ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

User avatar
TeeKay
Legend
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:49 pm
Battle.net Name:
Battle.net Char Code: 0
Battle.net Server: CN

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by TeeKay » Thu Jul 17, 2014 6:57 pm

Teroh wrote:I don't like the bidding system. Imagine it takes 1 minute for an owner to pick a player, then 2-3 minutes for the bidding and logging of the player. Then we move onto the next player, repeat. I'd guess you'll end up taking about 4 minutes on average per player. Times that by ~90 players, that's 360 minutes. 6 hours for a draft. I think that's nuts. I'd much rather come up with a better draft system where you still select your players, with owners seeded in their proper rounds. I'm not a first round player, and I shouldn't have to pick myself in the first round. I'd be happy to accept what round other owners agree I should be picked in as my own pick (3rd,4th,5th,w/e).
This just isn't true, at all. It should be like 15-30 seconds to pick a player, but then its a live bid where everyone can bid/repeat bid for a set amount of time. You give 45 seconds (recommended) or 1 minute max to bid on a player (LIVE BID) and then bam, bidding on that player is over.

We did this for 5+ weekly tournaments for Star Strikers and it never took more than an hour after the start to draft (that was for usually 8-12 teams, 4 players per team). If you are drafting 10 teams of 8 people (7+captain), thats 70 selections. So 30 seconds max to pick a player x 70 = 35 minutes + 1 minute x 70 players = 70 , for a grand total of 105 minutes. 2-3 hours from start to finish should be pretty doable.
User avatar
Teroh
Legend
Posts: 479
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 7:47 pm
Battle.net Name: Teroh
Battle.net Char Code: 773
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by Teroh » Thu Jul 17, 2014 7:44 pm

TeeKay wrote:
Teroh wrote:I don't like the bidding system. Imagine it takes 1 minute for an owner to pick a player, then 2-3 minutes for the bidding and logging of the player. Then we move onto the next player, repeat. I'd guess you'll end up taking about 4 minutes on average per player. Times that by ~90 players, that's 360 minutes. 6 hours for a draft. I think that's nuts. I'd much rather come up with a better draft system where you still select your players, with owners seeded in their proper rounds. I'm not a first round player, and I shouldn't have to pick myself in the first round. I'd be happy to accept what round other owners agree I should be picked in as my own pick (3rd,4th,5th,w/e).
This just isn't true, at all. It should be like 15-30 seconds to pick a player, but then its a live bid where everyone can bid/repeat bid for a set amount of time. You give 45 seconds (recommended) or 1 minute max to bid on a player (LIVE BID) and then bam, bidding on that player is over.

We did this for 5+ weekly tournaments for Star Strikers and it never took more than an hour after the start to draft (that was for usually 8-12 teams, 4 players per team). If you are drafting 10 teams of 8 people (7+captain), thats 70 selections. So 30 seconds max to pick a player x 70 = 35 minutes + 1 minute x 70 players = 70 , for a grand total of 105 minutes. 2-3 hours from start to finish should be pretty doable.
While I can agree with you that it might go smoothly for people who have been already doing it three or four times, I have a hard time believing it was all organized and quick the first go-through. I'm just trying to look at it realistically, because I've been in enough situations where people say "oh it'll only take someone max of 20-30 seconds" to pick a player and it just isn't always true. And how can bidding be organized if it's timed? A player like Vapour is up for bid, still being bid on, and at the last second 10 owners all yell a final price? That will take time to get sorted and booked. What's to prevent owners from all not bidding, instead waiting at the last second every time to yell a price, much like ebay bid sniping? I could understand a bid for a small draft, but this is a big one, and I especially don't think it should be put to a timed bidding process.

At the same time, as someone else mentioned, there is no balancing between captains of different skill levels. If Irish and I have the same access the the same players, I'm going to have to spend high amounts to potentially even get a single tier 1 player, while Irish's tier 1 player is already in the bag, so he can still spend to get another. A simple salary cap difference wouldn't solve the issue, as he can just shave off salary on his last few picks, who likely won't even play more than a couple games, to make up the difference. In a draft system where Irish is known to be a round 1 player and I am, for example, a round 3 player: I can select a round 1 player, Irish has himself, we both get to select round 2's, I pick myself round 3, and Irish picks a round 3 player. We all end up with a single player from round 1, 2, and 3. This is how fourteen seasons of the SPHL worked for the draft, and I can't remember anyone ever complaining about team stacking from the draft.
User avatar
Watermelon
Posts: 1374
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 2:34 pm
Battle.net Name: Watermelon
Battle.net Char Code: 1918
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by Watermelon » Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:34 am

ZHL is 2 months long, I don't have any problem with an extra long draft to ensure it's quality...

I don't think "unbalanced owners" is a good reason to scrap the auction idea. If you can assign a round # to each owner, then you can assign an auction value to each owner.
S4 Champ | Playoff MVP | "Best Owner"
EUDL7 Champ
BaseTradeTV ZH3K Winner
record for most goals in a ZHL game: http://www.zealothockey.net/event/450/
User avatar
TeeKay
Legend
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:49 pm
Battle.net Name:
Battle.net Char Code: 0
Battle.net Server: CN

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by TeeKay » Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:52 am

The general consensus (from talking to WF, Maha, Bruce) was to put the owners into 4 tiers pre-draft, voted by others owners prior to the draft (so if other owners think you should be the best player on team, 2nd best, 3rd best, 4th) and you have the price against your overall team salary before the draft. So, say for instance hwcubs since he is newer would be a Tier 4 player (4th best player on team), then he would have (as an example) 100 salary, whereas Irish as a tier 1 player would be something like 200 salary. The 100 salary credit to hwcubs would help him get extra talent in the draft to balance out the teams.



We talked about this in depth in the "make salary mean something thread" - http://www.zealothockey.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=422


Here's a few of my rationale for the budget auction > regular draft:

The salary draft + the free agency bidding window (per each free agent) would make salary much more strategic and balanced. It would also reduce the flat $110 for first round, $100 for second round, etc by letting owners pay their real market value for players. Getting Maha with the first pick in the draft isnt only worth $110 when the 10th pick is worth lower. Salary should be tied to market value.

I think this would make salary = balance, NOT what is supposed to be now (salary = incentives). Season one's theory where balance is created by players wanting rewards; season two's should switch that to a new theory where balance is created by free market setting player prices. Multiple top players said they would take $40 salary to win -- which sets up stacked teams.

As an added bonus, you get SOME control over who is on your team. I think owners will like being able to grab people they like playing with. For instance, say in a regular draft Wild takes Strawberry in round 4. Teroh was two picks behind him and value him more than Wild does, but can't do anything about it in a regular draft. In a bidding draft, Teroh can outbid Wild by $5 and get Strawberry. It balances out, however, because this is $5 that Teroh doesn't have to spend elsewhere (other picks or save for free agency).


Finally, in an auction system, whoever has the least money left over after the draft SHOULD be the team with the most talent. This is an important concept, because whoever has the most money left after the draft SHOULD be the team with the least talent, theoretically. So, when a free agent enters the league, the team with the most money left should be able to bid the highest for them to balance out their team. In the straight draft pick'em format, everyone has the same money left over and how do you even do free agency? If you don't address free agency properly, then you could get people like Burn or others hold out of draft and then enter as free agents.
User avatar
l)arkangel
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:50 am
Battle.net Name: Darkangel
Battle.net Char Code: 1457
Battle.net Server: NA
Location: Troll City

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by l)arkangel » Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:22 am

Free Agent System Comments:
As for Free Agents, I think having a 24 hour time period where owners can bid on the free agent is a bad idea. I envision a player being selected for a free agent signing. Then exactly 24 hours later, all other owners bid $1 (whatever the minimum is) more than the original bid. There is no way to stop this from happening with a time based bid on free agent signing as far as I know.

I think it would work better if once a week there was a free agent auction. All owners who are interested in signing the free agents of that week would be required to show up (or send a representative). This would make it a live auction once a week and would let all owners have an equal chance in getting the free agent. If owners aren't trying to sign any of the free agents, then they don't need to show up. All free agents that are going to be in the auction must be named 24 hours prior to the auction to avoid owners trying to sneak a free agent signing with little to no notice that they are going to be in the auction.

As opposed to someone bidding at the last second, or an owner announcing that he is setting a free agent up for bidding at 4am because he knows he is more likely than not going to be the only owner willing to wake up at that time the next day to place the last bid.
*S5 Champion*

Player Profile
User avatar
TeeKay
Legend
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:49 pm
Battle.net Name:
Battle.net Char Code: 0
Battle.net Server: CN

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by TeeKay » Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:32 pm

I completely agree DA. The emergency free agent thing would let you play someone right away but then there could be the live auction for them later. Auction could be like 15 min before one of the main game days too, would be convenient.
Ruckle
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 1:31 am
Battle.net Name: Ruckle
Battle.net Char Code: 627
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by Ruckle » Fri Jul 18, 2014 12:53 pm

Can players still become free agents midway through the season after being drafted?
Image
User avatar
TeeKay
Legend
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:49 pm
Battle.net Name:
Battle.net Char Code: 0
Battle.net Server: CN

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by TeeKay » Fri Jul 18, 2014 1:59 pm

Ruckle wrote:Can players still become free agents midway through the season after being drafted?
Depends on how many alts they have :roll:
Kholin
Posts: 201
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2014 9:00 pm
Battle.net Name: Kholin
Battle.net Char Code: 610
Battle.net Server: NA

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by Kholin » Sat Jul 19, 2014 5:51 pm

Teroh wrote:At the same time, as someone else mentioned, there is no balancing between captains of different skill levels. If Irish and I have the same access the the same players, I'm going to have to spend high amounts to potentially even get a single tier 1 player, while Irish's tier 1 player is already in the bag, so he can still spend to get another. A simple salary cap difference wouldn't solve the issue, as he can just shave off salary on his last few picks, who likely won't even play more than a couple games, to make up the difference. In a draft system where Irish is known to be a round 1 player and I am, for example, a round 3 player: I can select a round 1 player, Irish has himself, we both get to select round 2's, I pick myself round 3, and Irish picks a round 3 player. We all end up with a single player from round 1, 2, and 3. This is how fourteen seasons of the SPHL worked for the draft, and I can't remember anyone ever complaining about team stacking from the draft.
There is one major problem which is being over looked with the idea of team owners having to "buy" themselves. Due to the fact that salary is dependent on a bidding system, salaries have no limit. Team owners have a set amount of money which they can use to pay salary, and this can cause problems. If team captains have to buy themselves, then other team owners can raise the price on them, causing the team owner who has to buy himself pay a lot more. This would especially be a problem for captains who are Tier 1, because the other captains have the money to inflate prices. A Tier 4 or Tier 3 captain would have less of a issue, due to the fact that they have likely already picked and bought their teams, so extra money spent "buying" themselves won't change their rosters.
      • Dont worry, Im a Koalafied goalie
User avatar
TeeKay
Legend
Posts: 989
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:49 pm
Battle.net Name:
Battle.net Char Code: 0
Battle.net Server: CN

Re: ZHL Owners vote: Change to draft

Post by TeeKay » Sat Jul 19, 2014 8:34 pm

KholinGoal wrote:
Teroh wrote:At the same time, as someone else mentioned, there is no balancing between captains of different skill levels. If Irish and I have the same access the the same players, I'm going to have to spend high amounts to potentially even get a single tier 1 player, while Irish's tier 1 player is already in the bag, so he can still spend to get another. A simple salary cap difference wouldn't solve the issue, as he can just shave off salary on his last few picks, who likely won't even play more than a couple games, to make up the difference. In a draft system where Irish is known to be a round 1 player and I am, for example, a round 3 player: I can select a round 1 player, Irish has himself, we both get to select round 2's, I pick myself round 3, and Irish picks a round 3 player. We all end up with a single player from round 1, 2, and 3. This is how fourteen seasons of the SPHL worked for the draft, and I can't remember anyone ever complaining about team stacking from the draft.
There is one major problem which is being over looked with the idea of team owners having to "buy" themselves. Due to the fact that salary is dependent on a bidding system, salaries have no limit. Team owners have a set amount of money which they can use to pay salary, and this can cause problems. If team captains have to buy themselves, then other team owners can raise the price on them, causing the team owner who has to buy himself pay a lot more. This would especially be a problem for captains who are Tier 1, because the other captains have the money to inflate prices. A Tier 4 or Tier 3 captain would have less of a issue, due to the fact that they have likely already picked and bought their teams, so extra money spent "buying" themselves won't change their rosters.
No it's not a bidding system for owners it's just a tier system.. An owner cannot be bought by another team.
Locked