re: TDBBL '17: ESPN Auction Redraft

book value: ESPN $$ auction suggested value updated yearly.

so here's my reasoning.

- just that since the regular season is "uncapped" we shouldn't enable people to just trade for whatever value players they want for the next season. essentially, we're always moving "in" and "out" of these players $$ values actually mattering.
we want people playing for this year. being competitive for this year. if you start letting people trade for "cheap" players and letting them retain their this year value, you're going to encourage players to trade for the next year.

EXAMPLE:

if rondo drafts brook lopez for $5. rondo has used that advantage to have more money in the pool for his drafting. IN SEASON, brook lopez could be traded to PORT. he is using rondo's discount for that season to be added "uncapped" to his roster of players he spent money on. now i think if brook ends up being good, more power to him. but that discount shouldn't be extended past that season.
next year ESPN says brook lopez is worth $25. after you trade for him. you can keep him, but you gotta pay the next year's price. you don't get to just keep trading on the fact that rondo auctioned him at a good price in this original draft. if you really love him, you'll do it.

otherwise, we're gonna have a really weirdly skewed league economic that overemphasizes players who were drafted at a good/bad price in this original draft. that doesn't make sense to me, especially where we're coming from with our last league.

additionally, if we're uncapped during season, we shouldn't have to factor it while making trades. just know that you can trade at will. you don't have to look up whether or not this player was originally acquired at a bargain two years ago.

next year, your player you are trading for can be kept, but you're just gonna get going ESPN rate for him. ditto if you really love a player. you can overpay to get him now and you'll get him for fairmarket next year. but let's keep the value fluctuations to one season. we'll have plenty of values to accommodate just with new players and people making leaps.

my other thing i'd say is i'd be more open to keeping the drafted values permanent if the regular season was capped permanently at $200 in season.

I actually agree with that. It places more emphasis on drafting well. We want to reward guys for drafting gems, not encouraging them to trade them away as a lotto ticket. What does everyone else think?

quote:

---

And since our league is not the standard 10 team, 200 budget 15 roster spot league, we could get custom values from rotoworld and use that as "the book". It accounts for league size, roster spots, auction budget and scoring categories. I think it cost like 50.00 a year, a drop in the bucket for 14 teams.

---

fine with those or just use the ESPN ones they announce every year. shouldn't be too big a deal as long as we just agree to use one standard "the book" right now. either way i think it's a good change. thanks for listening commish.

I like that idea Karma

Book price +5 if he's being kept.

I say we just remove the 3 year cap, and once you get to year 4 and beyond it goes up in multiples of 5, meaning if in year 3 I had to pay the previous year, we will say 30 +10, the next year I could pay 40 + 15, then 55 + 20, then 75 + 25 ect. Give them the option to keep someone as long as they want. It's going to cost eventually and we reward good drafting.

I also think that we ammend Karma's proposal and say you pay the book price or their previous auction price, whatever the higher amount is. That way, you don't get someone who has had curry for 2 years trading for harden who was kept for 2 years and both getting lower value since the book will def be lower. Does that make sense?

So if you trade for someone, you don't have to worry about how many years they were kept. It starts over with you but you're going to either pay their book price +5 our their last year's auction price +5, whatever is higher.

Can't find any. We are talking less than 4.00 per person but I'll get it if need be.

Glad we are constructively talking this through. We can make this bitch great again :trump:

ok. Does another night work better or are you just slammed like you said previously?

Yeah...I don't have a problem doing it. I get it for baseball. I just won't share their super secret picks with you fools.