Changing the Autodraft

[TRW]

JMO...there are 2 ways to look at this:

1 - if you want teams to be evenly matched & have a fair distribution of player talent between all teams (especially at higher caps), then the auto-draft is severely flawed & you want it to change.

2 - if you are in the camp where you want to be able to take advantage of the flaws in the current auto-draft system, you are not going to want to change it. This is mainly going to apply to guys who play in the same stadium all the time & target certain players.

Personally, I absolutely hate the current auto-draft system & it is one of the main reasons I have stopped playing SOM this year (besides the cost issue & not having holiday sales).

There have been too many times I have lost almost all of my picks after an auto-draft & I felt like I just flushed $20 down the bowl.

My preferences would be individual draft lists at each starting position, guaranteeing you a #1 pick at, at least 1 position. There should alos be a draft list for stadium, so you don't have 3 or 4 Hilltops in 1 league. I think there should be at least a little bit of realism injected into the auto-draft process. For example, if you auto-draft Mantle, should you be able to auto-draft another big CF (mays? Dimaggio?, etc..that's my 2 cents)

[216 Stitches]

[quote:8ec489c8ed="The Rabid Wolverines"]
Personally, I absolutely hate the current auto-draft system & it is one of the main reasons I have stopped playing SOM this year (besides the cost issue & not having holiday sales).

There have been too many times I have lost almost all of my picks after an auto-draft & I felt like I just flushed $20 down the bowl.
[/quote:8ec489c8ed]

I agree with Rapid. There is a hidden cost to SOM in wasted teams.
I usually consider that >25% teams autodrafted I lose considerable
interest in even before the first game is played.

The autodraft can be especially brutal in theme leagues, which often
feel like they should be the most loose and fun but can turn into the
most lopsided and boring. In some themes, it seems like you get
9-10 managers focused on the spirit of the theme and 2-3 managers
are focused on the how to twist the theme to their advantage through
autodraft mechanisms. Result --- see Rabid's bowl comment above.

[Valen]

No question I am in the camp of something wrong.

For example you put Mantle at top of your draft card and miss the coin flip so you get Gorman Thomas. That is not a reflection of your draft skills or knowledge of the cards. That is just bad luck and if I am going to pony up $20 luck should not be what determines my fate.

I see 3 possible ways to fix the autodraft and shift from luck to skill.

1) Make autodraft more like waivers. If you lose the coin toss and miss on your first player then your #2 pick moves up to #1 and you get that player. Your #1 pick slides around to #25 and you get the pitiful compensation when that round drafts. This should be relatively easy since code could be borrowed from current waiver system.

2) A position style draft like Wolverine suggests. I did a football draft like this a few times. You ranked your preferences a each position. And then you ranked your positions by most important.

3) If you miss on a player you get as compensation the next highest player not yet drafted. Currently it is the next highest player which nobody placed on their card. If I draft Mantle #1 and lose the coin flip and nobody put Speaker #1 on their card then I get Speaker. That forces everyone to put the players they value most highest on their draft cards.

All 3 of these options makes knowledge of the cards the determining factor on how good your team is, not luck with a virtual coin toss. My preference and the one I think easiest to implement would be #1.

I feel stongly enough about this that I would make it my #1 priority and it likely determines how active I am down the road.

[mille1212]

I posted this on another thread, but this is my newbie perspective based on two autodrafts.

I agree that the draft system needs to be changed. I started the year with only 6 out of 24 of my original picks.

I didn't draft well and I got the players I wanted, but didn't need (didn't know what I was doing). Someone else drafts well and doesn't get the players they wanted or needed. Basically it's a crap shoot. Based on my experience, the only way to semi-get what you want is to understand how the broken system works when making your selections in the first place. Then base your picks on the system, not who you 'really' want.

On top of that, the only way to salvage the broken draft system is to be sitting at your computer when the waiver wire hits. Otherwise, you are bound to be disappointed as the first come first serve nature of the free agency benefits those that can be on their computers every moment.

Having said that, the only way to make it close to perfect is via a live computer draft. But, believe me I've been involved in a few of those (fantasy) that didn't work out either (due to quick time limit restrictions, computer issues, etc.) I like to take time to think, so the only perfect system is live in person draft in my opinion. It is also hard to find a time that fits well for 12 random people that could theoretically be anywhere in the world.

However, I do think they could do some simple things to improve the process even as it is. One is a simple fix in my opinion. Players could draft and rank their teams just as they do now. As in fantasy football, there could be a randomized draft order and the draft would need to be a snake draft (1-12 picks, then 12-1, then 1-12, etc.). Players should know their respective draft positions in advance of submitting their draft rankings (helps with drafting strategies). Selections would then be made one at a time by the computer. 1st player goes, computer checks if the player is available, computer assigns to team if he is, computer picks the next best player at that position (salary wise) if he is not and assigns that player instead. 2nd player goes and the computer does the same. Selections are made one at a time, so their is no tie involved and thus no teams that gets stuck with players that nobody else wanted. I think this would be better (fairer for sure) than the current system is with just that one change.

This process could be improved even more if you were allowed to couple this type of draft with the current computer assisted autodraft features I used when I played my free trial. I can't remember all of the choices, but % of money spent on pitching/hitting was one, and I think the balance of star players to fillers was another. These could be the general guidelines kind of like how the team managerial options work now.

Maybe a few more choices could be added to help customize the selections the computer is having to make for you to gear your selections towards your ballpark. These could be more individualized guidelines like the pitcher and hitter managerial options work now. Each of your 24 selections could have those boxes to the right to check the things you want the computer to weight like *SP only, defense, OBP, HR, SB, WHIP, R only, Closer, left handed, right handed, etc. etc., kind of like the things in the free agent search tool.

Another level of detail (and complexity) would be to add in sliding scales. I could slide the OBP scale to 330, the HR scale to 20, and the SB scale to 10 and the computer would do its best to match those selections.

Then a waiver system could be used for free agency instead of the current first come first serve. The waiver order could be based on record (some sort of tie breaker system based on stats), so the worst teams could have the option of going first. I am not sure how many transactions are typically made since I 've never played a full season, but once a week would work if there aren't many during season. Maybe run two per day from the time the original draft runs to the time of opening day.

These are just some thoughts I had and of course they would still not be perfect, but I think they would improve things. Again, for what it's worth newbie-wise.

[bernieh]

Thanks for the suggestions, guys.

I'm very willing to believe that the system may have flaws the way it currently stands, and I'm also willing to improve it given the right solutions. Of course, there's not a whole lot of agreement among the community what those solutions should be.

I know there have been numerous conversations had about the auto-draft, but so far no one has organized and presented me with an official/unofficial list of problems and solutions that the community agrees upon as a whole. Feel free to discuss this more comprehensively and try to put together a plan, and I'd be happy to review and comment on it, and hopefully implement the best solutions.

Thanks!

[Mr Baseball World]

Thanks Bernie. :D

I will try to gather some info, organize and pass it along.

[Coffeeholic]

I remember one of my first SOMO teams (the 2002 season). I spent hours/days compiling the perfect team. Probably had something like: Pujols; Ichiro; Vizquel; Bret Boone; Garret Anderson; Derek Lowe; Etc... All legit 1st and 2nd round draft picks, right? Surprise!!! I had a terrible draft! All 'cuz I was just being plain greedy! I din't see this as a sign that the draft system needed revamping... just that I needed to be more realistic in my draft approach.

One of the keys to a successful autodraft is determining what round in the draft a particular is likely to go in: Who is a 1st Rounder; Who goes in Round #2; Etc..

You boys who play ATG VI alot know who the 1st Rounders are: I'm thinking of the Speaker; Hornsby; Mantle; Mays; Maddux types. If you want one of these guys, it doesn't make much sense to list them in the 2nd or later rounds (unless of course you're willing to take a flyer on the chance he goes undrafted... but thats a whole different ballgame).

Who to list in Round 2? Again you guys who play way more than I know better, but I'm guessing players like: Wells; Wagner; Cobb; Walsh; Etc.. Same for Round #3, Round #4 and so on.

What worries me about the above suggestions regarding "Consolation" picks is that I'm afraid that these would penalize those managers who have put together a legitimately well planned draft card.

For example: Say you miss on a poorly placed #2 pick, Mantle for example, a player who really should be listed in Round #1. The idea of your consolation being an as yet undrafted CFer could very well take away my #3 round pick, which was a legit spot for that player. In essence I will end up being penalized for your poor draft card staregy.

The idea of "Bumping" picks up if you miss: ie. if you miss on your #2 pick, your #3 automatically kicks in, has basically the same effect: I could lose out on a legit #3 pick because you had a poorly placed #2 pick.

This is not to say that some smaller changes to the autodraft might not be merited. I'd love to see SP*'s as consolations when you miss on a SP* for instance (very important in the 200X versions). Or perhaps the option of allowing you to list some preferences in your consolation picks so that if I'm building a team in a Homer Happy Haven I dont get a slap hitter instead (but again, only if these players go undrafted through the entire draft). But I'm afraid that these huge over hauls to the draft you guys are suggesting will simply end up penalizing those managers who have good draft card strategy.

[geekor]

[quote:3ade82fd00="Petrosian"]Agree with Nev. It is what it is.[/quote:3ade82fd00]

Wow no one would have ever guessed you 2 would like to keep it the same :roll: :lol:

The current system is flawed however you want to look at it. Certain vets like this system as it gives an advantage to the guys who play a lot more and know the ins and outs of whom to draft in what spot. This system gives an advantage to the established. This is why they will always resist any change, they don't want to lose it.

God forbid we have a system in place that mirrors drafts for every type of fantasy sport, a system which generated millions if not billions a year in gambling $$. Yea that system is wrong and this current system is better :roll:

[mille1212]

I do have to pipe in and say from a business standpoint, I can most definitely understand your caution. You have a workable business model and major system changes should not be taken without a degree of caution.

Any changes should be implemented in phases and each phase should be beta tested (previous example - computer one selection at a time/phase one, general pick settings/phase two, individualized pick setting/phase three, etc.)

Even then, I would only allow that type of draft to be an option for those that want to set up a league with that type of draft, just like you do with live drafts. Let the market (how many people are filling those leagues) dictate from there.

I very much appreciate that you are open to listening to suggestions, as that speaks volumes to me. I think it's important to discuss things like this and to be open to suggestions if you want to improve your product. Enough discussion should generate some good ideas, some of which could possibly be tried (even if they're not mine :>)

[quote:1508961984="bernieh"]Thanks for the suggestions, guys.

I'm very willing to believe that the system may have flaws the way it currently stands, and I'm also willing to improve it given the right solutions. Of course, there's not a whole lot of agreement among the community what those solutions should be.

I know there have been numerous conversations had about the auto-draft, but so far no one has organized and presented me with an official/unofficial list of problems and solutions that the community agrees upon as a whole. Feel free to discuss this more comprehensively and try to put together a plan, and I'd be happy to review and comment on it, and hopefully implement the best solutions.

Thanks![/quote:1508961984]

[robert.kosky]

I've read with considerable interest the various suggestions and comments regarding the auto drafts. I'm not a grizzled veteran like some of you, but my take of the auto draft is I like it.

Going into an auto draft, you need to draft almost like a live draft. As another owner advised, don't get greedy. I tried to get greedy in a draft about 4 weeks ago in a 200-M capped league and ended up with the first pick of the waivers. What I gambled with was trying to get Ruth with the #1 pick and then Josh Gibson with the #2 pick, and I got shutout. I deserved it! I got too greedy.

If you study how live draft talent goes off the board, you can usually get a core of good players. Go for Ruth if you want, but in the second round, go for a Gehrig, NOT Hornsby. In the third round, go for F. Thomas, etc. There aren't guarantees, but your chances greatly increase of getting a respectable team if you don't go overtly for the great players.