[IBL] IBL: Something has to change

Sun Jan 21 17:38:44 EST 2018

My response to Alex would be that just because there is a current rule in
place doesn't mean there isn't room for discussion or improvement.  There
have been plenty of rules changes over the 9 1/2 years I've been in the
league, and 4.6.2 shouldn't be immune to discussion either.  A lot of teams
have switched hands in that time and new perspectives and ideas can and
should be brought forth.  At the very least, healthy discussion, amendment
proposals, and voting wouldn't hurt the league.

I'm in the camp of the annoyed/frustrated owners, and I think it's
ridiculous that 4 teams have taken up 53 days of the pick-by-pick portion
of the draft.  I'll go a step further than Joel though, in that I think
there's more than just delayed action and planning that is the issue,
although I do agree with Joel on that too.

Let me start by saying that I understand that IBL is not a high priority in
a lot of people's lives.  There are other things that rightfully should and
do take precedence, and I've experienced more of this the last couple years
myself.  However, over the last couple/few years, the season has become
stretched out way further than what it was when I joined the league.  The
secondary effect of this is that everything gets pushed back further -
regular season, playoffs, draft prep, draft lottery, etc.

My main contention is that IP penalties are irrelevant.  Most owners are
going to waive 5-8 players a year.  That means that they can turn in late
results for 1/5th to possibly 1/3rd of the season and not care about the IP
penalty.  To compound this, four real time weeks off have been added to the
schedule.  To compound that, two more arbitrary "catch up" weeks were added
this past season.  As I mentioned to Rusty, if I hypothetically got a late
result IP penalty in week 8, and then 9 weeks later an arbitrary week of
catch up time was added and those owners didn't get IP penalties, I
wouldn't be happy about it.  Or maybe I wouldn't care, because IP penalties
don't matter.  For IP penalties to matter, there has to be some actually
effective penalty associated with them - such as loss of a draft pick in a
certain round, etc.  I'd be willing to bet that would make everyone care.

My point is that we've added a month and a half or more to the season
schedule over the last few years, and that leads to later and later playoff
series playing, people later in getting to their draft prep, etc.  Here is
what I suggested to commish:

"Even just cutting out one off week and the two times this season that a
week's grace were added would add three weeks to the clock.  Then extending
the pick by pick past February 1st could happen, since most of the time the
season doesn't start until mid-April (correct me if I'm wrong, but I think
that's accurate).  We could go another two weeks of pick by pick before
going to lists, and with fewer off/grace weeks, we add five weeks to the
pick by pick without affecting anything else as far as I can tell.  The
draft would still be finished before cards are finalized."

Adding more time to the pick by pick portion would help ameliorate how some
of us feel about the lengthy pick times.  Having an actual effect for IP
penalties would force compliance and reduce the extended season, allowing
more time for people for playoff series play and draft prep.

Thanks,

Brent Cunningham
Owner/Manager
Gettysburg Generals Baseball Club

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Alex Campbell <arc213 at gmail.com> wrote:

> The draft doesn’t officially start until Feb 1. The pick by pick portion
> is a type of accommodation that is outlined in section 4.6.2 of the
> constitution. There is no time limit by pick and no owner should feel
> pressure to pick per the constitution.
>
> Personally, I am more troubled by the lack of progress in the playoffs.
>
> AC
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 21, 2018, at 10:51 AM, Doug Palmer <aeronutty43 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Joel,
>
> I was thinking the exact same thing!!  I can't believe that we're only 8
> picks in not to mention the IBL Playoffs are STILL going on!!  The season
> ended months ago.  I wish I had an answer but I don't.  A time limit (3
> days?) from the time you're on the clock?  Go to lists faster?
>
> It would probably be beneficial to have the 2017 season finished before
> the 2018 season starts :)
>
> Doug/BAL
>
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 12:56 PM, Joel Roberts via Members <
> members at lists.ibl.org> wrote:
>
>> So, we are (by my count) 12 days from going to pick-by-list and we are
>> only on the eighth pick of the draft. This has to be some kind of record.
>>
>> If we look at the number of days spent on each pick a pattern emerges:
>>
>> 1. 19
>> 2. 0 (yay?)
>> 3. 0 (yay...)
>> 4. 0 (Yay!!!)
>> 5. 13
>> 6. 8
>> 7. 2 (Maybe things are moving?)
>> 8. 13 and counting
>>
>> Now, one might assume from this rant that I am against the idea of not
>> having deadlines for the draft. This could not be further from the truth.
>> *I do not prefer a draft with per-pick deadlines.* I like that this system
>> accommodates the fact that people have lives, especially around the
>> holidays, and I don't want to see people chained to the draft on an
>> artificial schedule for two months.
>>
>> In the past this system has worked perfectly well, but for the past few
>> drafts it seems to be broken. And the cause of this, it would seem to me,
>> is that people delay action and planning until their pick is actually up.
>> If people are looking to trade their pick, they sit until they are actually
>> on the clock and only then do they shop the pick. This leads to the
>> following.
>>
>> -- Somebody (finally) picks.
>> -- The next person realizes they would rather trade the pick than choose
>> any of the remaining players.
>> -- They wait up to two weeks before realizing they aren't going to get
>> any offers they like.
>> -- They finally pick the guy they would have picked anyway.
>> -- (Repeat the cycle)
>>
>> This is actually a culture shift from the time when the draft was working
>> better. In the past people with an impending pick have had a list of a few
>> players they would like, on the presumption that some of them might be
>> picked ahead of their pick. If it looked like all their faves might be
>> gone, they actually shopped their pick ahead of time so that their
>> negotiations could move along in time to be done soon after they were on
>> the clock.
>>
>> Like I said before, I like the framework we have now. And I think it
>> could work, because it has in the past. But it's not working now so, unless
>> something culturally changes to improve the situation. when the next round
>> of constitution amendments comes around I will put a proposal on the table
>> that has some kind of per-pick deadline. Maybe people will vote for it and
>> maybe they won't. If it doesn't pass, fine by me. That just means I am one
>> of the few, if not the only, people annoyed by this. But I don't think I am.
>>
>> Joel
>> CAN
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibl.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20180121/ebad0a4c/attachment-0001.html>