The other one that i recall cropping up in the season was making LTI listings in the last 8 rounds. Currently not allowed. Personally, i dont mind either way.
Hi folks, been away for 3 weeks. Are we still in the trade period?
Its technically just begun.
I think most are awaiting final decisions on positions, keeper list size etc before cranking up.
Its technically just begun.I think most are awaiting final decisions on positions, keeper list size etc before cranking up.
Cheers.
Apologies for letting things stay open ended on here the last few weeks. Just under the pump re work and family life at the moment. Anyway Saladin has thankfully agreed to run a closed survey on a variety of issues we are currently discussing on here. Please provide Saladin the curiosity of replying ASAP so we can move things forward. I will make one separate post following this on a point I personally feel very strong,y about and that is keeper numbers. Other than that please survey away.
Number of Keepers
Below I have agrued why we should retain 20 as the number fo keepers.
More Experienced Teams
By increasing the keeper numbers these teams will arguably get stronger. They will be able to keep more players which logically means they can increase their depth, making it harder for the up and coming teams to compete. Also it will most likely mean these stronger teams can top up with more experienced players as draft picks will become more valuable with fewer of them. It also reduces the importance of the draft which is we all see as a key component to the league. All in all I think more keepers will reduce the likelihood of the top teams naturally cycling back down the ladder.
Teams with many fantasy prospects
At the other end of the scale we have some coaches who are willing to back young players in almost to their detriment with regards to their fantasy potential. I think this creates problems as some coaches are willing to hold and hold onto players rather than bringing in someone who will at least play an AFL and score points. This then leads into another issue we are trying to overcome and that is avoiding coaches from scoring 0s. Believe me from personal experience that this is a balancing act that is difficult (refer to Sam Colquhoun who I am still holding despite not sitting on an AFL list), but sometimes cutting these players to get regular AFL players is to everyone’s benefit. If these coaches are so worried about giving up on the talent, they have invested in without getting a return then I would think their best approach is to try and realise that value by trading some of the talent for picks in order to freshen up the talent. If the market doesn’t like what is on offer than the coach may recognise that these players that they desperately want to keep are still likely to be available to them in the draft at a decent pick.
Conclusion
Although these are just my opinions, I would like to think they show that both ends of the argument are actually working against the ultimate goal of our league which is to make it enjoyable and interactive for everyone. Therefore I will be looking for some very strong reasoning as to why we would change for the 20 keepers. In particular I am really keen to hear from some of the coaches middling around the longer rungs of the 8 and below and how they feel.
Will hopefully get a PM out to each coach later today. Just sorting out a couple of things with Red as to how he wants it set out.
Pm’s sent. Send back your votes when you can. Cheers.
I will reply tonight mate
Pm's sent. Send back your votes when you can. Cheers.
Done.
No drama’s, wob. Whenever you can.
Done
If your league increases keeper you’ll find the strong teams stay stronger for longer which is dangerous having teams down the bottom for 5+ years. Draft picks become less valuable as there will be less quality available. Also ruck relief is silly, teams that have ruckman should be rewarded and if you don’t have some then you should have to give up something to acquire the valuable commodity. It adds an extra layer of strategy otherwise rucks get devalued. All just an outsiders’ opinion tho.
I would like to make part of my response available to all coaches -
I have suggested giving each coach the option of 20 or 21 or 22 keepers. This gives each coach the flexibility to adjust his side according to his individual circumstances. Keeping 21 would mean missing the 1st round of the draft, 1st & 2nd rounds if you keep 22. This will not keep teams at the bottom, but rather give them some options.
Not a bad suggestion Bewick, but how would that work if you’ve traded out your first round pick? Or like wob, traded out your first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth round picks?
I guess if you didn’t have a first round pick, you couldn’t have 21 keepers. Has the problem that not all picks are created equal. The premier has pick 18, last has pick 1.
Having thought about it, that benefits top sides even more. If you’ve got pick 1 to 5, you’re not going to give that up for a 21st keeper, so you’re not going to make use of that option. However, if you’ve got pick 18, you might - just gives top sides the option more than bottom sides.
Edit: Yep, what Birch said.
Edit 2: also, have often would it be used? If you’re really keen to keep a 21st keeper, just redraft them in the first round. I think I was the first coach to redraft a player last year, and that was in round 4.
I would argue we should have less keepers, say 15, and fill the talent pool for the draft to have more interesting mature age prospects to decide against largely speculative new draftees. Draft picks are so wildly overrated at the moment given the current structure, because all teams have a full team in their keepers already. By reducing the number of keepers it makes the draft more interesting, more important to execute correctly and equalises the playing field slightly more so for the bottom teams where by they can maybe go for more established players in lieu of unproven draftees who may not get a run in year 1 or 2 and work their way back up the ladder quickly, as opposed to hoping pick 6 turns out to be Chad Wingard and not another Mitch Thorp.
Thoughts?
I would like to make part of my response available to all coaches -I have suggested giving each coach the option of 20 or 21 or 22 keepers. This gives each coach the flexibility to adjust his side according to his individual circumstances. Keeping 21 would mean missing the 1st round of the draft, 1st & 2nd rounds if you keep 22. This will not keep teams at the bottom, but rather give them some options.
Sorry but this is completely impractical and unmanageable with trading involved. The only way it would work is by not allowing 1st and 2nd picks to be traded which then automatically reduced the number of trades that will occur in the league - therefore less interaction and less involvement which will slowly erode the essence of the league.
I would argue we should have less keepers, say 15, and fill the talent pool for the draft to have more interesting mature age prospects to decide against largely speculative new draftees. Draft picks are so wildly overrated at the moment given the current structure, because all teams have a full team in their keepers already. By reducing the number of keepers it makes the draft more interesting, more important to execute correctly and equalises the playing field slightly more so for the bottom teams where by they can maybe go for more established players in lieu of unproven draftees who may not get a run in year 1 or 2 and work their way back up the ladder quickly, as opposed to hoping pick 6 turns out to be Chad Wingard and not another Mitch Thorp.Thoughts?
Whilst i like your thinking i think it might be a step too far at this stage. The downside is that it really increases the importance of the draft, whereas the current mix allows for drafters, traders and those in between all to be in the mix.