Jumping the Shark Draft

[Jamee999]

Matt, it might be better to go for 2 or 4 rounds of ineligibility, so that the same person doesn't get first pick in the top 8 and top 24 rounds. Just a thought.

[NUFAN]

If Matt takes my drop 5 picks suggestion, he only needs to be on for every 5th pick, I guess, apart from when the draft loops around.

I'm not really a fan of this, because knowing if the persons selection before you has passed or failed will help you with your selection.

I'm just picturing Matt or Simon going..

Asoka De Silva

No........ BINGO! [You may have needed to see the TV show to get what I'm talking about].

[chaminda_00]

I'll give it a run.

[Mister Wright]

Count me in.

[stephen]

eh, why not. Count me in.

[Matt79]

that's ten by my count. I think we want 15 players from each drafter for banned list. If people can email them to:
matt79cric(at)hotmail(dot)com

I'll post the final rules etc once i've got my kids to bed.

[stephen]

Sent

[NUFAN]

Mine sent also.

I have no idea who I'm going to pick in this comp. If the selector goes to the end of the line, what happens if their next pick is another one of the 31 Banned Players??

[99*]

Mine sent.

This is going to be very interesting.

[Mister Wright]

Sent

[Matt79]

Thanks, got four sets of players so far - very interesting reading to date.

To clarify a couple of questions. The main point of confusion is around what happens if you pick a banned player. I've never done this kind of draft before either, and am happy to take suggestions on the fine detail if people see a problem with what I'm proposing, but I had in mind the following:
- as someone pointed out, I'm not going to be online 24/7 vetting each individual pick,

- my preference would be to once, or at most twice a day come on and confirm or reject picks.

- I thought it would cool to do it at the end of each round. At the end of each round, I confirm which picks are ok, and which are rejected. The rejected picks are then redone in the same order they were made.

- I take the point about the penalty being disproportionate if you picked first and get shuffled, in effect 10 picks down, compared to if you are last and potentially, don't get demoted any picks at all if you're the only one to go for a banned player.

- An alternative would then be to have a set number of picks you're demoted, Jamee's suggestion of 5 is probably sensible. The disadvantage with this is that the rounds will get jumbled a bit, and it might be more prone to delay while I'm not online. I'm happy to go with the consensus on this point.

- The question was asked "what if the replacement player I pick after having a pick rejected is also banned". I think people should get one free go if they've already been demoted once, but if they pick a third banned player in a row, they are demoted to the end of the following round/another 5 picks.
So pick 1 - reject - demoted.
Pick 2 - rejected - immediate repick.
Pick 3 - rejected - demoted again.
I think immediately extra demotion is a bit harsh, but if people have crapped out twice, they probably really want to think carefully before going with a 'risky' selection again.

- I think the reverse serpentine will work well, with it being redrawn after every two rounds. This should avoid, barring extraordinary luck, the same person having first pick in both round 9 and round 11, as successive waves of players are unbanned.

[chaminda_00]

Would it be easy to post the banned players at the start and then we pick other guys. Does really make sense just picking guys and then they all get banned. Would most of guys in the first couple rounds of these drafts all be banned.

[Matt79]

It would be easier, but less fun IMO. It will be a strategic decision for each drafter how much they want to play risky going for guys they think are probably banned, vs. getting people they're keen on and think should be available.

[chaminda_00]

What happens if you keep picking players that are banned. Could you go 9 rounds without a pick?

[Matt79]

Potentially. But even though you were now making your picks in round 9, when all players are unbanned, you'd still be prohibited in taking any of the banned players with any picks that were originally from before round 9 - yes, I can see where you were going with that...