ATD 2017 Draft Thread IV

[BenchBrawl]

IIRC, people weren't too happy with the no-trade draft after 2014.You don't have enough freedom to build the kind of team you want, restricting creativity.

 

[jarek]

As long as it's a no trade draft.

Why does that matter?

 

[Dreakmur]

Why does that matter?

As of right now, I don't think I would join a trading draft again.

 

[ResilientBeast]

As of right now, I don't think I would join a trading draft again.

Any particular reason?

 

[Namba 17]

Foster Hewitt Division
1. Montreal Maroons 104 (8-6-4-1-3-1)
2. Cobalt Silver Kings 101 (5-8-4-3-3-0)
3. Atlantic City Boardwalk Bullies 82 (2-2-9-7-0-3)
4. Amarillo Gorillas 77 (5-4-1-1-8-4)
5. Miami Screaming Eagles 64 (1-2-3-8-3-6)
6. Borussia Red Bull 55 (2-1-2-3-6-9)

This is, probably, the most unexpected thing to me.
I thought, Gorillas are the President trophy contender. Really liked this team.

 

[seventieslord]

Any particular reason?

I'm assuming because he feels it upsets the competitive balance. I can't completely dismiss that point, even if he was mistaken about the impact of trades on BB's team.

 

[Iceman]

This is, probably, the most unexpected thing to me.
I thought, Gorillas are the President trophy contender. Really liked this team.

...and I thought I had the best team in my division but not everyone else did, so it doesn't really matter.

 

[Dreakmur]

I'm assuming because he feels it upsets the competitive balance. I can't completely dismiss that point, even if he was mistaken about the impact of trades on BB's team.

You think it was just a lucky guess? I said it half way through the 3rd round - that Trottier trade won the draft.

 

[Namba 17]

...and I thought I had the best team in my division but not everyone else did, so it doesn't really matter.

Every GM thinks, his team is the best.
Much more interesting, how others estimate it. And why.

 

[BenchBrawl]

You think it was just a lucky guess? I said it half way through the 3rd round - that Trottier trade won the draft.

Why don't you make your case that I broke the draft by going through each of my trades in details.Shouldn't take too long, 15-20 minutes max.It should be worth it if I truly broke the draft.

The Trottier deal was good, but as I repeatedly said, it was in trying to repair the Messier trade, not to get ahead.But I guess your strategy is to keep repeating it (without any details) until everyone believes you.

Back it up or give it up.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Trading puts GMs with inflexible schedules at a disadvantage because they are not around all the time to make potential trades, and therefore have less players available to them than other GMs. With player research it's not much of an issue because you have your clock and you have time before your clock to do a lot of research...whether you pick at the beginning or end of your clock does not affect which players are available to you.

That being said, if no trading is allowed, a favorable draft position can become a large advantage for a GM, as there is a large element of luck as to who gets to capitalize on a player with good value falling. With trades, a GM that recognizes this can trade his way to a position to take advantage of good value.

In other words, neither is perfect, we just have to pick our poison. Personally, I like the idea of alternating each year. You get to do both and it means the draft will be different from year to year (similar as to how we like to have a different number of teams than the previous year). Also, hopefully if an alternating rule is adopted then people that are not in favor of one type of draft (like Dreakmur) will stick it out and participate each year, because they know they will get their preference the next year...a compromise to keep participation high.

I wouldn't mind voting on something like this, but it would need to be done over a long period of time so a lot of people have an opportunity to vote and give their opinion (like start it sometime soon and leave it open until right before next year's draft).

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Following up, if we were to alternate trade/no-trade, then it might be a good idea to also alternate random draft position/pick your draft position, with of course, the no-trade year being the one where GMs could pick their position.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Put it to vote before every year, that way we have the yearly mood of all GMs.Not sure why we would decide in 2017 what happens with the 2020 draft.

No-trading won in 2014 and 2015 IIRC, then trading won easily in 2016.So the mood changes.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Put it to vote before every year, that way we have the yearly mood of all GMs.Not sure why we would decide in 2017 what happens with the 2020 draft.

No-trading won in 2014 and 2015 IIRC, then trading won easily in 2016.So the mood changes.

2015 allowed trading before the draft started only, which was a disaster

 

[BenchBrawl]

2015 allowed trading before the draft started only, which was a disaster

Yes I know, that was a very bad idea from the start lol.

 

[jarek]

I agree with Dreakmur about the Messier trade. The trade itself was:

To tinyzombies: Mark Messier, 81, 98, 198

To BenchBrawl: 39, 76, 89, 176

Messier was taken at 20th so here is the trade considering that:

To tinyzombies: 20, 81, 98, 198

To BenchBrawl: 39, 76, 89, 176

It goes like follows: -19, +5, +9, +22

If you look at it only like that, it seems reasonable. However, the trade ACTUALLY reads like this:

To tinyzombies: Mark Messier, 81, 98, 198

To BenchBrawl: Bryan Trottier, 76, 89, 176

Trottier and Messier are so close that, for the purposes of this trade, you can call that a wash. So, you got +36 of draft positions giving up very, very minimal value.

This trade was draft breaking IMO. A couple of us were saying that right from the start, but you guys decided to let it through anyways.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Couple of points:

-The 39th pick wasn't on the clock, I could have lost Trottier.
-Some people DO think Messier is solidly ahead of Trottier.
-Even if you ignore all of this, what I received in exchange for Messier's edge on Trottier is hardly ''draft breaking''.The only significantly jump occurs far, far later.The proof is that I picked Paul Thompson with the 176th pick, then Patrik Elias at like 203th, and I'm still not sure which one is truly better.

Also, not to get snarky, but if Trottier was so great, why didn't you guys pick him up before 39th?

Edit: Oh, and note that I had much better picks before the Messier trade, and since I had the 46th, I could have gotten to 39th without paying as much as I did when dealing for Messier.But if that's the case, how can I get a better situation out of an hypothetical minor trade, yet I break the draft when I'm in a worst situation? This seems to omply that I could have broke the draft just by acquiring 39th from 46th and moving down a bit from 48th (I had the 46th and 48th).

 

[jarek]

Couple of points:

-The 39th pick wasn't on the clock, I could have lost Trottier.
-Some people DO think Messier is solidly ahead of Trottier.
-Even if you ignore all of this, what I received in exchange for Messier's edge on Trottier is hardly ''draft breaking''.The only significantly jump occurs far, far later.The proof is that I picked Paul Thompson with the 176th pick, then Patrik Elias at like 203th, and I'm still not sure which one is truly better.

Also, not to get snarky, but if Trottier was so great, why didn't you guys pick him up before 39th?

That's a very good question. Probably just fell because of the position he plays.

As you pointed out earlier, you were already in a favourable position due to picking Harvey. Maybe the actual jumps in the pick values isn't that significant by itself, but when the teams you're being compared to are so, so close to yours already, that small edge might be enough to push you over. In that sense, that's why I'd call it draft breaking.

I think what it comes down to is that I think very small edges can be draft breaking. Just because of the parity of this league.

 

[jarek]

Anyways, I think the way to mitigate the impact of trading in the draft, without completely removing it, is to only allow teams a very limited number of trades. Like, 3.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I thought seventieslord broke the draft when he made that trade with you.I thought for a while that all of ResilientBeast's trades were draft breaking by committee, but in the end the whole thing balanced out and our teams were of similar value.

 

[jarek]

I thought seventieslord broke the draft when he made that trade with you.I thought for a while that all of ResilientBeast's trades were draft breaking by committee, but in the end the whole thing balanced out and our teams were of similar value.

Yes my trade with seventies ruined the draft for me.. lol. I had already planned to do EXACTLY what he did. I might have taken Clarke instead of Lafleur, but yeah..

 

[BenchBrawl]

I do think draft-breaking trades are a serious matter for the integrity of the draft, so if someone has a case that I or anyone else broke a draft, he should come ahead and make it publicly for everyone's benefit.But if he doesn't, he's just a sore loser throwing cheap shots based on some unreliable and personal emotionnal cues.

 

[jarek]

I do think draft-breaking trades are a serious matter for the integrity of the draft, so if someone has a case that I or anyone else broke a draft, he should come ahead and make it publicly for everyone's benefit.But if he doesn't, he's just a sore loser throwing cheap shots based on some unreliable and personal emotionnal cues.

Well I stated my case. I do think the standard for what constitutes a draft breaking trade should be very low. I mainly say that because the parity of the draft says that any small edge could become enough to push any team over every other team.

I would go as far as saying that I think trades should be restricted to no more than the picks being within a few rounds of each other, total, and that no more than 2 assets per team can be swapped. I would suggest trading should be for nothing more than giving GMs the opportunity to move out of a spot that they feel is no longer worthwhile for them to be in.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Well I stated my case. I do think the standard for what constitutes a draft breaking trade should be very low. I mainly say that because the parity of the draft says that any small edge could become enough to push any team over every other team.

I know you stated your case.I think your case is very bad, but up to others to evaluate it.At least you stated one.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I thought seventieslord broke the draft when he made that trade with you.I thought for a while that all of ResilientBeast's trades were draft breaking by committee, but in the end the whole thing balanced out and our teams were of similar value.

For the most part their will always been a winner and a loser in a trade, if I managed to win more than my fair share of deals I don't see that as "draft breaking"

Which of my trades were draft breaking? The only one even close could've been the Firsov deal