*!* VD 2 Commentary Thread *!*

[johnnya24]

I don't think we can open the draft to any decade for KO's at this point ... I'm totally with LJ on this. If it was debated pre-draft I'd have gone with whatever, but I don't think we can change that now because some people may have been calculating it into their selections. I certainly figured it into my selection of Billy Hamilton. I'm not sure exactly what I was thinking or if there was any sense to it, but it was a relevant factor.

[revo]

We didn't allow KO's for QUIZ or ENVOY letters I believe. Most of the exempt decades for this draft are of similar value to ENVOY, apart from 1870, which is most definitely QUI quality. We can review how it works for later drafts ... but we can't double back on that rule at this stage. It;s sufficient that every knows what's what IMO.

It would be wrong to allow a run of KO to debilitate an already weaker decade. For instance, let's say a couple of drafters had their 1950's hitters (for instance Frank Robinson), they spot an early KO run on 1950's hitters, and all jump on the bandwagon and decimate the decade down to QUIZY levels. Now from a Poguesian perspective, I like it. I'd be totally up for that. But it's something we need to debate pre-draft.

Note: I forget the accurate usage for the term Poguesian. So I just winged that one ...

I disagree.

In addition to there being far more qualifiers than the QUIZY/OVENs, you already have the choice of using a player's worse best year to satisfy the decade requirement. I picked King Kelly, but used a crappy 1870s year rather than his far superior 1880s year. So I've already chosen to basically toss a BY, or 50% of his net worth.

If the better of the 1950s hitters get KO'd, you'd still have plenty to choose from who will have decent career numbers and a decent BY.

[johnnya24]

Isn't this the entire point of including KOs, to add an element of surprise like this? Part of VD strategy is recognizing when a decade/letter falls off a cliff, so KOs just accelerate the speed at which the we approach that cliff, no?

I'm not entirely clear what the rule is at this point...have we changed anything? How did this discussion start?

The rule is, no-one can be KO'd from an exempt decade (listed in the rule 14). Therefore if someone qualifies at an exempt decade, then they cannot be KO'd.

Yeah I totally agree on the KO strategy part ... there are many different strategies, and that' definitely one. But do we want to open weak decades to lose all their value in the space of a few rounds? We prevented it for letters like ENVO, and they similar value to certain weak Decades ... I can't find a rules post to confirm this.

Nothing has changed, I just want to draw peoples attention to that. When I started running numbers on it yesterday, it was clear that there pool for KO's was much smaller than I imagined. So it;s important we all realize this.

[DMT]

This is all that's posted regarding decades exceptions:

Provisionally the following decades are not eligible for KO picks:

Hitting: 1870, 1900, 1910, 1940, 1950 & 2010's
Pitching: 1890, 1920, 1930, 1940 & 1950 & 2010's

So it's unclear whether players that played during those decades are exempt vs. just those decades. I don't think we should exclude players from the KO pool just because they played in those decades. I suppose that's what the discussion is about, but it seems like we'll need a poll because the rule is unclear and we have differing viewpoints on how to interpret the rule.

[johnnya24]

This is all that's posted regarding decades exceptions:



So it's unclear whether players that played during those decades are exempt vs. just those decades. I don't think we should exclude players from the KO pool just because they played in those decades. I suppose that's what the discussion is about, but it seems like we'll need a poll because the rule is unclear and we have differing viewpoints on how to interpret the rule.

Yeah ... it implies that anyone who qualifies for those decades is not KOable. The fact that it isn't clear is the reason I posted about this issue initially.

[DMT]

Yeah ... it implies that anyone who qualifies for those decades is not KOable. The fact that it isn't clear is the reason I posted about this issue initially.

'Implies' is a vague term as well...there is no mention of players, just decades, so I can easily see how one would interpret it literally to mean only those decades, rather than any player who played in those decades (even if for just one year that isn't even in the spreadsheet) when all of their best years were in other decades.

[DMT]

What are we arguing about? The rule seems pretty clear to me. You can't KO players from those decades. Apologies to those who have now picked an 1870s guy and think they can obliterate that pool of players, but c'mon now....the intent of the rule was pretty obvious. We have never used KOs in a manner in which some of you are suggesting. It's always been that a player is knocked out from the draft, period. If the player you want to knock out has played in an ineligible decade he is, therefore, ineligible for KOs. Maybe I'm remembering this incorrectly but we've had multiple KO drafts without this weird twist coming up.

We've never done a KO draft with decades, which are not mutually exclusive like letters.

[DMT]

And if we interpret the rule as broadly as Johnny is suggesting the rule implies, then the pool of KOs is pretty much 70s/80s/90s which is silly.

[johnnya24]

Options (my personal opinion in bold):

1. Leave rules as they are an make it clear that any player who qualifies in an exempt decade is not KOable (was my initial feeling before other opinions started coming in)

2a. Permit any player to be KO'd, but if they have a Best Year in an exempt decade they can still be drafted there. So you can KO Frank Robinson, but his 1950's years will still remain draftable. (perhaps the most appropriate)

2b. KO Player and Decade: when you KO a player you must also designate the decade to be KO'd ... so you could KO Hank Aaron's 1960's decade without effecting his ability to be drafted in the 50's (I like this ... it weakens the KO rule a bit ... but isn't pervasive)

3. Reduce the number of KO's each person has to mitigate the effect. (it needs to be in conjunction with either 1, 2 or 3, so I'm indifferent to this one)

4. Remove the exemption rule, and allow any player from any decade to be KO'd (this is a definite no-no for me ... it radically changes everything ... I don't pick Williams-Hamilton-Pedro with this change)

*reading back to see what other ideas were expressed ... will edit

[johnnya24]

And if we interpret the rule as broadly as Johnny is suggesting the rule implies, then the pool of KOs is pretty much 70s/80s/90s which is silly.

I'm not suggesting that ... I'm saying that is the implication of the rule because it wasn't properly debated or analysed pre-draft. We all just assumed it would be just like Letters, and it isn't.

[DMT]

We obviously can't remove the exemption rule or we'd have to start over. But I like 2 a lot better than 1 if those are our only options.

[DMT]

I'm not suggesting that ... I'm saying that is the implication of the rule because it wasn't properly debated pre-draft.

I said you're suggesting the rule implies this, but I don't think it necessarily does.

[Controller Jacobs]

Not sure of these options were mentioned, but we could change the KO rule for this draft to be (player and year) or (player and decade).

e.g. player and year
I could KO Frank Robinson 1962, any other Frank BY would be fine

e.g. player and decade
In example A, I could KO Frank Robinson 196X, any Frank BY in another decade would be fine

[johnnya24]

I said you're suggesting the rule implies this, but I don't think it necessarily does.

I don't believe I said it necessarily implied that. But you are right, it was vague ... and it could have implied other things to other folk. But strictly speaking, with the vagueness of rule 14, if a player had an eligible year for an exempt decade, it would be impossible to KO him.

[johnnya24]

Not sure of these options were mentioned, but we could change the KO rule for this draft to be (player and year) or (player and decade).

e.g. player and year
I could KO Frank Robinson 1962, any other Frank BY would be fine

e.g. player and decade
In example A, I could KO Frank Robinson 196X, any Frank BY in another decade would be fine

Similar to Feral's suggestion: you can KO a player, but his exempt years are still draftable.

KOing and a player and specific decade is something we can add to the options. It would weaken the power of a KO, but make it's implementation easier, and not radically change anything.