Next Draft - Ideas and Discussions

Enigma_87 said:
Yeah indeed, but the biggest pool definitely is the decade as it stands - it will overlap 3 generation of players, even with multiple managers choosing the same decade.

The way I see it you have decades pool - you choose the 80's and that's players who are ending their careers in the early 80's, at the peak of their powers in the mid 80's and all the young ones emerging in the later part of the decade.

Whilst if someone chooses a manager if we take 2 of them (possible overlaps as well) your looking at around 200 players pool at best (including fringe players) for a good 10-15 years career at top level per manager.
Click to expand...
Maybe 5 Years pool instead of a full decade?
 
another idea :D
what if we pick player/manager instead of just a manager. Lets say you pick Pep, you get to pick all the players he managed and all players he played with.....all of the sudden its a great pool of players.
 
Šjor Bepo said:
another idea :D
what if we pick player/manager instead of just a manager. Lets say you pick Pep, you get to pick all the players he managed and all players he played with.....all of the sudden its a great pool of players.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting idea although will likely restrict the managers picked. You could choose a manager and a player who played under him and then just be able to choose players who played with the player and those managed by the manager. It would also keep it within similar eras.
 
Physiocrat said:
That's an interesting idea although will likely restrict the managers picked. You could choose a manager and a player who played under him and then just be able to choose players who played with the player and those managed by the manager. It would also keep it within similar eras.
Click to expand...

either you didnt understand my post or i dont understand yours :D
You dont pick a player and a manager, you choose one football person(player/manager) and you can pick from both pools(his players while he was a manager and his teammates while he was a player).
 
Šjor Bepo said:
either you didnt understand my post or i dont understand yours :D
You dont pick a player and a manager, you choose one football person(player/manager) and you can pick from both pools(his players while he was a manager and his teammates while he was a player).
Click to expand...

I get your idea. It makes sense. I was just suggesting an alternative whereby your first player pick also opens a pool of players - those who have played with him. I suggested this since it would allow a greater variety of managers to be picked.

Also with the manager pool, do we use the peak of the player under that manager or their overall peak?
 
Physiocrat said:
I get your idea. It makes sense. I was just suggesting an alternative whereby your first player pick also opens a pool of players - those who have played with him. I suggested this since it would allow a greater variety of managers to be picked.

Also with the manager pool, do we use the peak of the player under that manager or their overall peak?
Click to expand...


Should be overall pick IMO to be fairer.
 
Enigma_87 said:
Should be overall pick IMO to be fairer.
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking although it goes against the theme a little. I recently checked when the Managers Draft was and it was back in 2014 :eek:. I thought it was quite recent.
 
@Gio @antohan

I remember you commenting in the last No Mates draft that you thought the restriction on drafting 1st and 2nd picks in reinforcements was a bad idea. Why was that? Also if anyone else has thoughts on this I'd like to hear them.
 
Physiocrat said:
@Gio @antohan

I remember you commenting in the last No Mates draft that you thought the restriction on drafting 1st and 2nd picks in reinforcements was a bad idea. Why was that? Also if anyone else has thoughts on this I'd like to hear them.
Click to expand...

I think it depends on the format. Take Monopoly for example: first two picks aren't necessarily the strongest players, same with any sheep draft.

In a regular no restrictions snake it clearly applies. I can't quite remember the no mates format, but off the top of my head I think it probably had to do with a block list and the no mates restriction being strict enough already? E.g. if you want Xavi do you keep not picking any Barca player through the first draft hoping to reinforce with him?

If you do you probably deserve the reward for the gamble/limitation on your first drafting. Others would optimise the first drafted side, taking less risks of going out straight off the bat, but then find they can't pick any of the better R1/2 player. That's the price they pay.

If you just strike out R1/2 you remove that entire angle to drafting which I value quite highly. In fact, any draft I've won I've done it on the back of risky drafting with a view to getting exponentially stronger with reinforcements while others just move sideways getting marginal improvements.
 
antohan said:
I think it depends on the format. Take Monopoly for example: first two picks aren't necessarily the strongest players, same with any sheep draft.

In a regular no restrictions snake it clearly applies. I can't quite remember the no mates format, but off the top of my head I think it probably had to do with a block list and the no mates restriction being strict enough already? E.g. if you want Xavi do you keep not picking any Barca player through the first draft hoping to reinforce with him?

If you do you probably deserve the reward for the gamble/limitation on your first drafting. Others would optimise the first drafted side, taking less risks of going out straight off the bat, but then find they can't pick any of the better R1/2 player. That's the price they pay.

If you just strike out R1/2 you remove that entire angle to drafting which I value quite highly. In fact, any draft I've won I've done it on the back of risky drafting with a view to getting exponentially stronger with reinforcements while others just move sideways getting marginal improvements.
Click to expand...

Ah, ok that makes sense
 
Physiocrat said:
@Gio @antohan

I remember you commenting in the last No Mates draft that you thought the restriction on drafting 1st and 2nd picks in reinforcements was a bad idea. Why was that? Also if anyone else has thoughts on this I'd like to hear them.
Click to expand...
Yeah, in that draft the restriction, for me at least, made the selection process more straightforward. The majority of the R1/R2 picks had played with other great players so it was a variable that would have introduced a lot more angles to the melting pot. It simplified the planning for reinforcements process - so you only needed a plan, rather than a masterplan.

That said, it's a good idea when you want to limit the megastars getting all crowbarred together, and for when you want teams to build around a specific player.
 
Would love to host a draft sometime in the future with the below idea.

The Away Goals draft:

Teams face each other twice, 1 home leg and 1 away leg.
You could change your team and tactics in the second leg based on inputs in the first leg. Sort of like a redemption.

If Team A and B were facing each other, and the votes come out as below

First leg - Team A 17-13 Team B (30 votes)

Second Leg - Team B 12-8 Team A (20 votes)

The ratio comes down to 3:2 for first leg:second leg.
So every 3 votes in first leg counts as 1 goal. Every 2 votes in second leg counts as 1 goal.
This is done to avoid unfairness to either team based on voter turn out and brings more probability of the away goals rule coming into the picture.

So the score line of the first leg become

Team A 5-4 Team B (Residual votes Team A(2), Team B(1) )
Team B 6-4 Team A (Residual votes Team A(0), Team B(0 )

Team B wins 10-9 on aggregate.
If after both legs, the scoreline remains same (example 10-10), the team with more away goals wins.
If the away goals are same too, team with more residual votes wins.

Residual votes basically makes sure people don't get harsh losses with scoreline 13-12.

My apologies, if it is too Mathematic a draft for your liking :lol:
 
@idmanager I see what you're trying to do but I don't think having two games with the same teams would be much good as most of the interesting discussions would likely happen in the first game even if you banned any tactical changes in game.

Btw I'm up for running my No Mates 46-66 Draft - even teams, new names (well probably under used names but still) and tactical drafting.
 
whats next? :D
reckon we should do a draft with current players(career or current peak), cant remember when was the last time we did a draft with the current crop....
 
Physiocrat said:
@idmanager I see what you're trying to do but I don't think having two games with the same teams would be much good as most of the interesting discussions would likely happen in the first game even if you banned any tactical changes in game.

Btw I'm up for running my No Mates 46-66 Draft - even teams, new names (well probably under used names but still) and tactical drafting.
Click to expand...

Guess, I could add a clause of injuries to 3 out field players in each team for the second leg to keep it interesting and involve all the 14 players drafted.
 
idmanager said:
Guess, I could add a clause of injuries to 3 out field players in each team for the second leg to keep it interesting and involve all the 14 players drafted.
Click to expand...

That would make it more interesting although there was a more radical idea suggested a while back you may be interested in. You drafted 22 players and played two games in which you had to play all 22 players over the two games. This would raise an interesting dynamic of exactly what team you'd line up in each game especially as you'd tend to be much reactive to what you think the other manager would field.

I'm up for running my No Mates 46-66 draft if anyone is interested at the moment. I do think a non-all-time draft would be good t mix it up. Now I know the last one wasn't strictly an All-time draft but it definitely had elements of it
 
Thanks for the tag but won't be able to play. Looking forward to seeing how it pans out though, great generation of players.
 
46-66 No Mates Draft

  1. Moby
  2. EAP
  3. 2mufco
  4. Sjor
  5. Pat
  6. Tuppet
  7. Idmanager
  8. Invictus
  9. Physio
  10. Raees
 
Yeah I'll have a shot of that. Unless it starts in the next couple of days.
 
Thanks for the tag, but I'll sit that one out with some work coming in lately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.