[IBL] Hello and Draft Schedule Ruminations

Mon Feb 1 11:58:20 EST 2021

Hi all --

Hope your weeks are off to good starts!  Mike, thanks very much for the
note and support for finding an alternative draft approach.  Whether
through a pick clock, extending the pick-by-pick phase, tier drafting,
other ideas, or some combination, I hope there is an approach that owners
think is an improvement.

I am tabling my own efforts until the midseason ballot.  My ruminations did
not leave enough time to consider and implement possible changes to list
drafting for this year.

I will try to come up with some ballot language for a tier-drafting
alternative and circulate draft language for review, revision, and critique
in advance of the midseason ballot/voting.  Feel free to shoot me a note
with any thoughts.

There are no doubt better ideas than mine, and Brent and Mike have already
suggested some strong approaches.  Hopefully there will be some other
proposals that can replace, or be combined with, anything I come up with.

Thanks much everyone

- David (oxy)

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Michael Kenlan <michaelkenlan at yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: Hello and Draft Schedule Ruminations
To: Brent Cunningham <gettysburg.generals at gmail.com>, D <genny429 at gmail.com>
Cc: bal at ibl.org <bal at ibl.org>, bow at ibl.org <bow at ibl.org>, can at ibl.org <
can at ibl.org>, eve at ibl.org <eve at ibl.org>, mad at ibl.org <mad at ibl.org>, Sean
Sweda <mcm at ibl.org>, njr at ibl.org <njr at ibl.org>, nyk at ibl.org <nyk at ibl.org>,
odm <odm at ibl.org>, phi at ibl.org <phi at ibl.org>, rrg at ibl.org <rrg at ibl.org>,
scs at ibl.org <scs at ibl.org>, sea <sea at ibl.org>, SKY <sky at ibl.org>, slg at ibl.org
<slg at ibl.org>, snh at ibl.org <snh at ibl.org>, wms at ibl.org <wms at ibl.org>, Gty <
gty at ibl.org>, kat <kat at ibl.org>, OXY <oxy at ibl.org>, por <por at ibl.org>, sdq <
sdq at ibl.org>, SFL <sfl at ibl.org>, SFP <sfp at ibl.org>

Hello,

Thanks for bringing this up David.  I'd be in favor of anything that offers
more control over our picks.  What's the point of playing in a dynasty
league and having your roster determined by list lottery?

With only a 60-game season on the docket (did the post-season ballot ever
come out?), we should e-mail draft or tier draft until the first two rounds
are complete with a later start date to the season if needed.

Maybe this was discussed before I joined IBL, but what are the down sides
to a 4-day pick timer? Most leagues look forward to draft season / draft
day but list lottery feels like the equivalent of having your roster
auto-drafted to me.

Mike

On Tuesday, January 19, 2021, 08:45:32 AM MST, D <genny429 at gmail.com>
wrote:

Thanks Brent, really glad the idea may have some value and may spark some
discussion of alternatives.  On the pick-by-pick, good by me to extend the
phase, but as between extending the non-binding pick-by-pick phase on one
hand, and tiering more rounds on the other, I think I'd lean toward tiering
more rounds.  I don't know how many more single picks would result from
extending the voluntary pick-by-pick phase by a week, for example.  But an
added week of draft time is three days of list picking (M, W, F), and that
would allow splitting three more rounds in half.  Or, if 8-pick tier rounds
are preferred, 4 more pick days would allow for two more 8-pick tiered
rounds.  Etc.  Every round that is split gives all owners (at least those
that do not have multiple picks in any given round) more time between picks
rather than a list due every 48 weekday hours, may lead to more trade talk,
and shortens lists for half the league.

If the list draft was started February 1 (which would not, in most years,
lop much time off of the pick-by-pick portion given the first Friday in
February falls from Feb 1 to Feb  7), and assuming we'd start with the pick
9-12 tier, we could do a 4-pick tier in round 1; 8-pick tier in round 2;
split rounds 3, 4, and 5 in half; and finish the draft on March 12.  I'd
think that would be a pretty good trial run to figure out if a change would
be good, bad, or in need of modification.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 6:07 AM Brent Cunningham <
gettysburg.generals at gmail.com> wrote:

I really like this plan, as it allows for some additional planning an
opportunities for trading.  However, given that we don't actually start the
season until late March or April, I've also always liked the thought of
extending the pick-by-pick portion of the draft to later than the first
Friday in February.  IMHO, it kind of sucks that I might have to make a
list and not have time to think on my 1st round pick this year.

Thanks,

Brent Cunningham
Owner/Manager
Gettysburg Generals Baseball Club

On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 8:34 PM D <genny429 at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all -

Hope everyone is well.  In this MLB/IBL lull, I thought I'd spitball an
alternate draft schedule scenario.  The aim would be to amplify the first
two rounds of the draft, increase the practical possibility of trades, and,
for at least one round, eliminate the need for a draft list up to 24
players long.

I like the draft.  Although I understand and support the principle that
owners should not be rushed in the pick-by-pick phase, I also wish that the
first two rounds were more dynamic than they are.  If we had tiers, I think
the bite-sized chunks would foster more trades.  At minimum, owners would
generally have a little more time, and a little more information, before
making important trade assessments and important picks in the first two
rounds.

In addition, when I have picks later in rounds, I don't enjoy the time and
effort of generating lists/rankings of up to 24 players at a time.  It can
be a chore.  I like shorter lists, even if for only one or two rounds.  In
a tiered round, almost every owner's list gets shorter, and some much
shorter.

The calendar does not allow tiering every round.  But maybe we could tier
the first two rounds.  One possibility is to use 4-pick tiers in round 1,
and 8-pick tiers in round 2, and we'd start the list drafting within
whatever tier the pick-by-pick phase ends in.

So, using the current draft as an example, we are at pick 1-9.  Let's say
it stays at 1-9 through the end of the pick-by-pick phase.  This year's
draft calendar, assuming the pick-by-pick phase stops on the first Friday
in February (Feb 5), would then look like this:

*Date*

*What is due*

*What is next*

February 8

Lists for picks 9-12

List for picks 13-16

February 10

List for picks 13-16

List for picks 17-20

February 12

List for picks 17-20

List for picks 21-24

February 15

List for picks 21-24

List for picks 2-1 to 2-8

February 17

List for picks 2-1 to 2-8

List for picks 2-9 to 2-16

February 19

List for picks 2-9 to 2-16

List for picks 2-17 to 2-24

February 22

List for picks 2-17 to 2-24

List for Round 3

February 24

List for Round 3

List for Round 4

February 26

List for Round 4

List for Round 5

March 1

List for Round 5

List for Round 6

March 3

List for Round 6

List for Round 7

March 5

List for Round 7

List for Round 8

March 8

List for Round 8

List for Round 9

March 10

List for Round 9

List for Remaining Rounds

March 12

List for Remaining Rounds

Draft Ends

A couple other notes:

   - Although the draft is lengthened, owners get added breathers on the
   front end, getting to sit out any tiers in which they have no pick.

   - If we moved the start of the list draft up to February 1, we'd shave
   time off the back end and finish earlier in March.  This year, for example,
   starting Feb 1 would result in picks on Feb 1, 3, and 5, and the draft
   would be over on March 5 rather than March 12.

   - In years that the pick-by-pick phase advanced far enough (by getting
   through or almost through all of round 1 for example), we'd have a shorter
   draft, or we'd have time in the calendar to extend tiered drafting into
   round 3.  If we got mostly through round 1 in the pick-by-pick phase, we
   could fit a 8-pick or 12-pick tiers in for Round 3 in the same timeline as
   above.

I didn't spend a ton of time wordsmithing the above thoughts, but you get
the idea. The notions may be impractical, unwise, and/or unpopular, but
it's hot stove time, and I figured might as well float them and see if
anyone had thoughts.  If we can make for a more dynamic draft with shorter
lists, I'd view those as material gains. Whether any such gains outweigh
the disadvantages, I don't know.

Thanks much all.

- David (oxy)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibl.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20210201/4be421ad/attachment.htm>