Random Parks II

[emart]

The more I think about it the more I like the basic idea and nothing crazy. Random ballparks on a fixed schedule, with a 14 round live draft and a rotating (not random) salary cap 100/110/120/130, all with DH.

Having made the mistake of watching a few playoff games on replay involving a no-DH team at 80 mil cap I'm not into the no-DH leagues any more. I was better off before I actually watched the sausage being made.....

We can either do a new draft at game 81 like we did last time, or once a month, whatever the majority thinks.

With all these new high-dollar players I'm not that into 80mil caps anymore either.

[PotKettleBlack]

We seem to be stalled at 6. Which is okay, since March 1 is not for two weeks. We might want to settle the issues, then recruit on the big board.

Issues:
1- Mechanism (original: all parks used by the end or until we get tired, or modified, like RP2: One Yankee Stadium nukes YS for the rest of the random, or some other modification: No NEL parks or only post 1920 parks)
2- I think we can all agree on 14 or 16 round draft on DD unless the site rebuild includes a draft function like DD... no clock unless we need to turn it on.
3- Cap. I like a number of options. Original random was all 100. I could see going 100-110-120-140, or random from that or a subset. Don't want to go 200M or 60M, and not that interested in 80M as the expending player pool is mostly expanding at the top.
4- I think keepers doesn't work that well here and might diminish interest. It keeps someone from doing a one off in the league.

By settling those 4 questions, we can make it simple enough to explain to someone who never randomed before.

Thoughts?

[emart]

Removing duplicate parks like we did last time was too much work. If I'm doing it I'd prefer just using all 170 ballparks and just pulling the ones we use.

[PotKettleBlack]

[quote:65ce4a23f4="emart"]Removing duplicate parks like we did last time was too much work. If I'm doing it I'd prefer just using all 170 ballparks and just pulling the ones we use.[/quote:65ce4a23f4]
Issue one settled. Original flavor, all parks. No commitment to do the whole series.

14 round draft or 16? I think 14 is fine, but no strong feeling.

[emart]

I think 14 rounds should be fine, that's all the key positions, and leaves enough to make the AD just a little bit interesting.

I'm not really interested in the 140mil cap as I think it becomes less strategic but if others like it then I'll go with the majority. 100/110/120/130 are all interesting caps IMO, and 130 requires some choices when drafting and building a team.

[thaibill]

If there are indeed 170 stadiums, 14 seasons will exhaust the list with 2 left over....unless more are added later.

PKB's point 3: 100, 105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130 gives you 7 options. Start with a 7 number randomizer run. When one option is used twice, it is dropped.

[rburgh]

I like the varying caps idea. Why not combine it with keepers? There will be 13 leagues unless they add ballparks.

Start at 140, drop the cap $5 million every season (ends at $80 million). Or, we can start at $80 million and keep increasing. But I like the first idea - it discourages keepers. You can keep as many players as you want, but MUST proxy all your keepers into the next DD draft before it starts.

Very interesting tactical problems with keepers that way. Must declare keepers in draft order - that will minimize the advantage of the first pick.

First pick either proxies (and posts) his keepers, or releases all. Next pick does the same, except that he can't make a pick if the person with the first pick releases all his players. And so on. We have to post all keepers to make sure nobody takes them.

[emart]

[quote:d7fe71bd9a="thaibill"]If there are indeed 170 stadiums, 14 seasons will exhaust the list with 2 left over....unless more are added later.

PKB's point 3: 100, 105, 110, 115, 120, 125, 130 gives you 7 options. Start with a 7 number randomizer run. When one option is used twice, it is dropped.[/quote:d7fe71bd9a]

That sounds fine to me.

Even though I floated the idea of keepers I'm not really interested in making this a keeper league. Prefer to keep it simple and in line with the core idea - random parks and live drafts. If the majority wants keepers then I'll relent. :)

[PotKettleBlack]

Keepers feels out of line with the in and out, non commitment flow of Random.

100-110-120-130 works for me. If you want to add the five mil nodes in there, that's cool. Gives us three things to randomize, which is a worthy randomization.

[Frank Bailey]

Guys, I'm going to bow out of the next round.

Thanks for the opportunity to run with this group for a while. I had a great time.