ATD 2020 Signup and Discussion

[BenchBrawl]

Well, this way we’d have 30 teams total instead of 40 using that example. Just makes the ATD feel “cheap” if we start drafting the Dmitri Khristich’s of the world in the main ATD. But that could just be me.

We had 40 teams in 2011—my first ATD !—and we won't have to scrap the bottom of the barrel just yet, especially considering the players that were added to the pool since 2011.

 

[BenchBrawl]

If we have two teams, I'll be the Montreal Canadiens and the Ottawa Senators (unless overpass participates, in which case Ottawa goes to him and I'll choose another one).

 

[VanIslander]

If we can have two teams, the second will be the Baltimore Skipjacks, the AHL affiliate for four NHL teams at one time or the other. Team hero Jon Casey was the league's best goaltender in 1985, a year after they had the best regular season record.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'm actually surprisingly pumped for this, to try the ATD with two teams. More drafting !

I still wish we could have 2-3 trades per team available. Shake things up !

 

[ResilientBeast]

I'm actually surprisingly pumped for this, to try the ATD with two teams. More drafting !

I still wish we could have 2-3 trades per team available. Shake things up !

Not keen on the trading with yourself bit.

But you're right double the teams double the drafting which is most of the fun for me.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I never was a fan of @VanIslander 's idea to have a trade conference and a no-trade conference in the past Figured it would put the GMs in the no-trade conference at a slight disadvantage from the start. But if each GM has one team in each conference? It could be worth exploring.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Not keen on the trading with yourself bit.

But you're right double the teams double the drafting which is most of the fun for me.

Oh no that should be 100% forbidden ! Cannot trade with yourself even if you have two teams.

Because obviously you can stack one team that way.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I never was a fan of @VanIslander 's idea to have a trade conference and a no-trade conference in the past Figured it would put the GMs in the no-trade conference at a slight disadvantage from the start. But if each GM has one team in each conference? It could be worth exploring.

Why put one conference at a disadvantage though?

I guess it would enable someone who dislike trading to participate with one team in the no-trading conference.

 

[VanIslander]

It prevents the quid pro quo: i let you win on this trade (weakens my conference #1 team a bit) and then you let me win on the next trade (to strengthen my team in conference #2 a bit).

And just because there is trading, doesn't mean a team is disadvantaged by choosing NOT to trade, at least, not if greatly lopsided trades are vetoed/forced to be reworked.

 

[The Macho King]

You could allow self trading and the final placement is based on the aggregate finish of your two teams to disincentivize tanking one of your teams.

 

[Habsfan18]

Yeah, not sure if it matters but I’m not on board with self trading, at all..

Allow trading all you want, but self trading just seems ridiculous if we do decide to do 2 teams, IMO.

Also on the topic of two teams, I assume that will be left up to each GM if they want to go that route? I’m co-GMing a team with VanIslander this year and personally have no desire to build a second team. Maybe another year but not for 2020. I’m co-GMing this year for the reason of having limited spare time right now.

 

[VanIslander]

I echo the anti-self-trading position.

And I will gladly co-GM one team with you, and do the other solo.

 

[Habsfan18]

I echo the anti-self-trading position.

And I will gladly co-GM one team with you, and do the other solo.

I’d probably be on board with co-GMing both clubs in this scenario, but none on my own this year just because of the spare time issue. But if you’d rather go solo for one of the clubs I’m perfectly fine with that as well.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Yeah, not sure if it matters but I’m not on board with self trading, at all..

Allow trading all you want, but self trading just seems ridiculous if we do decide to do 2 teams, IMO.

Also on the topic of two teams, I assume that will be left up to each GM if they want to go that route? I’m co-GMing a team with VanIslander this year and personally have no desire to build a second team. Maybe another year but not for 2020. I’m co-GMing this year for the reason of having limited spare time right now.

Every participant's opinion matters.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Consolidation of ideas

1) GMs have the possibility to manage two teams, which will be in two different conferences.

2) Trading might be allowed (need to be put to a vote), either in the entire draft or only in one conference (need to be clarified)

3) No self-trading allowed

 

[BenchBrawl]

Please go vote for whether you want trading or not (and if yes, what kind) in this thread:

Allowed trading or not in ATD2020? (If yes, in the whole draft or only in one conference?)

sorry for the typo in the title, did it too fast

 

[ImporterExporter]

Brutal.

Shame to see this draft fall so far over the past half decade.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Allright guys, I just sent a PM to everyone and to many, many HOH posters. Hopefully this brings many more teams and we can have a huge draft.

Draft will start Monday January 20th at 17h.

 

[Theokritos]

I've created a promo thread for the ATD2020 on the HOH board. Later I will make it a sticky.

 

[Dreakmur]

Brutal.

Shame to see this draft fall so far over the past half decade.

Times change, things fade.

 

[Habsfan18]

I’m not trying to come across as overly negative here, but it seems to me that while can talk up the “two teams” option all we want, would it not be a direct result of the almost complete lack of interest in an ATD this year if we do in fact go that route? Just seems “not right” to me to have 20-24 teams with only 10-12 actual posters participating? Not for the main annual ATD. Hell, with the playoff voting turnout in recent years what can we expect this year..4 people voting?

If we don’t get at least 20 actual posters participating, should we maybe skip the ATD this year since the general consensus seems to be that it has become stale anyways? Or at least perhaps push it off until spring and see if time generates more interest? It’s still early since PM’s just went out, so maybe we’ll be surprised. But yeah, doesn’t look good..What do we have so far, 8 confirmed so far with maybe 2-3 more that have posted in this thread that are assumed to have interest? And we want to start in 2 weeks? Don’t we usually have significantly more interest by early January each year? Or is there usually a rush of people joining at last minute?

 

[VanIslander]

If we get 20-24 GMs instead of 28-32 GMs as many years past, that's okay. The 2-team option means we get an INTRIGUING 40+ team draft that would make picks less predictable than in years past.

If I could assemble 100, yeah one hundred, RESPONSIBLE all-time-draft pickers, I would. Imagine the awesome dynamic of considering how long to wait for 1D, 1G, 1C, ... gawd it would be like 2004-2009 all over again. Er,... I've been here a long time. Leaf Lander has been here longer (he was here when i joined the 3rd HfBoards ATD fidteen years ago), but he is a Leafs homer so imagine a pimp with a flashy suit and big-brimmed hat.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Times change, things fade.

Absolutely. People age and get caught up in real life as well.

But part of this fade really does come down to an unwillingness to try something radically different as the main ATD. If you don't adapt with the times you die (in a business sense at least).

The other aspect is you have, 2-3 people who routinely dominate the ATD as it stands. Now, those few people are very, very good GM's and know how to build a consistently good team year in and year out but make no mistake, there have been years where I truly believe name recognition gets certain people a few votes extra. That is both in the ATD and in the side bar drafts.

I find it asinine that we have never really updated the voting or post draft procedures to introduce new voters or new ideas. Getting crowned champ when only 7-8 people vote takes the shine off the entire draft. Even in years when we've had 20-30 GM's, how often are more than half of those people even giving one shit once the draft ends? How often have we had entire match ups not even get a single post in the head to head threads?

Why have we never extended voting to reputable members of the HoH community? Folks who may never have done an ATD but are more than versed on players throughout hockey history. There is a potential to get a slew of extra votes from that sub forum and I have suggested this in the past. Ask people like MXD, C58, Tarheel, etc, to get involved as judges.

Maybe some of that is people realize their team didn't end up the way they envisioned and are simply not motivated to go further. I'm certainly not that way. There have been a few teams that I've build that had no business competing with others and I still argue my case. Why bother even participating if you just "quit" after the drafting ends?

Some of it, again, boils down to the fact that we keep doing the same thing, year in and year out, with window dressing fixes (trade or no trades or drafting 2 teams for example).

I think drafting 2 teams is a horrendous idea. That alone would push me out if I was on the edge. If you ever wondered about collusion or shady practices, look no further than GM's making picks for one team that possibly allow another player they want to fall to their primary roster. There will be selective picking. I'd bet my house on it.

I won't participate for reasons I've already outlined previously that have nothing to do with the make up of the draft this year.

But as someone who's done a bunch of these drafts I feel it's important to voice concerns.

 

[Habsfan18]

I agree that one change that absolutely HAS to be made is turning to either a panel of ex-ATD members who aren’t participating or the HoH forum regulars for voting in the post draft portion of the ATD. That’s the only way the playoffs make any sense to me moving forward. I also really liked the Challenge Cup idea.

 

[VanIslander]

... we have never really updated the voting or post draft procedures to introduce new voters or new ideas. Getting crowned champ when only 7-8 people vote takes the shine off the entire draft.

Winning is not the point of the draft,

but if you have marshalled stats and quotes in support of your picks and convinced others that your team is more capable of beating a competent opposition...

Even in years when we've had 20-30 GM's, how often are more than half of those people even giving one **** once the draft ends? How often have we had entire match ups not even get a single post in the head to head threads?

Why have we never extended voting to reputable members of the HoH community? Folks who may never have done an ATD but are more than versed on players throughout hockey history. There is a potential to get a slew of extra votes from that sub forum and I have suggested this in the past. Ask people like MXD, C58, Tarheel, etc, to get involved as judges.

But as someone who's done a bunch of these drafts I feel it's important to voice concerns.