Dynasty

[MilkSpiller22]

Have a set number of players we can "protect" the rest exposed to a draft. .if they don't get drafted, you still own them.

Not sure I like it, but it's interesting

I actually do like that... of course we would have to set the fixed numbers up, but that could be a lot of fun, and create another draft for us to all do...

 

[broncosmitty]

How would we manage that?

Well, I think there are a few options.....

1) each team is allowed to protect X number of players. (Any combination, up to the allowed total.) then reverse order of final standings can select a certain amount of players. (One round, maybe two. Not snake.) more expansion than Rule5, without expansion. (David Nied could have been selected by someone other than the Rockies or Marlins in this scenario.)

2.) each team is allowed to protect an initial starting lineup and X number or reserves. (Say 5, or whatever. But the number would be less than in Scenario 1 up there). Then in reverse order from final standings each team would have the opportunity to select a player that isn't protected. Under the condition that the selected player be required to stay in the starting lineup of his new team for a minimum predetermined number of weeks. (Until his bye week isn't fair. 4 weeks seems close, maybe 5.)

3-4-5) I haven't put enough thought into to make worth mentioning without unilateral "No Way!" Responses.

Imo there needs to be various ways of ensuring competitive balance over the long term. One or two teams hit the jackpot in the initial startup draft and then sit on studs for years and people will lose interest before the decade ends. I've done enough keeper leagues to see even hardcore fantasy freaks give up/throw in the towel.

 

[broncosmitty]

I actually do like that... of course we would have to set the fixed numbers up, but that could be a lot of fun, and create another draft for us to all do...

Who wouldn't like a bonus draft!?!

 

[Trudem]

would this occur before or after the rookie draft?

 

[broncosmitty]

would this occur before or after the rookie draft?

Starting year two, prior to the rookie draft. Is what I had in mind.

 

[Trudem]

Starting year two, prior to the rookie draft. Is what I had in mind.

Im game

 

[SteelersPride]

Im game

I'm in

 

[TREFF]

Yeah sure, the more I think about, the more I like it. Not overly complicated, and adds some intrigue

 

[Yellow Fuzzies]

Well, I think there are a few options.....

1) each team is allowed to protect X number of players. (Any combination, up to the allowed total.) then reverse order of final standings can select a certain amount of players. (One round, maybe two. Not snake.) more expansion than Rule5, without expansion. (David Nied could have been selected by someone other than the Rockies or Marlins in this scenario.)

2.) each team is allowed to protect an initial starting lineup and X number or reserves. (Say 5, or whatever. But the number would be less than in Scenario 1 up there). Then in reverse order from final standings each team would have the opportunity to select a player that isn't protected. Under the condition that the selected player be required to stay in the starting lineup of his new team for a minimum predetermined number of weeks. (Until his bye week isn't fair. 4 weeks seems close, maybe 5.)

3-4-5) I haven't put enough thought into to make worth mentioning without unilateral "No Way!" Responses.

Imo there needs to be various ways of ensuring competitive balance over the long term. One or two teams hit the jackpot in the initial startup draft and then sit on studs for years and people will lose interest before the decade ends. I've done enough keeper leagues to see even hardcore fantasy freaks give up/throw in the towel.

I like the way this is headed.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I have a fun trade proposal rule... Again, I am expecting this to be rejected, but it came to me and I said "OOOH this could be fun"

a trade is made- all other owners have 24 hours to better the trade for one of the original traders... If another owner betters the deal(has to have the same players from the original person in the trade) then the owner now has a choice on what trade to FINALIZE... And Must choose one of them, the default is the original trade...

For example- Chef trades Shady McCoy to Foot for Dez Bryant and Tre Mason...
But Milk really wanted Bryant, he could offer Foot Adrian Peterson for Dez Bryant and Tre mason...

then foot can decide which trade he would rather accept...

It would be called the TRADE BUMP rule... And what this rule does(besides complicates everything), now no owner can say well I WOULD have given you more...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Well, I think there are a few options.....

1) each team is allowed to protect X number of players. (Any combination, up to the allowed total.) then reverse order of final standings can select a certain amount of players. (One round, maybe two. Not snake.) more expansion than Rule5, without expansion. (David Nied could have been selected by someone other than the Rockies or Marlins in this scenario.)

2.) each team is allowed to protect an initial starting lineup and X number or reserves. (Say 5, or whatever. But the number would be less than in Scenario 1 up there). Then in reverse order from final standings each team would have the opportunity to select a player that isn't protected. Under the condition that the selected player be required to stay in the starting lineup of his new team for a minimum predetermined number of weeks. (Until his bye week isn't fair. 4 weeks seems close, maybe 5.)

3-4-5) I haven't put enough thought into to make worth mentioning without unilateral "No Way!" Responses.

Imo there needs to be various ways of ensuring competitive balance over the long term. One or two teams hit the jackpot in the initial startup draft and then sit on studs for years and people will lose interest before the decade ends. I've done enough keeper leagues to see even hardcore fantasy freaks give up/throw in the towel.

I love this rule... However we decide to do it... If we are voting, I am voting for it...

 

[Trudem]

I have a fun trade proposal rule... Again, I am expecting this to be rejected, but it came to me and I said "OOOH this could be fun"

a trade is made- all other owners have 24 hours to better the trade for one of the original traders... If another owner betters the deal(has to have the same players from the original person in the trade) then the owner now has a choice on what trade to FINALIZE... And Must choose one of them, the default is the original trade...

For example- Chef trades Shady McCoy to Foot for Dez Bryant and Tre Mason...
But Milk really wanted Bryant, he could offer Foot Adrian Peterson for Dez Bryant and Tre mason...

then foot can decide which trade he would rather accept...

It would be called the TRADE BUMP rule... And what this rule does(besides complicates everything), now no owner can say well I WOULD have given you more...

Im going to pass on that one. While it would be interesting it would make all the negotiations a giant waste of time for the owner that gets bumped. If a person thinks they can get more for Player X then they should do their homework.

However if it does get passed I would be bumping all of you so prepare thyself!

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Im going to pass on that one. While it would be interesting it would make all the negotiations a giant waste of time for the owner that gets bumped. If a person thinks they can get more for Player X then they should do their homework.

However if it does get passed I would be bumping all of you so prepare thyself!

I feel like that's the fun of it... Again, not expecting it to pass at all... In fact I would be shocked if anyone votes for it... But it sounds like fun...

 

[TREFF]

I have a fun trade proposal rule... Again, I am expecting this to be rejected, but it came to me and I said "OOOH this could be fun"

a trade is made- all other owners have 24 hours to better the trade for one of the original traders... If another owner betters the deal(has to have the same players from the original person in the trade) then the owner now has a choice on what trade to FINALIZE... And Must choose one of them, the default is the original trade...

For example- Chef trades Shady McCoy to Foot for Dez Bryant and Tre Mason...
But Milk really wanted Bryant, he could offer Foot Adrian Peterson for Dez Bryant and Tre mason...

then foot can decide which trade he would rather accept...

It would be called the TRADE BUMP rule... And what this rule does(besides complicates everything), now no owner can say well I WOULD have given you more...

No

 

[Chef99]

I think I would trade Shady to Foot for Dez and Tre...

 

[TREFF]

We've also gotta keep in mind when choosing these things, that a free hosting site is going to have to be able to offer these options. ..so, we can't get very "outside the box"

 

[MilkSpiller22]

We've also gotta keep in mind when choosing these things, that a free hosting site is going to have to be able to offer these options. ..so, we can't get very "outside the box"

Quiet now!!! let me have fun proposing!!! Maybe soon I will find something more suitable for the populous...

 

[broncosmitty]

I love this rule... However we decide to do it... If we are voting, I am voting for it...

My 3-4-5 options are very, very Milkian. (To the point I confuse myself a bit) So if you've got a couple ideas for other ways to increase parody year to year (and I know you do) let's hear em.

Personally, I'm in favor of Option 2. I'd like to see us have a number of rostered guys who we can't protect. Would be good drama waiting and watching on if a guy makes it thru. Then there also is the quasiRule5 aspect that would/could sway guys from reaching for potential over proven commodities.

 

[broncosmitty]

We've also gotta keep in mind when choosing these things, that a free hosting site is going to have to be able to offer these options. ..so, we can't get very "outside the box"

Good point.

But I kinda assumed we'd do all of this on here. And then reshuffle the rosters on whatever site accordingly. Maybe that's not as simple as it seemed in my head though. (In comparison to the options I haven't bothered to mention, 1 and 2 are like buttering bread. Hahaha)

 

[broncosmitty]

I think I would trade Shady to Foot for Dez and Tre...

Have you though aboot who you'd trade Dez for after that?