*** VD 4 Commentary Thread ***

[hacko]

I'm not sure who's idea this was ... Feral?

I think it was a combination of discussions - The question now is how many year 2 ,3 ,4,5 and Jc had any 2 years why another suggestion is link years only. As stated earlier I am game with any of these.

PS - another idea might be don't use their career stat but just a 5 year peak stat.

[johnnya24]

It would be good if we could discuss this to see the problems before we start ... getting 3 rounds in, then having to move the goalposts isn't optimal.

Loopholes & Issues with a Peak Period Draft

Consecutive Years ... B-R.com can only give us consecutive years, and we will need a AB & G/IP minimum for each of those years in order to get a fair average of the peak years. Players who had an injury year during their peak would lose a little value ... and if they failed to meet the minimum, you may find that some players cannot qualify, or cannot provide a quality peak line ... which of course probably means they didn't have a quality peak. The single season freaks lose value. The like of Koufax and Pedro jump in value.

162 average ... B-R.com provides both the actual average and the 162 average when you highlight a period. I don't think we can use the 162 average, because there would be too many weird loophole Ross Barnes type players.

Peak Period Average ... this makes more sense as it will reflect the actual stats, which means there was an actual peak, and not a potential peak.

or

Peak Period Aggregate ... if we do peak period aggregate rather than an average, then it would seem better to make it 3 years rather than 5 years. That would prevent a duplication of the categories, especially for the mid-round players with lower career stats ... it would also reduce the number of players who cannot put up a quality Peak Period Line due to injury etc. Maybe 4 years? I don't know why odd numbers seem to look better.

Posting Format ... it's a fairly slow movinge draft, so this wouldn't be a big issue. Go to B-R.com, highlight a 5 year period from your chosen player, and copy in the relevant stats from the pop up once you are happy. Note, it's best to reload the page if you want to try an new selection.

Hitting: AB Hits ... HR RBI R SB AVG (those would be the minimum)
Pitching: IP H ER BB ... SO W G SV ERA WHIP

I would input this as a year on the current SS, with the last two digits of the start and end years as the code: 1898-1902 = 9802 / 1947-1951 = 4751

This would be updated on the Scoring Sheet every round or so ... and then more often later in the draft.

We would designate 2 or 3 people to volunteer to double check stats posted by the previous few drafters as we go along to share out the workload.

[revo]

uh, I'm for best year.

[johnnya24]

uh, I'm for best year.

Rather than a peak period draft

... or the BY only side-draft?

[The Feral Slasher]

Scoring

Do you want to try the slightly alternative multi-scoring mechanism I suggested in the other thread?

Instead of 1-10 (based on a 10 person draft) for the category scores we use the following:

1st = 9
2nd = 8.5
3rd = 8
4th = 7
5th = 6
6th = 5
7th = 4
8th = 3
9th = 2.5
10th = 2

Basically add a little value to the bottom two scores, and deduct it from the top 2. This should open up a few more strategy options, but without rewarding the extreme punting strategies of additive drafting (i.e. 4+ category punts). I haven't ran numbers on this, but it should provide a bit more strategy flexibility from a standard multi-scoring draft.

I will write out a questionnaire and ask everyone to fill in their preferences. There is no point posting polls with such a small sample.

I like this idea. I don't have a preference on 3,4, or 5 years, whatever everyone else wants is fine. What about Decades, letters, or the Heye Option (both) ? Are we going to start this year or wait until after the holidays ?

[revo]

Rather than a peak period draft

... or the BY only side-draft?

rather than a peak period draft.

[Pogues]

I can't say for sure I'd be in the next draft otherwise, but the peak period will certainly have me out.

I've made my suggestion for one of these twice...not gonna go over it again. But a silent auction could be a change of pace without overly-complicating things.

[The Feral Slasher]

I'd do an auction. I'd do a best peak draft. I'd do a 162 average. I'd do your mom. I'd do heroin in a dumpster. I would do anything for love, but I won't do that.

This......except the dumpster part. I really do like the auction suggestion from Pogues.

[johnnya24]

One good thing about doing the first peak period draft is that once the stats are added to the spreadsheet, then it becomes a much easier option for later drafts. I'd estimate that for about 70% of the players, the consecutive peak years are going to be obvious ... so once they are added to the spreadsheet, there will be no more work for future drafts.

In fact, if we got 3 or 4 people to add the "typical" stats to blank spreadsheet, we could get the majority of the stats uploaded before the draft.

------------------------

I inputed 10 players onto a blank spreadsheet ... took me about an hour .. including messing around with things to get the format right. I added as many 3 and 5 year combinations as viable, and also took into account decade and franchise eligible periods. They are all big players, so they take a bit longer to highlight all the peak combinations. I'm guessing about 12-15 per hour is easily doable, maybe more.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/un7xgvo46pn1110/hitter-peak-years.xlsx

To break the back of the hitter pool for a 10 person draft you'd need about 200 hitters ... that is about 20 man hours to update all the hitters. Any volunteers? I'll take on 1/3 of that.

[The Feral Slasher]

One good thing about doing the first peak period draft is that once the stats are added to the spreadsheet, then it becomes a much easier option for later drafts. I'd estimate that for about 70% of the players, the consecutive peak years are going to be obvious ... so once they are added to the spreadsheet, there will be no more work for future drafts.

In fact, if we got 3 or 4 people to add the "typical" stats to blank spreadsheet, we could get the majority of the stats uploaded before the draft.

------------------------

I inputed 10 players onto a blank spreadsheet ... took me about an hour .. including messing around with things to get the format right. I added as many 3 and 5 year combinations as viable, and also took into account decade and franchise eligible periods. They are all big players, so they take a bit longer to highlight all the peak combinations. I'm guessing about 12-15 per hour is easily doable, maybe more.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/un7xgvo46pn1110/hitter-peak-years.xlsx

To break the back of the hitter pool for a 10 person draft you'd need about 200 hitters ... that is about 20 man hours to update all the hitters. Any volunteers? I'll take on 1/3 of that.

I could probably help out some if we go this route. So are we doing a by year in parallel with a peak period and people can play either or ? Or does anyone want to do an auction ?

[johnnya24]

I could probably help out some if we go this route. So are we doing a by year in parallel with a peak period and people can play either or ?

I think it's best we skip the peak period draft for the next one. That will give us time to get most of the stats onto a spreadsheet.

If you want to help, I'll give you a list of players to work through in your own time ... so we don't replicate work. Inputing the data takes a few seconds ... picking out the groupings takes a bit longer. I try to account for periods with:

- the best range of counting stats
- the best ratios
- a usable peak period in a particular Decade (based on simple majority ... e.g. if more years in the peak period are in the 1990's, then the decade will be the 1990's ... 1988-1992 = 1990's | 1987-1991 = 1980's)
- a usable peak period for a particular Franchise (as above only with Franchises)

That way the stats are set up for Letter, Decades and Franchises.

I include 5 year and 3 year peaks ... so we always have a fixed decade. There's not a huge difference between the 3 and 5 year periods, but there's enough of a difference to make switching between them good for variety.

[johnnya24]

Or does anyone want to do an auction ?

I'll do anything. But I do not know the first thing about auctions. Never done one, and don't really know how they work.

If someone else wants to set up an auction draft, I'm down with that.

[The Feral Slasher]

I'll do anything. But I do not know the first thing about auctions. Never done one, and don't really know how they work.
If someone else wants to set up an auction draft, I'm down with that.

Everyone submits one player to be bid on to the auctioneer. The auctioneer posts the names of players up for auction. Then everyone submits bids for each player that is up for acution(and defines constraints, for example, if I win the bid for Mays, then don't bid on Mantle). I think we we need to allow 36-48 hours for bidding on each round. When you submit your bids for the round you also submit your player that will be auctioned in the next round. lather, rinse, repeat. Not sure how practical it would be, but it would be fun to try...

[johnnya24]

Everyone submits one player to be bid on to the auctioneer. The auctioneer posts the names of players up for auction. Then everyone submits bids for each player that is up for acution(and defines constraints, for example, if I win the bid for Mays, then don't bid on Mantle). I think we we need to allow 36-48 hours for bidding on each round. When you submit your bids for the round you also submit your player that will be auctioned in the next round. lather, rinse, repeat. Not sure how practical it would be, but it would be fun to try...

So if I nominate Frank Robinson, and bid $1, and no-one else bids on him, I get him for $1? Or will there be a minimum for each player based on value?

[The Feral Slasher]

So if I nominate Frank Robinson, and bid $1, and no-one else bids on him, I get him for $1? Or will there be a minimum for each player based on value?

I'd assume you would get him for 1$. Basically everyone would want to bid on just about every player (In my opinion) to prevent someone getting a good player for $1. The trick is figuring out how high you want to go on a player you might not really want to prevent the other guys from getting a steal.