*** VD 6 Commentary Thread ***

[Pogues]

For the first time in more than 2 weeks, this morning I woke up without wrist pain. If I can make it two days in the row in the morning, I will probably participate in this draft.

Besides 9 just isn't enough, is it?

[Controller Jacobs]

For the first time in more than 2 weeks, this morning I woke up without wrist pain. If I can make it two days in the row in the morning, I will probably participate in this draft.

Besides 9 just isn't enough, is it?

Master your domain!

[heyelander]

Master your domain!

I couldn't think of an intelligent way to make this joke... kudos.

[johnnya24]

For the first time in more than 2 weeks, this morning I woke up without wrist pain. If I can make it two days in the row in the morning, I will probably participate in this draft.

Besides 9 just isn't enough, is it?

Plus you'll feel a lot healthier if you masturbate less. It's draining.

[johnnya24]

I agree with this. In fact, I'd say add one more regular letter (so you have to use 4/5 quizy), 2 wildcards, then require one more hitting decade and two more pitching decades. Alternately, 3 wildcards and leave quizy as is. Ideally I think we want to use as many decades as possible, because it's more "relevant" than last initial . i.e. It's more interesting outside of Vintage Drafting to know about how Reggie Jackson compared to 1960's hitters than how Dan Uggla changed the history of U hitters.

3 would create a situation were the first to pick also gets to pick last. That would be a huge advantage is a multi-draft. I think it'll have to be 2 WC's. 4 QUIZY's seems excessive in this format, and will add greater weight to these (essentially junk) players.

10 players so far (assuming Pogues keeps his hand out of his pants)
2 WC's (1 pitcher and 1 OF OR 1 OF and 1 UT)
Decades ... this should be easy ... there were a few spare decades last time around.
4 KO's (between rounds 6 and 13 ... added an extra round since we're adding 2 WC's)

Good so far?

[heyelander]

any chance we could revisit the adding 1 to each score or some other method of smoothing out the incredible damage done by getting a 1 in a category?

[johnnya24]

any chance we could revisit the adding 1 to each score or some other method of smoothing out the incredible damage done by getting a 1 in a category?

It was a bit more complicated than that. It involved add value to the lowest scores and deleting it from the highest scores so that the total value remained the same. I'd have to mess with the scoring page to see if I can find a formula to make the adjustment automatically. Could take a while to iron out.

[The Feral Slasher]

3 would create a situation were the first to pick also gets to pick last. That would be a huge advantage is a multi-draft. I think it'll have to be 2 WC's. 4 QUIZY's seems excessive in this format, and will add greater weight to these (essentially junk) players.

10 players so far (assuming Pogues keeps his hand out of his pants)
2 WC's (1 pitcher and 1 OF OR 1 OF and 1 UT)
Decades ... this should be easy ... there were a few spare decades last time around.
4 KO's (between rounds 6 and 13 ... added an extra round since we're adding 2 WC's)

Good so far?

I like it. I'd say one extra pitcher and one more OF/UT, but whatever is fine with me

[Controller Jacobs]

3 would create a situation were the first to pick also gets to pick last. ...

Excellent point - I'd be for two then, and the additional one hitter (OF)/pitcher should work perfectly, each as a LI wildcard.

As far as the +1 point standings, I don't know why it would be complicated, just change it to 2-11 by adding 1 to the rank functions.
e.g. on the CH page, revo's HR rank function in cell H2 goes from
=RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,1)/2-RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,0)/2+5.5
to
=RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,1)/2-RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,0)/2+5.5+1

[johnnya24]

Excellent point - I'd be for two then, and the additional one hitter (OF)/pitcher should work perfectly, each as a LI wildcard.

As far as the +1 point standings, I don't know why it would be complicated, just change it to 2-11 by adding 1 to the rank functions.
e.g. on the CH page, revo's HR rank function in cell H2 goes from
=RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,1)/2-RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,0)/2+5.5
to
=RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,1)/2-RANK(C2,C$2:C$11,0)/2+5.5+1

Cool ... I'll have a play this evening and see it we can implement a simple +1 for last and -1 for first.

I'm trying to remember why I figured that it'd be important to add and subtract value.

[Controller Jacobs]

Cool ... I'll have a play this evening and see it we can implement a simple +1 for last and -1 for first.

I'm trying to remember why I figured that it'd be important to add and subtract value.

There's no need at all to subtract from the top value, in fact I'd say it's counterproductive.

Adding a value for multiplicative scoring has a simple purpose - to keep a 1 from being such a severe penalty.
Currently, in a 10-team draft, getting a last place score (1 pt) means you need two 10s to almost break even: 1*10*10 = 100 = 4*5*5 (average being 5.5*5.5*5.5).
Add 1 to all the scores, and getting a last place score (now 2 pts) means an 11 almost catches you up: 2*11 = 22 = 4 * 5.5 *average being 6.5*6.5)

[johnnya24]

There's no need at all to subtract from the top value, in fact I'd say it's counterproductive.

Adding a value for multiplicative scoring has a simple purpose - to keep a 1 from being such a severe penalty.
Currently, in a 10-team draft, getting a last place score (1 pt) means you need two 10s to almost break even: 1*10*10 = 100 = 4*5*5 (average being 5.5*5.5*5.5).
Add 1 to all the scores, and getting a last place score (now 2 pts) means an 11 almost catches you up: 2*11 = 22 = 4 * 5.5 *average being 6.5*6.5)

Let's do it then.

I ran some numbers on this a while back ... it does make a small difference, but not a massive difference. I'll post some numbers in a bit just so everyone knows what we're going to do.

[Pogues]

I hate multiplicative scoring...that might make it tolerable.

[Pogues]

In it to beat frae

[frae]

In it to beat frae

Aim higher.