Alternatives to Current Autodraft

Feel free to propose alternative systems for how the autodraft distributes players. I will post ideas later. Don't worry about the idea being a perfect system. Just that it is better than the current model.

Supposed Mike Trout is listed first on your auto draft card, but someone else also has him listed first. Randomly one GM would get Trout while the other GM should get the second guy listed on his auto draft card (unless someone has that guy listed first) and then you would go to the third player listed (and so on...). Then later on after all the players you have listed have either been awarded to you, or someone else, the computer would start replacing the guys you missed on with the next highest paid player at that position.

In addition (possibly) we could list an alternative to Mike Trout (or whomever) if we miss on him.

As many have pointed out, awarding someone who is not listed ANYWHERE on the GM's auto draft card before picking players on the GM's auto draft card simply does not make sense or help the GM out at all.

Further more if GM Bob beats me out (randomly) for Mike Trout because we both have him listed number 1, the next time in the same draft Bob and I pick the same player he is awarded to me, or whoever missed out to Bob the first time around.

Many fantasy leagues let you list preferred players by position as well as a master list of preferred players at all positions. The computer could also incorporate a similar system. This is not a new concept, most fantasy leagues have auto drafts that operate like this as opposed to the current SOM auto draft system.

No system is going to be perfect, but that is not an excuse to keep the present system which is worse than not perfect it doesn't make any sense at all. This took me about five minutes to come up with and I am sure it shows, but it is a place to start.

I think superior alternatives have already been spelled out many times. They have always been ignored.

What Radagast suggests with your next pick being moved up is a good one and has been suggested before. Important thing there is you get a player you want for your number one pick verses the best of whatever nobody wanted. The current method if you lose out on that first pick, Trout or whomever, you lose your 1st pick completely and get a 26nd round pick in exchange. An alternative would be instead of moving on to your next pick as the waivers work give that person missing Trout the next most expensive player at that position not yet drafted instead of the most expensive nobody wanted.

Geekor has suggested a list style draft like you see in many fantasy football and baseball leagues.
This would have the advantage of allowing you to specify what positions you considered most important and who you would prefer in consolation. For example I draft Speaker and do not get him. Mantle might be a good CFer but might not be my preferred alternative if I am going small ball. Being able to specify I want Cobb as my first choice for consolation would mean a resulting team closer to my vision of what I was trying to build.

How about this? What if there was an option where the autodraft ran 5 picks at a time through the first 15 picks and then the last 10 at a time. So it takes place over 4 days, let's say. Then, after each day, for every pick you did not get you get to select any available free agent. This would put the emphasis much more on team-building and less on rigging the draft list. And while not everyone might like to do the draft over 4 days, it would probably be fairly easy to implement as an option.

^^^ I like all of the ideas listed above. It's interesting that on "Diamond Dope" you can set proxies (essentially autodraft selections) where you can specify a list of players, and they get picked in your order of preference. But even better , on that system, you can specify an "alternate pick" in a series of "either/or" options, in descending order of preference. This system is similar to some of the proposals outlined above (!).

Re "decorum", I appreciate Radagast's comments and I agree - although I thought I was the only moderator speaking. This thread here is the kind of thread that I think is most helpful for everyone in our gaming community. Don't get me wrong - it's ok to complain - but let's not get personal. Let's keep it constructive, looking for solutions together.

Full disclosure - as moderator of this forum, I recommended to strat that they lock the last thread about the autodraft. I did that because too many of the posts involved personal barbs directed between members, and because there was a lack of "listening" - just restating positions over and over again. I will not recommend this very often, and I will try appealing to the members first, to avoid these problems. Criticism is OK - let's keep it constructive, and not personal.

This thread is great. Keep going!

Geoff
Moderator, 200X board.

...there was a lack of "listening" - just restating positions over and over again.

I prefer simply mildly tweaking the current system. (I outlined one possible tweak in the old thread, so I won't repeat it here.)

I absolutely agree with Geoff's comment about lack of listening. In fact, I resorted to a personal attack in frustration over this very thing. My bad.

Anyway, I must make this observation. One of the biggest reasons originally put forth against the current system is that it favored better managers and they therefore "selfishly" didn't want to give it up. Yet most suggestions I have seen will make the draft more--much more in some cases--complicated. So, my suggestion is such a (new) system should be an option for a league, and the current system (with or without minor tweaks) should also remain an option.

I think superior alternatives have already been spelled out many times. They have always been ignored.

What Radagast suggests with your next pick being moved up is a good one and has been suggested before. Important thing there is you get a player you want for your number one pick verses the best of whatever nobody wanted. The current method if you lose out on that first pick, Trout or whomever, you lose your 1st pick completely and get a 26nd round pick in exchange. An alternative would be instead of moving on to your next pick as the waivers work give that person missing Trout the next most expensive player at that position not yet drafted instead of the most expensive nobody wanted.

Geekor has suggested a list style draft like you see in many fantasy football and baseball leagues.
This would have the advantage of allowing you to specify what positions you considered most important and who you would prefer in consolation. For example I draft Speaker and do not get him. Mantle might be a good CFer but might not be my preferred alternative if I am going small ball. Being able to specify I want Cobb as my first choice for consolation would mean a resulting team closer to my vision of what I was trying to build.

I like that the other was locked. Though I do remember the uproar by some on the boards when waivers were changed. there are always people resistant to change... always.

Actually, the type of draft we do here at SOM is a list draft, but with weird rules. That was always my point. What I would like to see is what Radagast suggest, if I lose my 1st, fine, give me my 2nd or 3rd, so at least I get some of my draft card. that would be the simplest change I could imagine.

What I would really love to see (again real wish, NOT simple) is a bracket by position, something like this (if you go to the depth chart where you see the diamond)
http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c365/ ... 142aa3.jpg
Where you could list say a top 3 at each position. That way for those multi-defense guys (say the aforementioned Moss, where 1B, LF and RF are eligible) you could choose what type of replacement you would get. Plus say list an alternate or 2 at each position. For issues of salary cap, it would use the most expensive card at each position, which would stop teams from getting more salary from their drafts. for ordering you would do it as a typical list draft (think a list of ALL the players you entered in the depth chart) in any order. Then follow the "normal" list draft rules (i.e. your top 3 choices are taken, so in round 1 I get my 4th choice). With up to 3 backups at each position, more people could get a team that actually suits their choices and parks. In the event you have no players available for a position, it will then give you the next highest not on any draft card.

I probably could explain better in person, but I hope you catch my drift.

Picking a Park after getting your players would help you out in fitting a team of players that you didn't want to a Park that fits them better. Nothing like getting a bunch of cement shoes at Petco or no power hitters at Coors. That spells doom from the get go. You shouldn't be able to see the other Parks in your league but should be able to pick one that fits you.

Picking a Park after getting your players would help you out in fitting a team of players that you didn't want to a Park that fits them better. Nothing like getting a bunch of cement shoes at Petco or no power hitters at Coors. That spells doom from the get go. You shouldn't be able to see the other Parks in your league but should be able to pick one that fits you.

Yes, I do not understand all this draft/waiver stuff. The one thing I would want changed is not being locked into a park. If people want a draft, it seems easy to form a private league and conduct a draft before creating the teams.

I don't know how many people remember the last time we had this debate about the autodraft needing changed on the old TSN boards. Bernie responded that in order to do something there would have to be consensus from the community that the autodraft needed changed AND there needed to be consensus on what the new autodraft should look like.

There have been a number of good ideas posted here just like there was on the old boards. But in the end if you guys cannot agree on specifically what it should be this will be nothing but a fun discussion of a dream but it will lead nowhere.

So discuss all the clever and original ideas you want. But sooner or later someone will have to figure out a way to settle on one alternative and everyone get behind it. You may not want to hear that but it is the reality of the situation.