BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
ATD2025 Trades or No Trade?
- Thread starter BenchBrawl
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Professor What
Registered User
So, I want to clarify something about the meaning of my vote. When I voter unlimited trading, I meant number of trades. I'd prefer not to have trading of already selected players and keep trading to picks.
VanIslander
20 years of All-Time Drafts on HfBoards
So you are the only vote to date for unlimited votes because you want to specify how to limit them? ... then vote limited and say why!!
Unlimited means unlimited. Hopefully even in a post-truth world.
Professor What
Registered User
Well, the problem is that I was thinking it was just number of trades when I voted, and didn't think about the player trades (which again, I'm opposed to) until a few minutes later. And now I can't change my vote. So, I wanted to specify what I had in mind for clarity.
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
Unlimited means number of trades.
You can now change your vote, I added the option to do so.
Professor What
Registered User
So, if I'm for unlimited number of trades, but opposed to player trades, which one do I need to choose? I want to make sure I'm casting my vote accurately, since I've been thinking about it more.
Man, my head is not in things today. I keep doing dumb stuff.
Typically I prefer no trades. But I wouldn't mind including limited trades this year just to switch it up in an attempt to keep things fresh.
So trades gets my vote this year, but as always i'll be perfectly happy with no trading.
So trades gets my vote this year, but as always i'll be perfectly happy with no trading.
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
Just pick unlimited. Trading players will not be allowed period, after the shitstorm a few years back. It looks pretty obvious everyone is in the mood for a laid back draft, not some cut throat business like it used to be in the 2010s. Let's keep it simple.
tinyzombies
Registered User
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
To be clear, this won't happen. Limited means a maximum amount of trades. Probably 2-5, TBD.
We don't have time to ponder such new scenarios with the deadline coming so soon.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
I personally would like to see limited trades. 3 in total. That gives you more than a single bullet but also limits a GM to the point where they need to be exceptionally tactical when/if dealing.
And picks only. No trading of drafted players. We've been down that road before and it has often led to infighting.
That's my vote specially but obviously the will of majority rules supreme.
And picks only. No trading of drafted players. We've been down that road before and it has often led to infighting.
That's my vote specially but obviously the will of majority rules supreme.
Dr Pepper
Registered User
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
Should we agree on 3 trades for each team ( no players involved )? I think that's what most people voting for limited trading had in mind.
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
Yeah unless someone has a strong contention, we'll go with 3 trades.
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
Rules on trading:
1) 3 trades per team maximum
2) Cannot trade players
3) Swapping your full set of picks before you start drafting doesn't count toward the 3 trades limit
4) Please try to keep trades reasonable. Other GMs can veto the trade if they feel it is draft-breaking. Every trade should be given the OK by a couple of GMs.
If you STRONGLY disagree with one of these, speak now.
1) 3 trades per team maximum
2) Cannot trade players
3) Swapping your full set of picks before you start drafting doesn't count toward the 3 trades limit
4) Please try to keep trades reasonable. Other GMs can veto the trade if they feel it is draft-breaking. Every trade should be given the OK by a couple of GMs.
If you STRONGLY disagree with one of these, speak now.
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
Playoffs format
At 19 teams we don't have the luxury of a perfect bracket, so I propose this:
4 divisions (5,5,5,4 teams)
Your division is determined by the lottery (you stay in the same division even if you swap your full set)
In the three division with 5 teams, 2 teams are picked AT RANDOM to play a preliminary round, with the goal of getting us to the perfect 16 teams structure for the next round.
Yeah, this is a luck for teams in the 4 teams division, but since this is randomly determined, everyone has an equal chance of catching this luck.
Thoughts?
At 19 teams we don't have the luxury of a perfect bracket, so I propose this:
4 divisions (5,5,5,4 teams)
Your division is determined by the lottery (you stay in the same division even if you swap your full set)
In the three division with 5 teams, 2 teams are picked AT RANDOM to play a preliminary round, with the goal of getting us to the perfect 16 teams structure for the next round.
Yeah, this is a luck for teams in the 4 teams division, but since this is randomly determined, everyone has an equal chance of catching this luck.
Thoughts?
I’d propose the 4 divisions, but in the 5-team divisions the bottom two teams have a play-in series instead of a random draw.
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,113
- 14,084
My thinking was that picking them at random would yield more interest for this round, but I'm fine with your proposition.
