[Deleted]

Whomever winds up with picks #1 and #2, I may consider making an asinine trade offer for said picks.

[Deleted]

Since we have so many drafters and are going in the direction of smaller round-robins for the opening rounds, next year it might be fun to have each smaller grouping do their own draft.

Sure there would be overlap in talent once we get to the final grouping, but I think it would be a fun way to freshen things up a tad and have some more "big name matches" on the cards.

Or maybe treat it as a mid-year draft as we await the "usual" annual one. Thoughts?

[The Canadian Content]

Another alternative for an offseason thing would be to skip the draft portion. Everyone just come up with a roster of whoever they want, and we go straight to the tournament of cards. There could be as much overlap on rosters as happens. You get as much talent at every level as you want, and the winner would be determined by how well you can use that talent.

[Deadly]

But drafting is the most fun part...

[The Canadian Content]

Agreed. Just throwing it out there as a different idea.

[Chris Eco]

I like both ideas, but particularly Gator's; I think mini-drafts of maybe five players each (give or take) could be a lot of fun. The OO min-drafts produced some fun stacked feds (I think the smallest draft was 7 people.) I would definitely be in to play that in December or whenever.

For the no-draft Dream Team idea, I would be genuinely curious as to how much variety would happen when you don't limit people at all; if we did all have Michaels/Hart/Austin/Rock/Angle/Punk/Savage/Flair/Steamboat/Jericho/etc (would we?), how much would the matches vary? I would find a draft where every wrestler could be drafted some given >1 number of times (say, 3) interesting for creating supercards. (I will say I prefer this version of a Supercard draft to the current version, where everyone drafts a bunch of matches I haven't seen.)

EDIT: To make what I'm saying more clear, something like the below:

Round 1

Abigail: Shawn Michaels (1)
Bruce: Shawn Michaels (2)
Chris: CM Punk (1)
Don: Kurt Angle (1)
Erica: Chris Jericho (1)
Flannery: Shawn Michaels (3-DONE)
George: Ric Flair (1)
Hassan: Kurt Angle (2)
Indrepal: The Rock (1)
Jason: Randy Savage (1)
Kara: CM Punk (2)
Lillith: Daniel Bryan (1)

Round 2
Lilith: Kurt Angle (3-DONE)
Kara: Randy Savage (2)
Jason: Chris Jericho (2)
(etc)

(You can't double-draft a wrestler, despite how much fun Ziggler v. Ziggler would be.)

[The Canadian Content]

That's definitely another thing I considered, Eco. Make everyone available to draft two or three times. That way, even with 20 drafters, you'd still have a shot at a Savage or an Austin at 17.

[Road Warrior Shark]

Another alternate idea I remember being tossed around and liking.. Taking Eco's super duper Spreadhseet with the average draft positions from over the years and Assigning picks that way. (if Gator has pick 8, he gets the 8th person on the list, etc..) Then giving everyone a week or two to make trades & come up with the best cards they can based on who they ended up with.

[The Canadian Content]

Love that idea with the caveat that trades and add/drop would need to be severely limited. There's no sense in assigning rosters if I can just trade away 20 guys I'm not comfortable with. Maybe three total roster moves? Or limit it to one move from picks 1-10, one from 11-20, one from 21-30, and one from 31-40, so we don't have a ton of top-level talent getting swapped?

[Road Warrior Shark]

Jun 5, 2013 8:21:26 GMT -5 The Canadian Content said:

Love that idea with the caveat that trades and add/drop would need to be severely limited. There's no sense in assigning rosters if I can just trade away 20 guys I'm not comfortable with. Maybe three total roster moves? Or limit it to one move from picks 1-10, one from 11-20, one from 21-30, and one from 31-40, so we don't have a ton of top-level talent getting swapped?

That seems like a bit of a pain to track. I'd say set a limit on transactions, or new roster members, and lock rounds 1-?? 8? 10? 12?

[Deleted]

Jun 4, 2013 18:57:03 GMT -5 Deadly said:

But drafting is the most fun part...

There's still this, though...

Essentially, the "guy can be drafted X number of times" is very similar to the pod-drafting idea. The pod-drafting idea ensures that the same wrestlers won't be on opposing cards in the opening round robin pods, though.

I think the pod-drafting route would be FAR less of a pain in the ass to keep track of, too.

[Road Warrior Shark]

I agree, the draft is the most fun part. I don't see the "Booking Game" being a big group of players, which would make more talent per person.

I'm not sold on drafting people multiple times, but as long as I'm not the one tracking all that...

[Deleted]

Depending on how work might be looking when it comes around, I'd be willing to run at least 1 of the groups, if not all of them.

[punk/core]

Jun 4, 2013 22:00:31 GMT -5 Chris Eco said:

(You can't double-draft a wrestler, despite how much fun Ziggler v. Ziggler would be.)

Why not? Just use Street Fighter rules, where one has different colored hair or something.

[Mr. Dashbee]

When are we posting the order?

[Batman]

I have two rule suggestions-- one to shake up rosters so that the final four have more booking options when they have to book a fifth and sixth show.... The other to introduce "keepers" as a prize for those who make it to the final-four, to give some opportunity for continuity....

1) Each promotion that survives to the final four can force one trade on up to four of the vanquished promotions from their division-- since the eliminated promotions won't be needing them anymore, and the finalists could use more booking options since they've already booked four shows with the same roster.

To limit the effect on competitive balance we can make it a rule that the trade can only be done for talents taken after the 10th round and/or that you must trade like for like -- a guy you took in the 12th round for a guy they took in the 12th round, etc.

2) Everyone who makes it to the final four is rewarded with a keeper or two-- guys they drafted that they will have dibs on if they play again next summer.

My suggestion-- Winner gets one guy he took after the 10th round AND one from after the 30th... Runner-up gets one guy he took after the 20th round.... The other two finalists each get one guy they took after the 30th round.


What do you all think?

[Road Warrior Shark]

Jun 22, 2013 14:37:57 GMT -5 Batman said:

I have two rule suggestions-- one to shake up rosters so that the final four have more booking options when they have to book a fifth and sixth show.... The other to introduce "keepers" as a prize for those who make it to the final-four, to give some opportunity for continuity....

1) Each promotion that survives to the final four can force one trade on up to four of the vanquished promotions from their division-- since the eliminated promotions won't be needing them anymore, and the finalists could use more booking options since they've already booked four shows with the same roster.

To limit the effect on competitive balance we can make it a rule that the trade can only be done for talents taken after the 10th round and/or that you must trade like for like -- a guy you took in the 12th round for a guy they took in the 12th round, etc.

2) Everyone who makes it to the final four is rewarded with a keeper or two-- guys they drafted that they will have dibs on if they play again next summer.

My suggestion-- Winner gets one guy he took after the 10th round AND one from after the 30th... Runner-up gets one guy he took after the 20th round.... The other two finalists each get one guy they took after the 30th round.


What do you all think?

The keepers thing has been brought up a couple times in various formats. I think the fluid nature of these drafts, people coming and going, teaming up one year and being separate the next, makes that pretty difficult. Last year Doug and I won, Matte & Dead were runner up. This year, all four of us are doing our won thing. I'm not sure how that would work. Eric won (Or was it Eco) one year, then they teamed up the next. Too many variables. It's one of those things that seems to work well in theory, but would be a hot mess in practice. Tracking it, setting a Keeper deadline, That's a lot of extra work to be done to get ready for the draft that I don't want to have to do/co-ordinate.

I do like you aren't advocating keeping top level names, which is different.

The trade scenario I'm 100% against. I eliminated the between rounds stuff this year to simplify things & make the showdowns go quicker. Once the Showdowns roll, I keep them on a pretty regular schedule. Tossing in a couple of days trade window at then end when interest has waned already is going to stretch things out further when people usually just want it to be done. Plus, adding big names to your card at the end is pretty cheap booking. Or they get misused in your midcard.


My 2 cents. Your mileage may vary.

[Batman]

I see your objections to the keeper thing-- I forgot about the whole "team draft" thing.....

With the trade thing, I totally agree that we should keep the showdowns running on rails. This thing goes slow enough-- but this wouldn't take days. These are forced trades between the victors and the slain-- perhaps allow just one or two, instead of four as I suggested. And they would have to give up a talent from an equivalent round, to keep the competitive balance. And we could set an arbitrary limit to how high you can take from (10th round maybe?)

It's only intended to allow the finalists to spice up their mid-card after four shows in a row with the same roster.....

[Eric O'Mac]

Eh, if you did a decent enough job, you should be able to get 6 shows out of the same roster, in my opinion. That's not to say I don't like it; I do. But I'm usually the guy who elevates a lot of midcarders to the main event by the end anyways, so my "spicing up" of my roster is done in house.

[Batman]

Oh, yeah-- I definitely agree that elevating your mid-carders is a great idea. If I should make it to the finals, I'm sure I can come up with a fifth and sixth show-- hell the first four are almost finished now....

I just thought that "Winners get to pick at the bones of the losers in their division" might be a fun way to use the whole division thing-- in addition to opening up some new storylines.