*** VD 5 Commentary Thread ***

[The Feral Slasher]

Vintage Draft Jeopardy - entertainers for 100;

You may be the right kind of sinner, to release her inner fantasies

Spoiler!

benitar01

Uuugh !! I didn't phrase that one in a question !!

[johnnya24]

Not sure they really help with that. I think they just give you an additional player with good stats and give you a little extra flexibility at the end (assuming you save one or two of them). You still need to draft all the hard letters and decades. I could be wrong of course, and I don't really care that much what the rules are, I'm happy with whatever we decide...actually the more I think of it they probably do help. This is now probably pointless, but I'm too lazy to erase it.

The point is not to have the flexibility ... the point is self-flagellation ... we need to punish ourselves for choosing such a basic format last time

[johnnya24]

How about we get this ball rolling 1 week from today? Official start next Thursday.

• Looks like we have the setup down to 2 formats (25 man draft or a 23 man draft). If need be we can use a dreaded poll.

• I'll post some hitter and pitcher sheets . A lot of the decade years are missing from the SS ... I suppose a lot aren't necessary, but some are. I will need to fix this first. That way you can mess around with the available players

• Then I'll get the official spreadsheet out hopefully before we start (depends on my work schedule over the weekend).

[Pogues]

Maybe we should dump the 1870's as a stand alone decade for this draft? Or don't combine the 1940's and 50's and leave a little bit of leeway there?

That way it will be either/or 1870 and 1940's

Or maybe even 1 from 3 (1870's, 1940's and 2010's)

I'd rather meld the 1870s into the 1880s. It's a short decade and not a ton of good players from solely the 1870s. Might as well blend in the two short decades in baseball history with other decades.

I assume the years in the pitcher area are just a scenario, and you aren't suggesting we have to take two pitchers from 1890, 1920 to 1950...though it's probably most likely we will.

[TS Garp]

Coming late into this, so maybe it's been suggested, but what about splitting some of the better decades into 5 year periods instead?

[johnnya24]

Coming late into this, so maybe it's been suggested, but what about splitting some of the better decades into 5 year periods instead?

That would create some spreadsheet headaches. It's set up right now for regular decades.

[TS Garp]

That would create some spreadsheet headaches. It's set up right now for regular decades.

Gotcha. I will roll with whatever. By the way, the snapshot feature in the last sheet was terrific.

[johnnya24]

I'd rather meld the 1870s into the 1880s. It's a short decade and not a ton of good players from solely the 1870s. Might as well blend in the two short decades in baseball history with other decades.

I assume the years in the pitcher area are just a scenario, and you aren't suggesting we have to take two pitchers from 1890, 1920 to 1950...though it's probably most likely we will.

The example above is how it will typically play out for most drafters.

There are no rules for which specific decades people have to pick. You can pick and 1870's, a 1940's and a 2010 hitter if you want ... but will be leaving 2 better decades on the floor.

23 letters (3 x QUIZY)
13 Hitters
10 Pitchers

Hitting: 13 from 15 decades
Pitching: 10 from 14 decades (with 1870/80 & 2000/10 considered as 1 decade)

No WC's or double letters.
4 instead of 5 OF's

Having the 1870's as a stand alone hitting decade (already combined for pitching) will probably make no difference, because I doubt a single player will be voluntarily drafted from there. But it may give the tiniest bit of flexibility at the end if someone has boxed themselves into a corner and can't make a pick. Better to pick a 1870's non-entity than take a 15 point penalty. I don't think combining them makes any effective difference, but it will create a SS problem (it's not configured for 1870/80 as a combo hitting decade).

The problem with the pitching is that if we have a 2 from 6 scenario, we are essentially creating 2 pretty decent combo decades out of 6 weak decades. Combining the 2000-2010 decades prevents people from just dumping a 2010 closer into one of their weak slots, that is why I did that. That leaves 2 from 5, as opposed to 3 from 5 in a regular decades draft. With the added difficulty of the letter/decade combo, that is probably going to be pretty close in terms of value.

Hope that makes sense

[johnnya24]

Gotcha. I will roll with whatever. By the way, the snapshot feature in the last sheet was terrific.

Thanks. I'm trying to think of a way of improving that. My own sheet always had the info on one page, so I could fly through all the scores and teams quickly. I found that it really helped ... glad someone could make use of it.

[heyelander]

That would create some spreadsheet headaches. It's set up right now for regular decades.

pussy

[johnnya24]

What's this:

Spoiler!

Eldiablo in the Drinking & Driving Thread ... badabum tsch

[revo]

how about 14 hitters & 11 pitchers? 23 seems way too light.

[johnnya24]

how about 14 hitters & 11 pitchers? 23 seems way too light.

It's actually:

13 & 10 (without double letters)
14 & 11 with some double letters (B & M was proposed)

If I don't get consensus, it will have to be a dreaded poll.

When you say too light, do you mean the number of players selected?

This is gonna be Tough . When we have got in about 6/7 rounds, the player pool of draftable players will have collapsed for most people ... even with 10 drafters. In fact the number of drafters doesn't have as big an impact as the letter-decade eliminations.

Example:

If you pick Babe Ruth you immediately lose the following players from your pool:

Ott
Hornsby
Williams K
Frisch, F.
Sisler
Bottomley
Willaims C
Heilman
Waner
Wheat
Lazzeri
Veach, B.
Fournier
O'Doul
Rodriguez, A
Robinson
Raines
Ramirez M
Rice, J.
Ripken
Ryan
Reily J
Rodriguez I
Rose
Richardson
Robinson J
Reese
Rolen
Robinson B
Rosen
Rice S
Radbourne C.
Rivera
Rusie A
Roberts, R
Rodriguez F
Reardon
Reulbach
Righetti
Radatz, D
Richard J
Ruth
... and the 1920's years from a bunch of 1910's & 1930's players
Speaker
Simmons
Cochrane
Klein, C.
Gehringer
Goslin

Then you pick say Buck Ewing for a bit of flexibility:

Hamilton
Duffy
Davis, G.
Kelley
Dahlen
McGraw
Jennings
Brown T
Childs C
Lange
Stenzel
JoyceMcKean
Doyle
Richardson
Lowe B
Wilmot W
Eckersley
Ewing
Evans Dw
Ennis
Evans, D.
Edmonds
Elliot
Erstad
Eichorn
Everitt B
... and the 1890's years from a bunch of 1900 and 1880's players (inc the best years from about 10-15 other players)
Daly
Delahanty
O'Rourke
VanHaltren
Burkett J
Keeler
Cross
Brouthers
Clarke F
Stovey
Hoy D
Connor
Long
Tiernan

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

There are lots of ramifications every round ... but for instance, D has just got hammered, and you have only made 2 picks, and haven't even picked a D:

Duffy
Davis, G.
Dahlen
Doyle
Daly (1890's)
Delahanty (1890's)

[heyelander]

spoiler tags do not work in "Reason for Editing:"

[heyelander]

I honestly wish he would make my picks for me too.