Future Draft Games

[Blazers-1977]

Had the same thing with the random teams draft, wasn't a big problem so long as you can keep fairly close tabs.

How much fairly close tabs , like I can check like 3-4 times a day but might be harder more than that . Would you say that would be enough


Sorry if I am asking too many questions

Hopefully no longer than 2 or 3 hours?

Oh, I think a one MVP limit is a must. Keeps someone from stumbling into an unbeatable team and adds to the strategy.

ok I will start the draft(But i will have a list of 10 seasons from 1976 to keep it random throughout the draft)

[Fadeaway_J]

Beat The Champs Draft - you pick players from teams that lost to the NBA champions in the playoffs. So if the time period is 90s to now for example, the only version of MJ you can pick is '90 (when he lost to the Pistons). Would probably need to be tighter than that to make the research less onerous.

That is interesting but yeah would take some digging.

Maybe just limit it to the dynasties of modern times - the Showtime Lakers, MJ's Bulls, the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, the Steph-era Warriors. Only teams that won at least three titles over four seasons.

[Laimbeer]

Beat The Champs Draft - you pick players from teams that lost to the NBA champions in the playoffs. So if the time period is 90s to now for example, the only version of MJ you can pick is '90 (when he lost to the Pistons). Would probably need to be tighter than that to make the research less onerous.

That is interesting but yeah would take some digging.

Maybe just limit it to the dynasties of modern times - the Showtime Lakers, MJ's Bulls, the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, the Steph-era Warriors. Only teams that won at least three titles over four seasons.

And it's limited to seasons they lost to the champs? I like it.

[Fadeaway_J]

That is interesting but yeah would take some digging.

Maybe just limit it to the dynasties of modern times - the Showtime Lakers, MJ's Bulls, the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, the Steph-era Warriors. Only teams that won at least three titles over four seasons.

And it's limited to seasons they lost to the champs? I like it.

On the downside, I'm not sure if there's enough talent to go around from only 15 seasons, especially since quite a few players would be duplicated.

Might just go with the original concept and keep it 90s to now.

[8on]

Random Divisions, 90s to now. Unless we get the Southeast five times, it should be fine.

[euroleague]

Pairs draft, one all-nba 1st per pair. Each pair must come from one decade - 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s.

With a twist: The draft times will be set (eg. 1st person picks between 9-10, 2nd between 10-11, etc.). The draft for each decade will happen simultaneously - and each person will pick for each decade in a set time. The draft will be semi-scrambled (pick 1st in 60s, 16th in 10s, 7th in 90s, 8th in 00s). The draft would end in one day, ideally with 12 or so people.

[Laimbeer]

Pairs draft, one all-nba 1st per pair. Each pair must come from one decade - 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s.

With a twist: The draft times will be set (eg. 1st person picks between 9-10, 2nd between 10-11, etc.). The draft for each decade will happen simultaneously - and each person will pick for each decade in a set time. The draft will be semi-scrambled (pick 1st in 60s, 16th in 10s, 7th in 90s, 8th in 00s). The draft would end in one day, ideally with 12 or so people.

This is interesting. There might be some gamesmanship in waiting until the last minute to pick so you can see who's picked in another decade during the same round. It might be tough to get enough people to commit, though.

[Laimbeer]

Random Divisions, 90s to now. Unless we get the Southeast five times, it should be fine.

Limit each division to two times, maybe?

[8on]

Random Divisions, 90s to now. Unless we get the Southeast five times, it should be fine.

Limit each division to two times, maybe?

OK

[8on]

How about Random Ten Years, but 90s to now so we don't get stuck in the 70s over and over again?

[Fadeaway_J]

I don't even want to see the word "random" for another couple of months at least.

[wackbone]

Time period is up for debate, but what about a game where instead of a maximum FGA or ppg, we have a MINIMUM apg or rpg? No FGA limit (or a higher FGA than normal as to not affect the theme of the game, but deter absolutely monstrous teams from forming. Possibly 100 FGA maximum?) Could drastically alter the pool.

[Laimbeer]

Pairs draft, one all-nba 1st per pair. Each pair must come from one decade - 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s.

With a twist: The draft times will be set (eg. 1st person picks between 9-10, 2nd between 10-11, etc.). The draft for each decade will happen simultaneously - and each person will pick for each decade in a set time. The draft will be semi-scrambled (pick 1st in 60s, 16th in 10s, 7th in 90s, 8th in 00s). The draft would end in one day, ideally with 12 or so people.

I like this idea. If you made it two hour windows per pick, how would that be any more difficult to follow? In fact, it would be easier since you would know when your window is coming.

[euroleague]

Pairs draft, one all-nba 1st per pair. Each pair must come from one decade - 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s.

With a twist: The draft times will be set (eg. 1st person picks between 9-10, 2nd between 10-11, etc.). The draft for each decade will happen simultaneously - and each person will pick for each decade in a set time. The draft will be semi-scrambled (pick 1st in 60s, 16th in 10s, 7th in 90s, 8th in 00s). The draft would end in one day, ideally with 12 or so people.

I like this idea. If you made it two hour windows per pick, how would that be any more difficult to follow? In fact, it would be easier since you would know when your window is coming.

That draft would take longer than normal though. It would be too easy to know, and you’d have 2 hours to make every pick.

I initially was thinking 30 minute windows because it should still be easy to pick, but sometimes that window won’t be at a good time

[Laimbeer]

Any interest in a sealed bid kind of thing? Maybe take all the players for 2019 and divide them into groups. Each day a group is put out and coaches can submit a sealed bid on as many or as few as they like. The results of the bidding are posted after 24 hours and the next batch published for bid - think I played one here and one the Knicks board.

We could divide the players into however many days we wanted it to last. Could be eight, whatever.

[Laimbeer]

Pairs draft, one all-nba 1st per pair. Each pair must come from one decade - 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s.

With a twist: The draft times will be set (eg. 1st person picks between 9-10, 2nd between 10-11, etc.). The draft for each decade will happen simultaneously - and each person will pick for each decade in a set time. The draft will be semi-scrambled (pick 1st in 60s, 16th in 10s, 7th in 90s, 8th in 00s). The draft would end in one day, ideally with 12 or so people.

I like this idea. If you made it two hour windows per pick, how would that be any more difficult to follow? In fact, it would be easier since you would know when your window is coming.

That draft would take longer than normal though. It would be too easy to know, and you’d have 2 hours to make every pick.

I initially was thinking 30 minute windows because it should still be easy to pick, but sometimes that window won’t be at a good time

We could send our picks to the commish.

[euroleague]

I like this idea. If you made it two hour windows per pick, how would that be any more difficult to follow? In fact, it would be easier since you would know when your window is coming.

That draft would take longer than normal though. It would be too easy to know, and you’d have 2 hours to make every pick.

I initially was thinking 30 minute windows because it should still be easy to pick, but sometimes that window won’t be at a good time

We could send our picks to the commish.

Yes, that was my thinking - but I’m not in the USA time zone. Would have to be a different commissioner

Ah, sorry I forgot - 2 hour picks is a good idea. Was a while since I posted, and forgot about the simultaneous aspect

[wackbone]

Time period is up for debate, but what about a game where instead of a maximum FGA or ppg, we have a MINIMUM apg or rpg? No FGA limit (or a higher FGA than normal as to not affect the theme of the game, but deter absolutely monstrous teams from forming. Possibly 100 FGA maximum?) Could drastically alter the pool.

Never did get feedback on this. I have a lot of free time coming up and come run some variation of this. Thoughts?

[Laimbeer]

Time period is up for debate, but what about a game where instead of a maximum FGA or ppg, we have a MINIMUM apg or rpg? No FGA limit (or a higher FGA than normal as to not affect the theme of the game, but deter absolutely monstrous teams from forming. Possibly 100 FGA maximum?) Could drastically alter the pool.

Never did get feedback on this. I have a lot of free time coming up and come run some variation of this. Thoughts?

Not sure what you're getting at - that we normally neglect these and will be compelled to have a normal amount or we're going to make them unusually high to add to the challenge?

[wackbone]

Time period is up for debate, but what about a game where instead of a maximum FGA or ppg, we have a MINIMUM apg or rpg? No FGA limit (or a higher FGA than normal as to not affect the theme of the game, but deter absolutely monstrous teams from forming. Possibly 100 FGA maximum?) Could drastically alter the pool.

Never did get feedback on this. I have a lot of free time coming up and come run some variation of this. Thoughts?

Not sure what you're getting at - that we normally neglect these and will be compelled to have a normal amount or we're going to make them unusually high to add to the challenge?

Using either APG or RPG as our means of building the team, as opposed to the typical FGA. And with this game, we have to achieve a minimum APG or RPG, as opposed to the typical maximum FGA. Say the APG minimum was 50 APG, so the value of guys with high APG would go up, whereas players, while dominant, with low APG, would be less welcomed.

The more I think it through, the more I think RPG would be the way to go. Typically the guys with the highest RPG are big men, who typically aren't none for their range. I think it could be an interesting change of pace to try.

And we could set a maximum FGA to ensure no absolutely crazy, crazy teams. But something way higher than normal so that it won't be a factor in most cases (The focus of the game should/would be on the RPG, not on the FGA.