Alternatives to Current Autodraft

"Method 1: Miss out on player get next player at that position, on a draft card or not (i.e. Miss Trout get McCutchen).
Method 2: Miss out on a player, move up to your next pick. Replacement players same as current system (next highest not on a draft card) Replacements done after the draft part is done."

Of these, I like method 2

Steve F - your post brought a thought to my mind. This thought isn't tested out in my head, so if it's crazy, or there's some issues with it, please everyone feel free to post their own thoughts or critiques.

Here it is - is it possible for each gamer entering each league to pick from a few alternative methodologies for replacement picks in their autodraft, i.e. to specify which methodology they want to use for their own autodraft in the league?

On first consideration, I'm having trouble finding any problems with that idea - other than it involves some programming, and some up-front work to design the alternatives and the user interface. But logically, it seems to me like it could work.

By the way, the current system - amended or not - could be one of 2 or 3 alternatives.

What do you think?

BTW, can I find 12 individuals to help test those 2 draft methods.

Basically 12 volunteers to send me their preferred draft cards. Something you would want to put it.

I will run the drafts manually following these 2 sets of rules and post the results. I think doing it this way would show how it could work, real life examples tend to work better than theoretical ones.

Method 1: Miss out on player get next player at that position, on a draft card or not (i.e. Miss Trout get McCutchen).
Method 2: Miss out on a player, move up to your next pick. Replacement players same as current system (next highest not on a draft card) Replacements done after the draft part is done.

I won't submit a draft card but do the actual leg work (may take me a few days).

If I could get 12 volunteers, to post here and PM me a draft card, we'll use standard 80 mil 2012 league, DH.

After viewing the results, we can look at where things are not good, or are good, and look to make things better from there. Baby steps until we find a good consensus.

Geekor, I'm willing to be a participant, subject to some personal scheduling issues.

Also, what do you think of my previous post - where gamers could choose which replacement pick method they want to use for a particular autodraft, as part of their team draft submission?

I like the idea. Seems like it would be tough to program, but then I'm not a programmer

BTW, can I find 12 individuals to help test those 2 draft methods.

Basically 12 volunteers to send me their preferred draft cards. Something you would want to put it.

I will run the drafts manually following these 2 sets of rules and post the results. I think doing it this way would show how it could work, real life examples tend to work better than theoretical ones.

Method 1: Miss out on player get next player at that position, on a draft card or not (i.e. Miss Trout get McCutchen).
Method 2: Miss out on a player, move up to your next pick. Replacement players same as current system (next highest not on a draft card) Replacements done after the draft part is done.

I won't submit a draft card but do the actual leg work (may take me a few days).

If I could get 12 volunteers, to post here and PM me a draft card, we'll use standard 80 mil 2012 league, DH.

After viewing the results, we can look at where things are not good, or are good, and look to make things better from there. Baby steps until we find a good consensus.

Geekor, I'm willing to be a participant, subject to some personal scheduling issues.

Also, what do you think of my previous post - where gamers could choose which replacement pick method they want to use for a particular autodraft, as part of their team draft submission?

I don't think that would work. you can't have different people in the same league use different methods. If you know how players are going to be drafted you can set your list to be the most beneficial to you. If these 3 players draft one way, and these 3 draft another, etc etc, I wouldn't, and neither would anyone else, have any idea how to even draft if it isn't an even playing field.

Any my suggestion is just to see the results. It's not to run an actual league/team. It's all theoretical, until we actually try some drafts and see the results, we can't even figure out how it would work.

My goal would be to get 12 draft lists, and then run the draft, manually, with the 2 methods I listed, as well as the TSN way. We could then compare all 12 teams and see which way really made for a more fair and balanced league, what the issues are, and where it could be improved.

Assuming we can step forward from there (that is already a big if with this crowd tbh) we could then try again with a bigger challenge like ATG.

But I really think we need to start with some actual comparative results. I think once you have those results, people can start to see where TSN's method is flawed and can be gamed (I digress that some people enjoy this game within the game), and that moving to another method will allow a much more balanced league.

Of course I'm not talking of changing waivers, just looking at the draft portion.

And of course, I could eat crow off of this. It could show the TSN method worked out better. Again, that's how it works

PSA: Coyote303 likes the current system and will continue to post in here, not to find a new system, but to shoot down anything else.

In case you haven't read the whole thread, just do it. All he wants is what he has now. Perhaps go troll another thread. We are discussing other ways of drafting, to come up with some consensus. Not to complain how it isn't like the current system you somehow adore.

If you're not going to help, and just hinder the process, just GTFO.

Do not libel me, sir. I am no troll.

Do I like the current system? Yes. Do I think it can be improved? Definitely. I even had my own suggestion how to do so in the old thread. However, I absolutely do not want to see the system changed to something worse. My most recent post pointed out what I believe is a seriously flawed method that looked good at first glance but awful if you think it through.

My first post pointed out why the current system has real advantages, and hopefully make people realize we shouldn't be so quick to scrap it. In the old thread you, sir, said yourself "Anyone who is against [changing the system] has no real valid reason posted." So, I gave plenty. Interesting, you find them so upsetting that you have to resort to discrediting me and my motives. My in-between posts were merely defending my position. When someone makes an illogical argument tearing down my opinion, I reserve the right to respond.

All is want is for any new suggested system be compared fairly to the old system. Is it better? Are there flaws? I don't want us to find out after a change that we are stuck with the "New Coke" of drafting systems!

For the record, I think option 2 in the upcoming test is a reasonable alternative to the current system. I won't attack it or put it down. If I understand option 1, I think it is the seriously flawed option. However, I'm glad they are both being tested. Let's find out if I'm right.

I don't think that would work. you can't have different people in the same league use different methods. If you know how players are going to be drafted you can set your list to be the most beneficial to you. If these 3 players draft one way, and these 3 draft another, etc etc, I wouldn't, and neither would anyone else, have any idea how to even draft if it isn't an even playing field.

Hey Geekor, I hear what you're saying (I think)....but maybe personal choice is the answer - i.e. each person knows how it's going to work for themselves, and maybe that's all that matters to each person.

Anyway, I don't want to take the thread down a different path - let's try testing things as you're discussing, and see where that leads. I'll follow along with what you're suggesting.

PSA: Coyote303 likes the current system and will continue to post in here, not to find a new system, but to shoot down anything else.

In case you haven't read the whole thread, just do it. All he wants is what he has now. Perhaps go troll another thread. We are discussing other ways of drafting, to come up with some consensus. Not to complain how it isn't like the current system you somehow adore.

If you're not going to help, and just hinder the process, just GTFO.

Do not libel me, sir. I am no troll.

Do I like the current system? Yes. Do I think it can be improved? Definitely. I even had my own suggestion how to do so in the old thread. However, I absolutely do not want to see the system changed to something worse. My most recent post pointed out what I believe is a seriously flawed method that looked good at first glance but awful if you think it through.

My first post pointed out why the current system has real advantages, and hopefully make people realize we shouldn't be so quick to scrap it. In the old thread you, sir, said yourself "Anyone who is against [changing the system] has no real valid reason posted." So, I gave plenty. Interesting, you find them so upsetting that you have to resort to discrediting me and my motives. My in-between posts were merely defending my position. When someone makes an illogical argument tearing down my opinion, I reserve the right to respond.

All is want is for any new suggested system be compared fairly to the old system. Is it better? Are there flaws? I don't want us to find out after a change that we are stuck with the "New Coke" of drafting systems!

For the record, I think option 2 in the upcoming test is a reasonable alternative to the current system. I won't attack it or put it down. If I understand option 1, I think it is the seriously flawed option. However, I'm glad they are both being tested. Let's find out if I'm right.

Everyone - we're all hoping to make a positive contribution, and constructive criticism is OK. Let's keep it all positive - we're looking for ideas, and valuable feedback aka constructive criticism. Coyote, Glad you posted again. Let's keep working together on this.

Geekor - thanks for taking this to another level with the testing idea. Let's keep it going.

My goal would be to get 12 draft lists, and then run the draft, manually, with the 2 methods I listed, as well as the TSN way. We could then compare all 12 teams and see which way really made for a more fair and balanced league, what the issues are, and where it could be improved.

Outstanding idea comparing the two suggested methods along with the current! What would make it really interesting is if the results are reported blindly when you ask for feedback from each manager. In other words, here are results A, B, and C but you don't know which result is the result of which method!

Of course, the person running the test will know, and that's okay too. It will give a different perspective in comparing the results.

But I really think we need to start with some actual comparative results. I think once you have those results, people can start to see where TSN's method is flawed and can be gamed (I digress that some people enjoy this game within the game), and that moving to another method will allow a much more balanced league.

Of course I'm not talking of changing waivers, just looking at the draft portion.

And of course, I could eat crow off of this. It could show the TSN method worked out better. Again, that's how it works

It's not about being "right" or eating crow. It's about figuring out the best system (although there may be crow in my future!). I would also like to see the test repeated if possible with a different set of managers just for comparison purposes.

Geekor, I'm willing to participate - can't PM my list(s) until Monday. Do you want a separate card for each of the three methods?

Spider