglers)

9-Neal Moses

10-Texas Connection

11-Brian Slack (GLG20)

12-Mark Sebro

13-The King of the Hill

14-John Pausma

15-Glenn Lowy

Nevadaman · Post by **Nevadaman** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:03 pm

Sorry Todd, a little brain freeze!

vpokrnut · Post by **vpokrnut** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:07 pm

Thanks for adding me to this league. I can agree with any of the rules. I do like the 5-10-15-23 hidden rounds. I am looking forward to how I can compete with all of the great owners here.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:19 pm

Originally posted by :

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

quote:Originally posted by :

To add on to Gekko's question- If we select a multiple-position eligible player, do we need to "declare" which position he will fill when we draft him, or can he be moved as the draft proceeds? Will somebody be checking position eligibility as we draft? What happens if we goof? Like drafting Roger Bresnahan 1903 at catcher? Sorry about all the rookie questions... but hell, I'm a rookie! We are all rookies in this. I think I answered your question in the Gekko respone. [/QUOTE]I didn't see any answer. Let me clarify the questions: For example, say I've already filled 2b/ss/mi/ut and need a ci. Best player remaining is a ss and one of my ss also qualifies at 3b. Can I move that ss to the ci slot and select the ss still available? As for the Bresnahan selection, since he only played OF, would I be stuck with him as an OF if that mistake was made, or would I be allowed a "do-over"? And please don't call me KING, I'm just a Fool. [/QUOTE]Yes you can move your players around as long as they qualify for another position. If you draft a player and he doesn't fit your roster, you must select another player to fill the voided position. If it isn't noticed right away and other players have made selections, you cannot draft a player already selected. With it being a slow draft, I would think the time between picks would make it easy to find an error in the roster before another player was selected.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:20 pm

Originally posted by Glenneration X:

What's the clock on each pick? 24 hours

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:22 pm

Originally posted by mbendar16:

One piece I forgot to mention.

If we want to utilize Dan's kind offer to help us out as needed, we can all e-mail our years to him so no one else knows what we have selected. He can release them once all teams have submitted their rosters. This will be our plan.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:27 pm

To review:

5/10/15/23 blinds rounds

1500 innings

2 pitchers need to be relievers

Do we have any objections to any of these?