5/6 Draft rounds???

**Stumps** · January 16th, 2005, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
But at the same time I was wanting attention to be realised to the affect it coudl have on some peopel. And if it gets PUSHED through as it appears it will - due to the desires for "something different".

If it is "pushed" through, it will be because a majority desires it.

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
The thought that those that have the highest chance for being affected, might ought to be compensated.

I still haven't heard it explained how you think this change would be to your detriment. Why is it more likely that your picks would go down the order rather than up?

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
you see, it has desolved from a claim to reduce tankers, to open satement that it is change only for chaneg sake, and that no one cares that it will robn a more deserving team eventualy. So you are talking about making a vote only for selfish resaons.

How do you judge which team is most deserving? Is an owner who took over a 2-58 pile of crap and struggles to 10-50 with no talent less deserving than a guy with 30-win talent who tanks to get a good rookie?

And selfish reasons? Gee, I wonder what objecting on the grounds that you somehow think it might impact on the future value of your own picks is. After all, with those picks, you can't use your "deserving" argument, because the bad teams don't even have the picks anymore -- you've got them.

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
Some people such as myself have traded for future draft picks. We have more at stake then you do. We have the possibility of those draft picks changing value AFTER we already made our trades.

Guess what? When you trade for a future draft pick, its value changes every day, lottery or no lottery. Perhaps the team you traded with should "compensate" you if they win too many games?

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
So your vote for a Lottrery has a chance to alter the value of a trade I made previous to this "much needed change". Compensation starts to look like a good idea.

No it doesn't, because you haven't demonstrated any loss whatsoever.

Gee, I'm glad you're not a lawyer. You want pre-emptive compensation in advance for something which has an equal chance of helping you as it does of hindering you? Good luck.

**eo2seabee** · January 17th, 2005, 12:01 AM

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
The only reason anyone would wnat Lottery is because they would like a shot at a better pick and are willing to take the chance at recieving a worse pick for that chance.

It isn't going to disuade Tankers. If anything it will create more last minute tankers... (if you slip to 21st you now have a 1-500 chance of receiveing the first pick. so throwing a few games at the end of the seaosn could land you a better pick - while you help determine the play-off scenario...

No Thanks.

There is no evidence that a lottery would reduce Tankers. So don't even try to sell me on that one. I have a sound reason for not wanting a Lottery - first a talent poor team WILL eventualy get robbed of it's pick, that can't be argued.

And my personnel reason - why would I wnat an extra factor added to deals that I have already made? I see no one lining up saying - Yeah I think it's a great idea to throw all the top talent into a lottery every season. Why is that? because no one wantrs to put the fate of their team into that kind of test of luck.

If Tankers are an Issue - deal directly with Tankers. Don't change something that is concrete into a variable thinking that will have any effect on Tankers. Especially after we have alreday began dealing and trading with each other.

Ok lets put this in perspective Without an Nba lottery the clippers would have had the top pick in the draft about 8 times over a 12 year time frame You think thewre owner finally got the message Hey if i dont do something about this My team is gonna stink forever. No the lotery didnt prevent Donald sterling from being cheap and trying to get the number pick but he got the numbe r1 pick what once?
For the most part it is gonna prevent tankers Yes there might be a team or 2 that takes there chances but why would you want to?

SO if you had next year 10th and 12 pick in the draft with no lottery that would be fine but under a scenario with a draft lottery you end up with the 3rd and 4th that isnt exceptable?
The lottery wont prevent teams from tanking for 1 season what it should do is prevent teams from tanking 2-3 seasons in a row.

**eo2seabee** · January 17th, 2005, 12:01 AM

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
The only reason anyone would wnat Lottery is because they would like a shot at a better pick and are willing to take the chance at recieving a worse pick for that chance.

It isn't going to disuade Tankers. If anything it will create more last minute tankers... (if you slip to 21st you now have a 1-500 chance of receiveing the first pick. so throwing a few games at the end of the seaosn could land you a better pick - while you help determine the play-off scenario...

No Thanks.

There is no evidence that a lottery would reduce Tankers. So don't even try to sell me on that one. I have a sound reason for not wanting a Lottery - first a talent poor team WILL eventualy get robbed of it's pick, that can't be argued.

And my personnel reason - why would I wnat an extra factor added to deals that I have already made? I see no one lining up saying - Yeah I think it's a great idea to throw all the top talent into a lottery every season. Why is that? because no one wantrs to put the fate of their team into that kind of test of luck.

If Tankers are an Issue - deal directly with Tankers. Don't change something that is concrete into a variable thinking that will have any effect on Tankers. Especially after we have alreday began dealing and trading with each other.

Ok lets put this in perspective Without an Nba lottery the clippers would have had the top pick in the draft about 8 times over a 12 year time frame You think thewre owner finally got the message Hey if i dont do something about this My team is gonna stink forever. No the lotery didnt prevent Donald sterling from being cheap and trying to get the number pick but he got the numbe r1 pick what once?
For the most part it is gonna prevent tankers Yes there might be a team or 2 that takes there chances but why would you want to?

SO if you had next year 10th and 12 pick in the draft with no lottery that would be fine but under a scenario with a draft lottery you end up with the 3rd and 4th that isnt exceptable?
The lottery wont prevent teams from tanking for 1 season what it should do is prevent teams from tanking 2-3 seasons in a row.

**eo2seabee** · January 17th, 2005, 02:46 AM

Originally posted by netteb16:
I vote Yes for a draft lottery, and also Yes for the additional rounds in the draft....

Perhaps it is my old school thinking, but I like it when players go to the place they were drafted.........not to where they simply received the most money to go play.......it just puts me in that feel-good mood.......

although....this is just a computer program.... [img]smile.gif[/img]

six should be a lottery

**eo2seabee** · January 17th, 2005, 03:11 AM

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
About the draft going more then 4 rounds - TIME, and it should have been discussed pre trades....

As for the Draft lottery - changing things just for the sake of change really isn't a great idea, but novelty will often sway many people.

I haven't yet heard a decent reason behind Lottery for the Draft. All it does is make it so eventualy a deserving team will get ripped off.

Please don't try to say it will reduce Tanking - we have discussed that in circles, and it won't adjust a thing. If that is the intent of it, other then just adding "Something Different" to the league then Tanking can be addressed in a fashion like I posted in a different thread.

Tell me, is the small hope for being able to steal a better draft pick from a deserving team, the primary reason? If so, Of course the majority will like the idea. People like rolling the dice if it gives THEM a better chance at something they would benefit from.

How would you feel if you were the 18th team and you took the first round draft pick from the team that couldn't win 5 games? Wow, that really helped them out. Immagine it happen twice to that poor team. If there is such a demand to add more random element to the league, as I said before lets lottery off the top players from every team every new season.

[ January 15, 2005 02:27 AM: Message edited by: GrendelKhan ]

The chances of the 18 team getting the top pick would be slim to non but albeit he still has a chance. The best chance at the top pick would still be the the team with the worst record.

**eo2seabee** · January 17th, 2005, 03:25 AM

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:
in spirit it is a joke. and was mewnt to raise eyebrows.

But at the same time I was wanting attention to be realised to the affect it coudl have on some peopel. And if it gets PUSHED through as it appears it will - due to the desires for "something different". The thought that those that have the highest chance for being affected, might ought to be compensated.

you see, it has desolved from a claim to reduce tankers, to open satement that it is change only for chaneg sake, and that no one cares that it will robn a more deserving team eventualy. So you are talking about making a vote only for selfish resaons.

Some people such as myself have traded for future draft picks. We have more at stake then you do. We have the possibility of those draft picks changing value AFTER we already made our trades. So your vote for a Lottrery has a chance to alter the value of a trade I made previous to this "much needed change". Compensation starts to look like a good idea.

-- Why don't we make this vote in 4 seasons? I wil no longer have future picks at stake then, and I wouldn't fear losing any value for my trades.

There is nothing at stake Unless you planned on each draft pick you acquired being the number 1 pick and we have no way of knowing. Even without a lottery you have no way of knowing.

Example the cowboys made a trade with Buffalo during last season draft for buffalos first round draft pick this season. every darn cowboy fan was sure buffalo was gonna have a top 5 pick buffalo will pick in buffalos spot at either 18 or 19 so you have no way of knowing where that pick is gonna fall the only thing you are mad about is you might get the number 1 pick and draft 3rd or fourth.

**diluted** · January 17th, 2005, 05:18 AM

[quote]Originally posted by douglass:

you have no way of knowing where that pick is gonna fall the only thing you are mad about is you might get the number 1 pick and draft 3rd or fourth.

and that is enough concern to vote against it, i feel it is very unfair to make changes after people have already made trades that will be affected,

why shouldnt GK be compensated? He made trades based on rules and now you guys want to change those rules, how is that fair on him?

**Livermore Leapers** · January 17th, 2005, 05:28 AM

Everyone had agreed to the rules in advance, shouldnt be changing them in the middle of pick trading ect...

**hornetjohn** · January 17th, 2005, 06:00 AM

Everyone agreed on the rules in advance???? a little ridiculous - Someone please explain to me why an extra round or two (or a lottery - for that matter) in the future can possibly affect picks traded in the future.

No one has any real teams yet - you don't know where you will finish - we don't even have any favorites. So you don't know where those picks will be

You are afraid of a vote, because you know that most people would want to try it. It sounds interesting and makes the game that way too.

**diluted** · January 17th, 2005, 07:40 AM

Originally posted by hornetjohn:
Everyone agreed on the rules in advance???? a little ridiculous - Someone please explain to me why an extra round or two (or a lottery - for that matter) in the future can possibly affect picks traded in the future.

well seeing as how that is actually the case its not rediculous

Thread: 5/6 Draft rounds???

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions