Draft Date

We had no off-season vote on this so atleast for this season, yes, they should be capped at 20. Someone can bring it up next year if theyd like to expand them to 25 or whatever number.

i wasn't sure about this either.. i'd be all for going 25 next year

jake wrote:

i wasn't sure about this either.. i'd be all for going 25 next year

First, let me say I love the bidding system (in fact, I helped my other dynasty institute a modified version). BUT since there are no restrictions on who may be bid on & our MiLB rosters are already huge, I feel increasing our MiLB roster size only serves to devalue the MiLB draft. While there a few gems out there to be drafted, the pool isn't exactly deep.

I agree. Bidding system right now can get you better players practically.

well i was more concerned with having to cut milb players.. as it looks for me now, i probably won't make a a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft (and maybe not the 2nd round either) .. if the bidding system is the problem, why don't we get rid of that instead? or put more restrictions?

jake wrote:

well i was more concerned with having to cut milb players.. as it looks for me now, i probably won't make a a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft (and maybe not the 2nd round either) .. if the bidding system is the problem, why don't we get rid of that instead? or put more restrictions?

I think the huge MiLB rosters are a drain on talent. I do love the bidding system, but I prefer some restrictions. As I mentioned earlier, I helped establish a modified bidding system for my other dynasty league, the modifications being focused on keeping the MiLB drafts valuable & viable. Some of the restrictions were no unsigned North American or International Players, we only run the bidding system from May through August, & we only bid during a 3 day window each week. We felt that those restrictions, plus capping our MiLB rosters at 15 players, would keep future MiLB drafts relevant.

I agree with HLZ here. Our bidding system is a strength of this league, and with the new limitations on who can be bid on during the season (no college, foreign, unsigned, etc) the draft provides the lagging teams a real chance to get the elite guys that become eligible. The milb draft next year should have significantly more talent. I also wouldn't add more roster slots for the same reason, and think an argument could be made to actually reduce the minors roster size (15 - 17) to allow those same teams more opportunity.

Well we already have restrictions for the college, IFA, HS players here now. I think it was the first year, that everyone was free game, and then we changed it to the current system.

This is just a bad draft because a lot of the top tier talent is already gone, because of bidding in the first year, and also the draft that year. Next year's draft pool should be deeper because top level talent will be available.

The King Maker wrote:

Well we already have restrictions for the college, IFA, HS players here now. I think it was the first year, that everyone was free game, and then we changed it to the current system.

This is just a bad draft because a lot of the top tier talent is already gone, because of bidding in the first year, and also the draft that year. Next year's draft pool should be deeper because top level talent will be available.

Sounds good. I for one think those restrictions plus a reasonable MiLB roster size cap will keep future miLB drafts viable. We'll just have to decide on what a reasonable roster size cap is exactly!

I think 20 is a great number, no need to go up or down. Like some ppl have already said.. With the restrictions now in place (no IFA, Amateurs, or unsigned Japanese players) our future drafts should be very deep. I mean a typical draft has 50 or so very solid prospects being very great talents next year. All of the top high school and college draftees will be available next year. Our system isn't broke so why try to fix it.. I feel our full plan for it is just now starting to take off!

The King Maker wrote:

Also btw, no one answered from the last time. To my knowledge, the Players Taken Thread is uptodate. But people mentioned that it wasn't before, so if there is someone that isn't on there, please let us know soon.

This is only a nitpick, but M.Ynoa is listed as Inoa in the owned players. Could confuse someone...

ThunderBalls wrote:

The King Maker wrote:

Also btw, no one answered from the last time. To my knowledge, the Players Taken Thread is uptodate. But people mentioned that it wasn't before, so if there is someone that isn't on there, please let us know soon.

This is only a nitpick, but M.Ynoa is listed as Inoa in the owned players. Could confuse someone...

Thanks, I added him. I didn't take out Inoa, so now either way, it can be seen that he's owned.

I added Knuckleball as a Moderator here because he said he'd help out with the draft with me not being here this week. He should have the ability to update the picks and edit the posts.