HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

All-Time Draft #8 Suggestion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-20-2007, 11:54 PM
  #1
Evil Speaker
Registered
 
Evil Speaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NorthVan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,614
vCash: 1575
All-Time Draft #8 Suggestion

aaaa


Last edited by Evil Speaker: 04-22-2011 at 12:54 AM.
Evil Speaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2007, 01:21 AM
  #2
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,717
vCash: 500
I think the fact that a team lead by Lalonde, Taylor, Bentley, Seibert and Hall won last time, we can say for certain that there is no bias towards modern players. We are all knowledgable people who do their research.

If we split, the drafts should be completely seperate, that is, any player taken in one is eligable in the other.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2007, 03:52 AM
  #3
VanIslander
10 Years of ATDing
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,850
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
I think the fact that a team lead by Lalonde, Taylor, Bentley, Seibert and Hall won last time, we can say for certain that there is no bias towards modern players. We are all knowledgable people who do their research.

If we split, the drafts should be completely seperate, that is, any player taken in one is eligable in the other.
i agree on both counts.

however,... if we have co-g.m.s, that makes for 30 teams, up to 60 g.m.s

Quote:
Veterans with a co-g.m.:

God Bless Canada & raleh
vancityluongo & Tricolore#20
nayld psycho & sturminator

Veterans interested in having a co-g.m.:

cottonking (willing to be co-g.m.)
murphy (might be interested in co-g.m.ing)
MXD (co-g.m.ing might be his best option, depending)
arrbez (might or might not want a co-g.m., not sure yet)

Newbies interested in having a co-g.m.:

The Hockey_Guy18 (preferably with a co-g.m.)
FlyersHomerDM03 (would like a fellow newbie co-g.m.)

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2007, 04:06 AM
  #4
Evil Speaker
Registered
 
Evil Speaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NorthVan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,614
vCash: 1575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
I think the fact that a team lead by Lalonde, Taylor, Bentley, Seibert and Hall won last time, we can say for certain that there is no bias towards modern players. We are all knowledgable people who do their research.

If we split, the drafts should be completely seperate, that is, any player taken in one is eligable in the other.
Fair enough. Still the chance of there being any voting bias would be decresed, I know there is some.

I 'm against having two drafts if all players are eligible unless the drafts are to be done at different times. There will be too much reference going on between the two drafts. Instead of people going by what they know and will have to study about the history of the game, they will instead have a chance to use the other draft as a reference and a reminder of some great players that they foorgot about. If somone makes a steal of a pick in one draft the players in the other draft will jump on the opportunity to do the same thing by picking that player instead of picking the player thats next on their list. And if somone is unsure of who to pick they can just look at the other draft and see who the best GM's are drafting. I know this wouldnt happen with everyone at all times but this will happen somtimes especially if there will be alot of rookies enetering ATD#8 and I dont think it should happen at all. Also I think it would be silly to potentially have two teams facing each other in a cross over playoff match with some of the same players.

Evil Speaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2007, 10:53 AM
  #5
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
Burkupine
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 41,434
vCash: 500
While the speed of two drafts is tempting, I'd rather keep it all under one draft. With the co-GMs coming in, the number of teams will probably remain about the same, and decisions might be made more quickly.

Further, if we're having an All-Time Draft, I'd say we ought to keep all the eras together, warts and all. If there's a bias towards modern players from some the new GMs, the more experienced ones will weed them out and their teams won't make it very far.

Lesson learned, simple as that.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2007, 11:43 AM
  #6
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,336
vCash: 500
Voting bias- There seems to be a voting bias mostly in favor of modern players and therfore voting gets scewed because some GM's dont know alot about players from the past. At the same time there are some GM's that come across as being a bit overly nostalgiw alot of older player would flock to the post 1970's draft. And thec. Hopefully if this draft spilt were to happen the GM's that don't kno GM's that allready know alot about older players and those who prefer drafting them such as pappyline, pitseleh and BM67 will enter the pre 1970's draft.

Sorry about this... But I really disagree. Maybe teams with "older players" got killed, but... Teams with with "younger players" got ripped, mainly in the playoffs. (especially talking about active players here...). Also, amongst all centers receiving All-Star Team mentions, the only ones that didn't had a regular spot in EITHER ATD & MLD were two guys from the '90 ( I shouldn't tell who they are at this point, and while they're arguably headcases, especially one of them, there's no reason why they shouldn't have a roster spot in MLD...).

As for my tendencies, I tend to fall middle of the pack concerning era's, maybe with a little bias on the "older side" as far as core players are concerned, with a bias for modern players for the "supporting crew", as there's more information available. Yes, I was afraid of drafting Carol Wilson in the ATD, considering he's no HOF'er and split his career between the Western Leagues and the NHL (but finally got ripped off for drafting Peter Bondra...), but I felt the guy would have been a nice fit on that line ; too bad I was afraid most people would consider his 120-something game stint in the NHL not being enough.

However, your idea really deserves discussion, and not only for the size of the draft.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2007, 05:14 PM
  #7
Evil Speaker
Registered
 
Evil Speaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NorthVan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,614
vCash: 1575
Okay, I guess I have overblown the voting bias claim. However i'm not saying the GM's are trying to be biased toward modern players, it's just because they may be ignorant about older players. I remember when I was a rookie and didn't know alot of the early players (like other rookies in past drafts), but it didn't stop me from entering the draft, and it didn't stop me from voting either. Under my format there will be no issue of ignorance and therfore it would be more fair. Especially when you only have to study 40 years of hockey instead of 90.

Another issue with this draft is that voting opens too early and people vote too early. I remember people voting on series only one or two days after the playoff series started when hardly any discussion had gone on. If people aren't listening to discussion that is a problem, especially when GM's offer enligtenment on some of their less known players on their team.

I don't really care if my idea doesn't pan out, I just think this idea will make the ATD a bit more fair and in my opinion more fun. Like I said it would enable more accurate historical analysis when compairing teams because more players in reality did play against each other. Anyway it's just a suggestion, please dont take this as a complaint. I don't mind having one big draft. Though I am opposed to running two drafts at the same time with all players eligible as I explained before.

VanI-If we need to reduce the amount of teams I might be willing to have a co-GM.

Evil Speaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2007, 12:33 AM
  #8
shawnmullin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Swift Current
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,172
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to shawnmullin Send a message via MSN to shawnmullin
I'm willing to have a co-GM if it comes to that as well.

shawnmullin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2007, 06:02 PM
  #9
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Speaker View Post
Okay, I guess I have overblown the voting bias claim. However i'm not saying the GM's are trying to be biased toward modern players, it's just because they may be ignorant about older players. I remember when I was a rookie and didn't know alot of the early players (like other rookies in past drafts), but it didn't stop me from entering the draft, and it didn't stop me from voting either. Under my format there will be no issue of ignorance and therfore it would be more fair. Especially when you only have to study 40 years of hockey instead of 90.

Another issue with this draft is that voting opens too early and people vote too early. I remember people voting on series only one or two days after the playoff series started when hardly any discussion had gone on. If people aren't listening to discussion that is a problem, especially when GM's offer enligtenment on some of their less known players on their team.

I don't really care if my idea doesn't pan out, I just think this idea will make the ATD a bit more fair and in my opinion more fun. Like I said it would enable more accurate historical analysis when compairing teams because more players in reality did play against each other. Anyway it's just a suggestion, please dont take this as a complaint. I don't mind having one big draft. Though I am opposed to running two drafts at the same time with all players eligible as I explained before.

VanI-If we need to reduce the amount of teams I might be willing to have a co-GM.
I think your idea of having a pre 70's & post 70's split has merit & should be considered. I actually think the 2 GM approach slows things down. Although there is a better chance of one of the GM's being on line, I found that many were hesitant to pick without a lot of back & forth discussion with their co-GM.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2007, 05:53 AM
  #10
VanIslander
10 Years of ATDing
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,850
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
I actually think the 2 GM approach slows things down. Although there is a better chance of one of the GM's being on line, I found that many were hesitant to pick without a lot of back & forth discussion with their co-GM.
i thought the 2-g.m. approach is a major reason why the minor league draft averaged an entire round per day

did any co-g.m. clubs use up their entire time window? i don't think so

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2007, 11:47 AM
  #11
Spitfire11
Registered User
 
Spitfire11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
i thought the 2-g.m. approach is a major reason why the minor league draft averaged an entire round per day
I think that had more to do with the GMs involved in that draft than the 2-GM approach. None of them took a long time in the main draft either when they were all on their own.

The draft should stay the way it always has, with all players available in one draft. I think too many people are caught up in "winning" it and forgetting it's to have a fun time learning about some players you never knew about with the help of other knowledgeable posters. Who ends up winning the championship is going to be a total crapshoot no matter what format you make.

Spitfire11 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2007, 12:10 PM
  #12
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
I don't like this suggestion at all. I think both pre and post expansion era players belong in the draft. I'd feel short-changed if I couldn't take Gretzky or Howe with the No. 2 pick overall. The fact that we have all players from all leagues from all eras involved is the element that makes this draft special.

If a GM is more inclined to vote for a team because it has modern NHL players, then maybe that GM shouldn't be in this draft.

I think the day is coming when we will have to split the draft in half. This thing has grown far bigger than I think BM, LL, Spit, JFF and the other founding GMs ever thought it would be. Thirty, maybe 32 teams, is the most that could be comfortably accommodated. Once we reach 32, and if the interest is still there from other knowledgeable posters, it's time for a split. The last thing we ever want to do is say "we can't take new GMs" because we were all new GMs at some point.

Co-GMing works if it's done right, and it's good for the league if it's done right. You need to have two GMs who are on the same page in terms of team direction, priorities and style of play. As much as I respect pappy, I don't know if we'd work well as co-GMs: he favours a more up-tempo, run-and-gun style, while I like that grinding, hard-working defensive game. Or BM: he's done so much with this draft, but he loves picking Europeans. I pick North Americans, or Europeans who played in the NHL. (Could you imagine Wiser and I trying to collaborate on a team)? That's probably why I worked so well with Murphy in the minor league draft: our attitudes towards the game, and building a team, are virtual mirror images.

The other thing you need with co-GMs is constant communication. Murphy and I were often talking about future rounds before we made our picks. Before we got Stoughton and McKegney in Rounds 4 and 5, we were talking about what to do in Rounds 6 and 7. And we finalized those picks right after we picked Stoughton and McKegney. If the GMs are on the same page, and talking regularly, and formulating back-up plans, it works. If they aren't, then it's a problem, because they're unprepared for their pick, and they hold up the process.

In other words, raleh can expect to have his PM box filled with messages from me during the next draft.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2007, 08:33 PM
  #13
raleh
Registered User
 
raleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Dartmouth, NS
Posts: 1,764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
I don't like this suggestion at all. I think both pre and post expansion era players belong in the draft. I'd feel short-changed if I couldn't take Gretzky or Howe with the No. 2 pick overall. The fact that we have all players from all leagues from all eras involved is the element that makes this draft special.

If a GM is more inclined to vote for a team because it has modern NHL players, then maybe that GM shouldn't be in this draft.

I think the day is coming when we will have to split the draft in half. This thing has grown far bigger than I think BM, LL, Spit, JFF and the other founding GMs ever thought it would be. Thirty, maybe 32 teams, is the most that could be comfortably accommodated. Once we reach 32, and if the interest is still there from other knowledgeable posters, it's time for a split. The last thing we ever want to do is say "we can't take new GMs" because we were all new GMs at some point.

Co-GMing works if it's done right, and it's good for the league if it's done right. You need to have two GMs who are on the same page in terms of team direction, priorities and style of play. As much as I respect pappy, I don't know if we'd work well as co-GMs: he favours a more up-tempo, run-and-gun style, while I like that grinding, hard-working defensive game. Or BM: he's done so much with this draft, but he loves picking Europeans. I pick North Americans, or Europeans who played in the NHL. (Could you imagine Wiser and I trying to collaborate on a team)? That's probably why I worked so well with Murphy in the minor league draft: our attitudes towards the game, and building a team, are virtual mirror images.

The other thing you need with co-GMs is constant communication. Murphy and I were often talking about future rounds before we made our picks. Before we got Stoughton and McKegney in Rounds 4 and 5, we were talking about what to do in Rounds 6 and 7. And we finalized those picks right after we picked Stoughton and McKegney. If the GMs are on the same page, and talking regularly, and formulating back-up plans, it works. If they aren't, then it's a problem, because they're unprepared for their pick, and they hold up the process.

In other words, raleh can expect to have his PM box filled with messages from me during the next draft.
I look forward to it! And Pappy you don't have to worry about us slowing the draft down because of not wanting to step on each other's toes. I kind of view myself as a side kick in this draft, kind of like Selke to Smythe before he went to Montreal, since I'll be spending a month of it traveling. Hopefully we have our list pretty much set before I leave though. One thing is for sure before even exchanging a single pm. Pavel Bure (GBC's first rule) and Paul Coffey (raleh's first rule) will not be members of our team.

That Selke-Smythe analogy might be a very poor example since Selke was, in my opinion, the better hockey man!

raleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2007, 05:36 PM
  #14
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
i thought the 2-g.m. approach is a major reason why the minor league draft averaged an entire round per day

did any co-g.m. clubs use up their entire time window? i don't think so
The MLD did go quick though I think it was because of you being a tough taskmaster, fewer teams & a more relaxed atnosphere. I really didn't care if i missed a turn. The ATD is a little more cut-throat and I really did notice the 2 GM system slowing things down. It only helps if they are prepared ahead of time & each GM has complete freedom to make a selection. under those circumstances it can work well.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2007, 06:29 PM
  #15
Diving Pokecheck*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 1,474
vCash: 500
I would like to be a cogm

Diving Pokecheck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2007, 10:30 PM
  #16
Leaf Lander
Registered User
 
Leaf Lander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: BWO Headquarters
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,669
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Leaf Lander Send a message via MSN to Leaf Lander
suggestion

2 conferences with 2 commishioners running the leagues

each league would have 15 teams each

Leaf Lander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2007, 12:13 AM
  #17
Evil Sather
YOU KILL THE JOE
 
Evil Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YOU MAKE SOME MO
Posts: 1,897
vCash: 500
It's not an "all-time" draft if it's not including all players from all time. Self-explanatory.

If there is a "bias", I think it's toward certain players and certain "types" of players, and vehemently against other "types" of players. I could probably list fifty guys who by all rights should *never* be picked considering the amount of vitriol they get from various people here and are considered drawbacks and detriments rather than top-100 and top-200 guys like they arguably are.

Evil Sather is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:49 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.