TASTIC wrote:MathiasPW wrote:bwgood77 wrote:
One problem is that if say, the two new teams and one new team from last year perform a draft of 24 players, you would need to consider their draft tier. You currently have the newer teams slated in their original tier. But the two new teams finished fairly well I think (or at least one did) and for example, if say, bigfoot improved his team to get some players from those other teams, he likely wouldn't have finished so low...and of course if a team that finished well last year and has a low draft spot, gets worse because of a re-draft, they are somewhat being penalized now for drafting lower than where their redrafted team would have likely finished.
I understand that, but that's why the draft is optional for last years' new managers.
It's hard to argue that this years' new teams managers are being penalized when it wasn't them who actually played last season. They are getting a blank canvas and a "random" draft spot, so it shouldn't really matter how the previous owner performed.
Agree with keeping them in their draft slots as is.
But they’re choosing to take over a team? Treat it like the real NBA, there are so few openings that (the majority) of GM candidates take the first open job.
I’m really opposed to letting anyone other than first time managers the chance to basically start over. Goes against the whole point of having a dynasty league if they’re just redrafting in their second year? My team for example - 2yr ago I was rolling with All NBA level Isiah Thomas and Boogie, now look where they both are. Also drafted well getting Sexton then dealing he and Griffin for Wall - then what happened to him? Point is, make trades and pick a route of either competing or compiling, don’t just sit on your thumbs for a season. There are enough active and knowledgeable fantasy players in here to improve your team and theirs if need be, but not through a redraft.
Also don’t like the reduction of keepers from 7/8 to 4. Why should a really good team with a core 4-5 be penalised for either nailing a late pick or grabbing 1-2 guys off the scrap heap? That’s what the warriors did with Draymond and the rest of the NBA shouldn’t penalise that, they should try and replicate it. It’s not like a top team is signing KD, they’re just keeping an investment they made during the season.
Sorry to rant but the more new tweaks we make the more difficult this will become in future years to keep consistent. This includes my own suggested tweaks which were mainly included if people got bored with the current format and more and more posters wanted to join.
This is a good, fun and competitive league with active and smart managers for the most part - keep that as the core of the league and let’s not make new rules just because some of the new managers don’t like the squad they inherited. What happens next season if they don’t like their team again and they just go back in the pool? I’ve been in dynasty leagues for 15yr in some cases and have never heard of a current manager just redrafting, that’s not a keeper league that’s a new redraft...
Jokes aside, I get (parts of) your argument. I agree most of our managers actually make very few adjustments to their teams and sit on their thumbs too much. I do not agree so much to the "it's been always done this way" types of arguments, though.
I am trying to find solutions that keep managers motivated and active. A league that has 2 or 3 managers leaving every season is troublesome.
The PARTIAL, KEEPERS ONLY re-draft is just to level the field among new managers, who've had no input in their teams other than saying "I want to play". This is very different from your situation, which is 100% self-inflicted (with a great lot of bad luck included).
Because it seems as a fair idea to be done with the new managers, I thought it could be expanded VOLUNTARILY to less-new managers since they didn't have the chance to do so when they came in, and would participate only this one time. The pool and redraft rule would continue to exist ONLY for new managers for future seasons, if more than one team changes hands, again.
This engages new managers more as they have input on their team build from day 1. It should not affect current managers that much, as you're only moving existing pieces around, much like trades would do, and none of those pieces are in your team.
Anyway, I believe the pool and redraft for new managers is pretty much a consensus. The whole point is if we do want to let bigfoot (and wheezy, if he feels like it) join, as well. This also depends if we are able to find a new manager for our 2nd vacant team. If we don't, sunskerr takes over one, we don't do any pooling, we reduce the league to 15 players, and the extinct team's players are up for grabs under normal draft rules.
