I know we decided that the losers would have the higher picks in next year's draft, however, there was some dispute on whether or not it should be a snake draft. Personally, as much as I'd like a non-snake draft at this point, I feel it would unnecessarily put the winning teams at a disadvantage. The snake draft would still give us losers the opportunity to pickup non-keeper high-value players, without it being so unfair to the winning teams. I'm opening this up for discussion and a commish vote.
Josh? David?
I see no reason why it should be anything BUT a snake draft.
ReplyDeleteThe original reason it was brought up was that it would give the losing teams a better advantage to pick up momentum for the next year.
ReplyDeleteMy vote is for the non-snake draft.
ReplyDeleteMy vote is for non-snake, and I'll explain why later.
ReplyDeleteI just don't want to have the 12th pick and then wait til the 24th to get another one. :)
ReplyDeleteDon't worry, you won't.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what JWHerrin is saying. If we were allowed to keep more than 4 offensive players I wouldn't have a problem with it. The issue though isn't that the worst teams in the league don't have a few stud players, it's that they don't have strong depth. David has Jamaal Charles, Rashard Mendenhall, Sidney Rice, Ben Roethlisberger, Brandon Marshall, and so on. Those Keeper-caliber players aren't really any worse than mine are and to give a team like his the 1st, 13th, 25th etc pick and the winner the 12th, 24th, 36th etc pick would put David at a significant advantage in my opinion. If we did a Snake Draft to start the season and future draft styles weren't thought of or clarified before that then I think the only choice we have is a Snake Draft because that is the precedent that was set for how this league operates.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I wish this would have been determined before this season started.
John, how would it have changed anything? Would you have drafted any differently, or managed your team differently this year?
ReplyDeleteNo, but it's hard for me to make an argument for what I think is best without people thinking that I only think it's best because I'm at least a Top 4 team.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your feeling that it unnecessarily puts the winning teams at a disadvantage. An unfair disadvantage.
Anyone else find it ironic that the only teams arguing against the set draft type are the teams emerging in top slots? I don't remember seeing this argument earlier on in the year, and for that reason alone, I vote nothing changes.
ReplyDeleteYou didn't see this argument earlier in the year because no one knew it was happening. This is the first I heard of it. I hope that first sentence was a joke!
ReplyDeleteNot a joke at all, I knew what the draft was when I first joined the league. And *I* was the guy who was least informed.
ReplyDeleteStill, this reeks of irony.
There is nothing in Pat's "I mean, you should really read this" post (basically the rules or "constitution" of the league) that says anything about this.
ReplyDeleteThat's because it was never clearly decided. It was something that was discussed (very briefly) prior to the season, but it was not ever decided on during the rules meeting.
ReplyDeleteBut how we did the first draft is irrelevant. When you start out in the first year of the league, it is essentially a re-draft league, and everyone IS on equal footing, so the fairest way to draft (asside from an auction) is a snake draft. By year 2, everyone IS NOT on equal footing, as the below stats clearly show, and contradict your belief that "the issue though isn't that the worst teams in the league don't have a few stud players, it's that they don't have strong depth". This is a HUGE assumption, and an assumption that certainly doesn't apear to be supported by stats. If your apparent belief that the bottom teams are just as well off as the top teams "except for depth" were true, then the below percentages would all be 50% (or at a very minimum some of them would).
# of players the bottom 6 teams have-
in the top 25 overall- 9 (36%) **Only 2 in the top 10.
in the top 25 QBs- 10 (40%) **Only 1 in the top 6.
in the top 25 WRs- 8 (32%) **Only 2 in the top 10.
in the top 25 RBs- 11 (44%) **0 in top 5.
The bottom 6 teams, absolutely will not have as good keepers as the top 6 teams. So no, we won't be starting on an even playing field next year, even if we are only keeping 5 players.
Besides, even if you were right that all the teams are essentially starting out with 4 equal players next year, it would still be better to do a standard draft. Why? Parody breeds competitiveness, and competitiveness makes for a better league. The fact is that 6 teams are going to be at a disadvantage going in to next year. They will have (in general) lower quality keepers, they will already be behind in the points race, and in a few cases (not knocking anyone, just reality) the team managers are simply at a disadvantage from the start due to lack of knowledge/time/understanding of the game. So you say it's not fair to give teams an advantage? Well, I say it's not fair that you've played fantasy football for years but this is Juan's first year.
We need to not look at this in terms of what is most fair, and look at it in terms of what is going to make for the best league. I'm in the top 6, so it's a disadvantage for me if we do a standard draft. But I'm not concerned about that. That disadvantage is balanced out by the fact that in year one I was smart enough or lucky enough to have a playoff caliber team. It's better for the league to not have teams going into year 3 with no shot at winning anything.
I know I'm rambling and maybe didn't make a super clear argument (it's 2:30 in the morning so...), but the bottom line is most of the teams at the bottom half of the league are going to be in worse position going in to next years draft that the teams in the top half of the league. And there is nothing wrong with balancing that out a bit by doing a standard draft (at least partially).
My suggestion would be to draft 4 rounds standard and then start to snake at the end of round 4. This will give a bit of an advantage to the bottom teams, but not have it go overboard by lasting the entire draft.
I had a conversation with Josh about this the other day, and have bought into this logic. Contrary to what I said earlier, "fairness" or "equity" is not the goal, and as Josh points out, the purpose of doing this is not to promote "fairness" but to make the best league possible. (do I reject trades simply because I think they're "unfair"? Never, it would make a bad league!)
ReplyDeleteJohn, as a side note, you could not have chosen a worse team for your example, as David's team is the consensus best-last-place-team-ever, for the second year now. Even so, I'd rather walk out with your lot of keepers than David's any day. That's no offense to David, but Brady/Vick/Megatron/Bowe/Jackson/Hillis versus the guys you listed?!?!?! Come on now!
Well, I was under the impression that it was decided and set in stone. I remember having a conversation with my boss about it at the start of the season as well.
ReplyDeleteStill, something stinks.
Okay, okay... I'm starting to understand and maybe even agree (shock!).
ReplyDeleteBen, I can't tell what you're trying to say stinks.
Agreed, Ben, can you clarify who/what you think "stinks"? A little discouraging...
ReplyDeleteSo... Ben?
ReplyDeleteI merely found it amusing that the two people against it were the two people who had the chance to win the league. Well, John anyways.
ReplyDeleteOkay. I don't understand why you think I would argue solely for my benefit and get somewhat personal about it.
ReplyDelete