Idea for ATD2019

[ImporterExporter]

Random limited draft pool somewhat defeats the purpose of an All Time Draft IMO.

As a side draft sure

Not limited at all. Random in terms of who is up for bidding each day. If we make the pool of any player drafted in the ATD last year to say pick 500, it doesn't limit the choices.

But my issue is if we know exactly when each player will be up for bid you'll have people plotting entire draft plans before the first pick is even made. Not knowing who will be up day 1, day 10, day 20 makes it a more challenging project IMO. Everyone will be available to draft from past ATD's but you just won't know when they're available.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Not limited at all. Random in terms of who is up for bidding each day. If we make the pool of any player drafted in the ATD last year to say pick 500, it doesn't limit the choices.

But my issue is if we know exactly when each player will be up for bid you'll have people plotting entire draft plans before the first pick is even made. Not knowing who will be up day 1, day 10, day 20 makes it a more challenging project IMO. Everyone will be available to draft from past ATD's but you just won't know when they're available.

You can plot your draft plan, but as I've found out for 5 years now your plan does not matter. Especially since all GMs are technically able to "pick a player" by silently bidding the most. There will be limited successful planning

 

[BenchBrawl]

I keep believing that for something so radically new, the prudent approach is to keep it as simple as possible.No complicated rules, nothing cute

• X amount of players available per day (probably from 4 to 12, possibly increasing gradually as the draft progress)
• GMs can bid on whoever they want everyday, as long as they have the cash for it
• Bidding is to be done once a day and in private; no discussion about the value of players allowed
• Highest bidding GM wins the player
• Crazy bidding numbers like $3,454,433 as opposed to $3,500,000 are to be encouraged to avoid ties which will slow down the draft if tied GMs cannot be contacted shortly
  
• Each GM should keep a (to be determined) minimum salary for all their roster spots.Since many GMs will only have the minimum to bid near the end of the draft, we can expect a lot of bidding ties.A sort of "draft order" could be established when this situation pops up to determine who has priority in order to break the ties.

On that last point, assume we force GMs to keep $100k as a minimum salary for every player.So to simplify, assume there's only two GMs left with spots to fill.

GM#1 has 3 players left to pick, and he has the minimum $300k to pay them.

GM#2 has 2 players left to pick, and he has the minimum $200k to pay them.

They both need a defenseman and Brent Burns pops up.They both bid $100k; the only bid they can make, since they have to keep the rest of their cash to fill their lineup.So we have a tie.Now imagine that situation with even more GMs that only have the minimum available to bid.I feel that's why we need some sort of "draft order" at the end.This doesn't concern the more responsible GMs who never put themselves in that precarious situation.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I'm looking forward to spending 20 Million on each of Lemieux, Gretzky, Howe and Orr

XXX - Gretzky - Howe
XXX - Lemieux - XXX

XXX - Orr

The idea of having Gretzky, Lemieux or Orr on the ice for the entire game....

 

[BenchBrawl]

I propose a $100M ($100,000,000) total budget, with a minimum salary of $500K ($500,000) by player.

 

[Theokritos]

As a complete novelty here, the auction-style idea could potentially hold several issues that are hard to predict in advance. IMO you should run a small-scale auction-style draft with a limited pool of players to test it in reality.

 

[BenchBrawl]

As a complete novelty here, the auction-style idea could potentially hold several issues that are hard to predict in advance. IMO you should run a small-scale auction-style draft with a limited pool of players to test it in reality.

The rules I came up with were chosen based on how likely they would avoid any big problems that are draft-breaking.This is why I had to get rid of the "back-and-forth" type of bidding (you bid $1, I bid $2, you bid $3, so on), because it would be unmanageable.Obviously you can never know in advance and I could have missed something.

I'm down to test it whenever anyone wants to try it.I only need two other persons; one GM and a commish (to handle the bids), and the GM and I will run 3 teams each, and I'll try multiple behaviors; normal and extreme.

The biggest immediate problem I see is how to automatize all of this so we don't need the commissioner to do everything manually.

 

[ImporterExporter]

How many bids can a person make per player? Do we all just bid once and whoever is the highest wins or will there be somebody to update the daily board with the highest bid (minus the leading GM name of course)?

 

[BenchBrawl]

How many bids can a person make per player? Do we all just bid once and whoever is the highest wins or will there be somebody to update the daily board with the highest bid (minus the leading GM name of course)?

First option

Only one bid per player

(In my proposed framework anyway)

 

[VanIslander]

Two bids per player allows for some attempt at a deal: opening bid vs. closing bid.

Eg., Offer Forsberg $5.5M and if others bid be willing to make a closing bid at one's max for the guy (eg., I'd pay $8.2M max for him on a $75M cap).

 

[VanIslander]

I keep believing that for something so radically new, the prudent approach is to keep it as simple as possible...

• Crazy bidding numbers like $3,454,433 as opposed to $3,500,000 are to be encouraged to avoid ties which will slow down the draft if tied GMs cannot be contacted shortly
  
• Each GM should keep a (to be determined) minimum salary for all their roster spots.Since many GMs will only have the minimum to bid near the end of the draft, we can expect a lot of bidding ties.A sort of "draft order" could be established when this situation pops up to determine who has priority in order to break the ties.

simple: if two GMs tie, first come, first served.

No cutsey bids. Minimum allotments (eg., $100,000 ... so to top a $3.8m bid you would need to bid at least $3.9m).

We've had several auction drafts on the fantasy board and they work well. Yeah, simple realistic rules. Use the nhl salary cap. Have the administrator select the player options. Have a free agency bidding pool (leftovers or non-ATD picks). A bid is null and void if it doesn't leave the team with enough money to cover minimum bids. So, if you have 11 picks left and $100,000 min. bids then you need $1.1m remaining. Easy. Simple. No bankruptcy nonsense.

 

[BenchBrawl]

simple: if two GMs tie, first come, first served.

No cutsey bids. Minimum allotments (eg., $100,000 ... so to top a $3.8m bid you would need to bid at least $3.9m).

We've had several auction drafts on the fantasy board and they work well. Yeah, simple realistic rules. Use the nhl salary cap. Have the administrator select the player options. Have a free agency bidding pool (leftovers or non-ATD picks). A bid is null and void if it doesn't leave the team with enough money to cover minimum bids. So, if you have 11 picks left and $100,000 mim. bids then you need $1.1m remaining. Easy. Simple. No bankruptcy nonsense.

This is wrong because of the different time zones.It's completely unfair to people with limited access.That's why we had a clock in the usual draft.

 

[VanIslander]

Wrong?

If someone made a $6.4m bid, it would take a $6.5m bid to top it, not another $6.4m offer!

Auction drafts have used this simple fair rule.

Time zones are beside the point.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Wrong?

If someone made a $6.4m bid, it would take a $6.5m bid to top it, not another $6.4m offer!

Auction drafts have used this simple fair rule.

Time zones are beside the point.

So you won't complain when the time the new players become available is centered around the majority who live in North America?

 

[VanIslander]

So you won't complain when the time the new players become available is centered around the majority who live in North America?

No prob.

If I lose a $7.5m bid on Langway because it's tied with someone who already made that offer, then I'd think I just should have offered $7.6m.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I am firmly against any ''first come, first served'' rule in the draft.I'm pretty sure the overwhelming majority will agree with me, but let's hear what people think.

I don't see what the problem is with bidding amounts like $4,555,654 instead of $4,500,000.Is basic arithmetic and substracting this number from the overall budget beyond our abilities? Really?

 

[ImporterExporter]

I will say making crazy numerical bids might complicate things in terms of keeping track of who has what money available.

But then again, if you do a more standard 6.1, 6.2, 6.3M there would be a lot of ties.

Definitely should get some of the more "complicated questions up for a round table discussion/vote once we get closer to January/post holidays.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I will say making crazy numerical bids might complicate things in terms of keeping track of who has what money available.

But then again, if you do a more standard 6.1, 6.2, 6.3M there would be a lot of ties.

Definitely should get some of the more "complicated questions up for a round table discussion/vote once we get closer to January/post holidays.

How so? This will be tracked in the main post for sure.

Are you guys that bad at math?

 

[Hockey Outsider]

How so? This will be tracked in the main post for sure.

Are you guys that bad at math?

Agreed, I don't see this as an issue. It's all going to be tracked in a spreadsheet anyway.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Ok. I figured it would complicate things for whoever was tracking everything.

I mean people should be on the honor system as far as keeping their own budgets in line but there definitely needs to be a stiff penalty for teams that exceed the cap. That's something I will draw a line in the sand on.

I assume we'll be doing the same roster sizes as before.

500K minimum salary. No limit to what you can spend on a player but obviously must remain under the 100M mark and have enough money throughout to fill out a roster.

Who will determine the order of the players going up for bid?

 

[VanIslander]

One huge advantage of using the NHL salary cap ($75M) is to compare what you might spend with what teams actually allocate:

Chicago hamstrung itself paying the league-highest $10.5M for each of Kane and Toews.
Ovechkin makes $9.5M.
Malkin is a $9.5M hit and Crosby a $8.7M.

If we had the same salary cap as an NHL team, the craziness of a $15M bid will be immediately apparent.
As well, the typical debate of whether a defenseman ont he second pairing is worth more than $3.5-4.0M range applies.

 

[ResilientBeast]

One huge advantage of using the NHL salary cap ($75M) is to compare what you might spend with what teams actually allocate:

Chicago hamstrung itself paying the league-highest $10.5M for each of Kane and Toews.
Ovechkin makes $9.5M.
Malkin is a $9.5M hit and Crosby a $8.7M.

If we had the same salary cap as an NHL team, the craziness of a $15M bid will be immediately apparent.
As well, the typical debate of whether a defenseman ont he second pairing is worth more than $3.5-4.0M range applies.

Just compare % of Cap if you want to compare players that way, the actual number is honestly arbitrary

 

[VanIslander]

Agreed, I don't see this as an issue. It's all going to be tracked in a spreadsheet anyway.

If the administrator uses a calculator to add up $7,450,012 + $9,500.001, etc. then so be it. Usually it's the administrator that wants to limit bids to 100,000 thousand or even quarter million bids.

But it is irksome and getting even more fantasty to have one bid beat another by $3 ($8,500,000 lose to $8,500,003). Geee, like any player in free agency wouild base their acceptance on that difference.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I mean people should be on the honor system as far as keeping their own budgets in line but there definitely needs to be a stiff penalty for teams that exceed the cap. That's something I will draw a line in the sand on.

Ideally every team's remaining cap space would be updated and published daily, so there's full transparency.

But the question of what to do when teams run out of money needs to be resolved (see post #78). I'll give that some thought.

Who will determine the order of the players going up for bid?

I think we'd need to decide if we want a predetermined order, or a random order.

If it's predetermined, it makes sense to rank the players and put them up for auction in (approximate) draft order. Someone (possibly me) can calculate the average ranking of the top 500 (?) players over the past 3-7 drafts. (The more drafts would give you more meaningful data, but it would also start becoming out of date due to the deserved climb in the rankings of Crosby, Ovechkin, etc). This would be published in advance.

If it's a random order, I think the population would need to be defined (ie anybody picked in the top 500 in the past five ATDs or MLDs). Then somebody (possibly me) can make the random selections on a daily basis.

My preference (at least for the first time we're trying this) would be the predetermined order. It would be new and exciting enough. Though part of me wants to see someone steal Gretzky for like $2.5M if he randomly comes up in the final round.

 

[VanIslander]

But the question of what to do when teams run out of money needs to be resolved (see post #78). I'll give that some thought.

I've been in auction drafts where these options have prevented any bankruptcy:

EITHER
1. Any bid that puts a team incapable of offering the minimum bid to their remaining players is invalid. so, if you offer 5mill to a guy but your team has just 0.5 million left and seven players left to acquire (with a minimum bid of 100,000) then that bid is invalid. If you have 5.5 mill left and 8 guys to sign at 100,000 minimum, then the most you could bid is 4.8.mill, leaving your team with 0.7 mill for the last 7 signings at the minimum.

OR
2. Any team that is over cap will lose its top salary immediately (to injury - not to be available to other teams for bidding). And if that doesn't get the team under cap, then they lose their next best player as well.

Simple. Practical. Tried and proven.

We just did an auction draft in the fall of 2016 on the fantasy draft board. I'll shoot you a link when I'm on my computer.