World Baseball Association

WBA Official Business => Constitutional Amendments => Topic started by: Huckleberry on August 03, 2017, 07:33:11 AM

Title: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Huckleberry on August 03, 2017, 07:33:11 AM
Okay guys, I'm going to make a couple of changes unilaterally effective immediately. If anyone has a really good reason for me not to do either of these then let me know, but I can't really see a reason for complaint.

Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: APMP on August 03, 2017, 08:01:51 AM
Do_it.gif
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Huckleberry on August 21, 2017, 10:24:58 AM
More changes coming based on draft pick trades. First of all, I think we need to put something in there about how many drafts in the future you can trade a pick from. We don't want a guy completely selling out the future of his club because he's planning to quit the WBA after two seasons. So I'm going to put in a rule that you can only trade picks up to two drafts away. When the current draft has started in StatsPlus that is when you can start trading two drafts ahead. E.g., when the 2110 draft starts in StatsPlus you can start trading 2112 draft picks. Feel free to complain about this rule below, but I think it's perfectly reasonable. Two years away in the WBA is 5 months in real life, so going past that seems like it's asking for trouble.

Second thing is this part:

Quote
3. Draft picks may be traded between teams in different leagues with the following stipulations:

a. The rights to the given pick are traded, meaning that the team receiving the pick identifies the player to be drafted and then that player is traded immediately after the draft.

b. The trade will initially take place by using $1 cash as the placeholder for the draft pick.

c. Although the commissioner will attempt to keep track of such traded picks on a page on the website, the OOTP Online Utilities do not support trading of draft picks between leagues so the ultimate responsibility for remembering the traded pick lies with the team receiving the pick.

Now that we are moving to StatsPlus all the subsections are unnecessary. I'm going to change that up to talk about posting a traded draft picks spreadsheet.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: CaseyBlakeDeWitt on August 21, 2017, 02:55:38 PM
For my money, I think even that sounds like too far into the future to be able to trade picks. If I’m dealing for a draft pick (or dealing away a draft pick), where people are int he standings is a huge factor to me. For example, the difference between picking first or second in the round verses ninth or tenth can be pretty enormous, especially when dealing early rounders. If we’re dealing picks so far into the future it’s difficult to even know what the value of those selections will be because a team can either completely fall apart or get right into the thick of things within a year if things go well. I would advocate for only being able to trade picks for the current draft, but would settle for at least changing the final part of your rule. Being able to deal 2112 picks during the 2110 draft definitely seems too soon to me.

All that being said, I haven't really been involved in much pick trading, so the voice of those who are trading picks is probably more important.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Txhorns on August 21, 2017, 06:19:31 PM
I have to disagree Casey.  Mostly I disagree because there are players in the league who are worthy of two first round picks for example. 
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: claphamsa on August 21, 2017, 07:13:42 PM
drafts are so deep here standings dont matter.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Echo127 on August 21, 2017, 08:07:31 PM
drafts are so deep here standings dont matter.

I disagree. Maybe standings don't matter after the first round very much, but there tends to be a fairly steep drop after pick 5/6 in the first round.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: CaseyBlakeDeWitt on August 21, 2017, 08:14:51 PM
Yeah, this is my biggest concern.

And while I agree that guys can certainly be worth two first rounders, I'd argue that the value of a 1st rounder 2 years away is significantly lower than the one for the preceding year due to that mystery around where that pick will fall in the order.

I guess it also just doesn't really make sense to me to trade assets that are so far removed from actually existing yet.

I disagree. Maybe standings don't matter after the first round very much, but there tends to be a fairly steep drop after pick 5/6 in the first round.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Coop on August 22, 2017, 08:09:43 AM
I have no strong feelings about exactly how we restrict these trades but I definitely agree that we should have some sort of restriction in place.  Otherwise we're eventually going to have someone join the league, trade his next ten first-round picks so that he can win immediately, then after a season or two he'll quit and leave behind a franchise that is crippled beyond repair.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Claybor on August 22, 2017, 10:04:08 AM
I'd very much prefer not being able to trade picks too far in the future considering the GM turnover rate in some cases.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Huckleberry on August 22, 2017, 11:12:02 AM
Yes, I think the real question at this point seems to be whether we allow two drafts in the future or just one. I don't want to limit it to just one at this point but we will keep an eye on it. Reason being that sometimes there really is a superstar who is worth two #1 or #2 draft picks or some combination thereof and someone may want to trade one of those guys. For example, let's say Mumbai and I switch to rebuilding mode next year. Players like Cheslav Zamorov, Zuleide Rainha, and Ahvana Subbarayudu could possibly fetch multiple early draft picks from future years. That's especially true when you consider the flameout rate of early round pitching selections in the WBA.

Not that I'm bitter about stuff like this (https://statsplus.net/wba/draftteam?filter=1&team=6&startyear=2101&endyear=2109&startrd=1&endrd=2). Seriously, look at this garbage.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Coop on August 22, 2017, 11:42:07 AM
Yeah, I've been kind of shocked by the flameout rate among SP's.  I've been through 6 drafts and have drafted exactly one SP who has developed into a useful ML pitcher (Munsif Esam).

I 'm going to try to find the time to study the issue and find out what the flameout rate is.  I'm guessing it's well over 50 percent.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Txhorns on August 22, 2017, 11:53:57 AM
According to the OOTP scouting reports every one of my players is dumb and lazy.  I attribute that to the flame out rate.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Coop on August 22, 2017, 12:07:22 PM
I'd like to hang out with your players.  I'd fit right in with them.
Title: Re: Unilateral Consitutional Amendments for the 2109 Season
Post by: Huckleberry on August 22, 2017, 12:29:57 PM
According to the OOTP scouting reports every one of my players is dumb and lazy.  I attribute that to the flame out rate.

That's actually because I have morale and personality turned off. So instead of just giving everyone an exactly average rating for intelligence and work ethic the game assigns them extremely low ratings in that department and then ignores them during development.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal