Idea for ATD2019

[BenchBrawl]

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.



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 (The more drafts would give you more meaningful data, but it would also start becoming out of date due to the deserved climb in the rankings of Crosby, Ovechkin, etc).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.

Agreed with both bolded.

No need to go back 5 drafts to take the average IMO, just use 2018 and 2017, maybe 2016 and just ignore the 2016 score for the few obvious ones like Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Kane, Keith, Doughty, Karlsson, Getzlaf, Bergeron.But taking only 2018 and 2017 would be fine IMO.I don't see any big deal with even taking only the 2018 list and going with it.

 

[BenchBrawl]

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.

Which is exactly what I said in post #78.

• Each GM should keep a (to be determined) minimum salary for all their roster spots.

In your case that would be $100k by empty spot.

 

[seventieslord]

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.

No cutesy bids is good in theory, but in practice if it's one shot in the dark bid, then the highest bid wins, and yes, those cute little digits you add at the end could make the difference.

On eBay, if the max bid is 10 bucks, you have to bid at least 10.50. I get that, it makes sense. No ticky tack nonsense.

But if the bid is sitting at 2.00 and the high bidder had a proxy maximum of 10 bucks, your bid of 10.01 will win that auction.

 

[seventieslord]

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.

I completely agree with this.

 

[seventieslord]

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.



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.

I have all this data.

 

[BenchBrawl]

If we want to use the modern salary cap, we need to add a certain amount for a coach.

edit: nvm the rest of my post

 

[seventieslord]

If we want to use the modern salary cap, we need to add a certain amount for a coach.

edit: nvm the rest of my post

True.

 

[VanIslander]

NHL coach salaries range from $1 million for the inexperienced head coaches of the Florida Panthers and Vancouver Canucks, to $2 million for Peter Laviolette in Nashville to the extravagant hockey-mad $5 million for Julien in Montreal and obscene $6.5 million for deep pocket Toronto.

Since the NHL salary cap just went up from $75 million last season to $79.5 million this season anyways... the $4.5 million increase ought to cover it.

A $79.5 million cap, as per NHL 2018-19 season, ought to cover a coach too. (No need to round up to an even $80M if we're doing cutesy dickery margin bids like $5,205,012M via spreadsheet anyway.)

 

[ResilientBeast]

Making it the real salary cap will not stop me from bidding 15 million for each of the big four

 

[VanIslander]

Making it the real salary cap will not stop me from bidding 15 million for each of the big four

A great reason to have:

1. A semi-random administrator selected list to spread out the top talents over several rounds...

2. A hard salary cap that automatically makes bids ineligible if they leave insufficient funds to meet minimum requirements.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Disagree with 1.

No point in spreading out top players.

 

[ResilientBeast]

A great reason to have:

1. A semi-random administrator selected list to spread out the top talents over several rounds...

2. A hard salary cap that automatically makes bids ineligible if they leave insufficient funds to meet minimum requirements.

There is no need for spreading out top talent

 

[VanIslander]

You just said RB you would go ape **** over the top 4 with 15 mill bids.

That's reason enough!

(There's always one...)

 

[ResilientBeast]

You just said RB you would go ape **** over the top 4 with 15 mill bids.

That's reason enough!

(There's always one...)

How is that a reason? Am I not allowed to build my team as I see fit within the structure agreed upon?

Semi-randomizing does not do anything useful

 

[VanIslander]

"I'm gonna spend most of my cap on Orr Gretzky Howe and Lemieux" is not exactly a scenario we are all looking forward to.

How about a readonable squad?

That squad stinks as much as teying to draft Crosby and Toews top 6 in an atd because they are fav players.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I like the idea of taking any of the 500 players drafted from say the past 3 ATD's and making the order random.

Yes, if RB is 100% set on just going for broke and using 2/3 of his salary cap on 4 players it wouldn't matter where they come up for bid but I guess I just like not knowing when players will be up for bidding. Adds an element of suspense. What if we're on day 20 and only 1 of the big 4 have come up? You (anyone) just going to keep on waiting or fall pressure to time and alter the plan? I'm fine with either or, just prefer it being random to add an element of surprise. The one problem with the ATD as we know, is that the draft positions are relatively boring now. We know when most players end up going, within a small set of picks or so. There isn't much variation anymore.

Also:

I think with 24 players and a coach we should probably re-examine the minimum salary for a player. If the cap is 100M it would be pretty easy to bid 60M on the big 4 and still fill out a reasonable roster otherwise if the minimum salary is 500K. Obviously the team would be top heavy and I don't think somebody will actually get Orr, Gretzky, Howe and Mario on 1 roster but an entry level contract is more than 500K at the NHL level, correct? And the cap is far below 100M.

Lots of details to hash out but that's something I thought of this morning.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I like the idea of taking any of the 500 players drafted from say the past 3 ATD's and making the order random.

Yes, if RB is 100% set on just going for broke and using 2/3 of his salary cap on 4 players it wouldn't matter where they come up for bid but I guess I just like not knowing when players will be up for bidding. Adds an element of suspense. What if we're on day 20 and only 1 of the big 4 have come up? You (anyone) just going to keep on waiting or fall pressure to time and alter the plan? I'm fine with either or, just prefer it being random to add an element of surprise. The one problem with the ATD as we know, is that the draft positions are relatively boring now. We know when most players end up going, within a small set of picks or so. There isn't much variation anymore.

Also:

I think with 24 players and a coach we should probably re-examine the minimum salary for a player. If the cap is 100M it would be pretty easy to bid 60M on the big 4 and still fill out a reasonable roster otherwise if the minimum salary is 500K. Obviously the team would be top heavy and I don't think somebody will actually get Orr, Gretzky, Howe and Mario on 1 roster but an entry level contract is more than 500K at the NHL level, correct? And the cap is far below 100M.

Lots of details to hash out but that's something I thought of this morning.

Wrong, because everyone else will have 100M, without having spent the 60M, so the bids throughout the draft will reflect that, and they will outbid you nonestop.You'll put 4M, they'll put 6M, because they can.

 

[ResilientBeast]

"I'm gonna spend most of my cap on Orr Gretzky Howe and Lemieux" is not exactly a scenario we are all looking forward to.

How about a readonable squad?

That squad stinks as much as teying to draft Crosby and Toews top 6 in an atd because they are fav players.

Your example doesn't make sense since my team would have 4 of the greatest players of all time.

I was mainly joking about doing this, but now I really want to

 

[ImporterExporter]

Wrong, because everyone else will have 100M, without having spent the 60M, so the bids throughout the draft will reflect that, and they will outbid you nonestop.You'll put 4M, they'll put 6M, because they can.

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle actually.

If you get the big 4 for 60 you still have 40M for another 20 players. With a pool of 500 (or more) players you will find depth. It might be later in the draft but it will be found.

Again, RB's team (in that scenario) would be very top heavy but I don't think it would be those 4 and then a bunch of bums. He'd find value with so many players available. Now with a smaller cap, you'd run into serious problems.

But again, I think we'll need to get multiple threads up after the holidays for various votes on these issues. I'm 100% on board with the auction draft. Just want to make sure the people who sign up all have a voice in how we structure it.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think the truth is somewhere in the middle actually.

If you get the big 4 for 60 you still have 40M for another 20 players. With a pool of 500 (or more) players you will find depth. It might be later in the draft but it will be found.

Again, RB's team (in that scenario) would be very top heavy but I don't think it would be those 4 and then a bunch of bums. He'd find value with so many players available. Now with a smaller cap, you'd run into serious problems.

But again, I think we'll need to get multiple threads up after the holidays for various votes on these issues. I'm 100% on board with the auction draft. Just want to make sure the people who sign up all have a voice in how we structure it.

You will find some depth... after every other team that didn't spend 60M for a Big 4 choose theirs.

20M is meaningless, all numbers are relative.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'm 100% on board with the auction draft. Just want to make sure the people who sign up all have a voice in how we structure it.

Double quoting: of course.We will have polls.

 

[Namba 17]

What if two or more GMs make the same maximum bid for one player? "The first takes it all" doesn't sound fair here. This easily can be a case for big 4.

 

[VanIslander]

Look.

If you allow silly willy bids and you just copied someone's bid, then snooze, loose.

Bid $5,000,063 and then no ties.

The benefit of willy nilly bids was supposed to be to stop common same bids.

Geez. Free agency in sports isn't fair? Get your bids in asap and bid more than the other guy. If you don't, you don't deserve anything!

 

[Namba 17]

Look.

If you allow silly willy bids and you just copied someone's bid, then snooze, loose.

Bid $5,000,063 and then no ties.

The benefit of willy nilly bids was supposed to be to stop common same bids.

Geez. Free agency in sports isn't fair? Get your bids in asap and bid more than the other guy. If you don't, you don't deserve anything!

I told about situation when there is some max bid (salary cap) and GM is not allowed to spend more on one player. No salary/bid cap - no such a problem.
The whole idea is interesting, indeed.
Suggestion: 2 days of bids for each round. The amount of players avaliable in each round is equal to the amount of teams participated.
Day 1. Teams make their initial bids via pm to some person. At the end of the day this person posts a list with player's name and max bid without name of the team made this bid.
Day 2. Each team can make another bid for each player via pm as well. At the end of this day the list with player's name, price and team name is published.
If some team runs out of money, its most expensive player became avaliable for the auction and this team is not allowed to take him again.
Order of players - lets take any of the last 3 drafts. Player, who was not bought this round is avaliable the next rounds untill he is taken.
GMs are allowed to suggest players for auction in the 2 last rounds.

 

[Namba 17]

And yes, no cup space.