Draft fairness

[SeductiveNun]

In light of the strategy pick of picking 10th every round in a draft, I thought I'd bring to mind an issue we're having in my long time local.

 

In my local 12 team redraft league, for 19 years we have run the same type of draft - we redraw position every odd round (16 round draft). So if you have #1 in the first, you may end up with any number of positions in the 3rd. We flip on the even rounds so in round 1 if you pick first you would get #12 in the second. If you redraw and get 10th in the 3rd you would get #3 in the 4th, etc.

 

The last couple years we have had owners who complained this is a completely unfair way to draft, as in the case if you pick #1 in the first, you may end up with #12 in the 3rd, which theoretically gives you a worse player than you would get at your #1 position. I would contend though that you would get a much better player in the 4th round than you would get if you didn't pick until pick #12, so to me it's a wash.

 

Conversely, you could pick #12 in the first round and get the swing pick, then perhaps draw #1 in the 3rd round. You would get (again theoretically) a better player in the 3rd round than you normally would get but you lose out on that swing pick in the 4th and could get a lesser player there. Again, to me it's a wash.

 

The two owners leading the charge on this are saying this method is blatantly unfair. One has even stated he's unable to win in our league due to our draft method. Never mind the fact he's made the playoffs 4 of 5 seasons, but has only managed to win 1 playoff game in that time.

 

My contention is that our method balances things out in the draft (and I ran the stats to prove it only to get shouted down by the two owners who oppose it), and that a standard snake draft isn't any fairer than our method. They have shown no evidence to prove their point, only just shouting louder that it's an unfair method and that our "lottery" method of selecting draft order is unfair for some owners to be able to win in our league. I think it's a bunch of sour grapes myself, but just want to get some other opinions.

 

Oh, one more thing. The guy who is protesting the most is in another league with almost the exact same draft method as our league. Their only difference is they use reverse order of finish from the previous season for rounds 1-2, then redraw ever odd round after that. They are also allowed to keep 2 players, at the expense of their 3rd and 6th round picks, but those kept players cannot have been drafted in rounds 1-2 the previous season. I have perused their league message board (I used to be in that league myself) and he has not lodged one single complaint about their draft method in the 5 years he's been in that league. He's also won that league 3 times. I'm thinking severe hypocrite, or at least one who is in love with double standards. I have yet to bring up this point on our league message board though.

 

Thanks for any feedback!

[MustOfBeenDrunk]

I think they are saying it is unfair because it is not the norm , back in the day when your league started I'm sure everyone was ok with this and most were in their first FF league , so had nothing to compare it to. Now that you probably have some new owners and most of the others are in multiple leagues , this type of draft is just different to them ?

[SeductiveNun]

I think they are saying it is unfair because it is not the norm , back in the day when your league started I'm sure everyone was ok with this and most were in their first FF league , so had nothing to compare it to. Now that you probably have some new owners and most of the others are in multiple leagues , this type of draft is just different to them ?

 

The biggest complainer has been in the league 5 years now, and is in another league with a similar style draft. He hasn't complained about that one because he's won 3 championships there.

 

The other guy has been in the league about 18 seasons. He's in another league where they do a standard snake draft.

 

This is the one thing that makes our league unique to every other redraft league that uses the standard snake style. I'm trying to hang on to this like grim death, but the other owners who have been supportive of this drafting method are staying silent. My opinion is if you want to be in a league with a different draft - then be in a different league. Why change what we've been doing for 19 years when there is no basis for it?

[flemingd]

The last couple years we have had owners who complained this is a completely unfair way to draft, as in the case if you pick #1 in the first, you may end up with #12 in the 3rd, which theoretically gives you a worse player than you would get at your #1 position. I would contend though that you would get a much better player in the 4th round than you would get if you didn't pick until pick #12, so to me it's a wash.

 

This worst case scenario is called 3RR, or 3rd Round Reversal, which some leagues do. So your league isn't quite that harsh, so I don't see an issue with it. I'm a fan of 3RR actually, because the #1 is a huge advantage on paper otherwise.

[Big Country]

I suppose technically no "draft" system is inherently fair, as not everyone has an equal shot at every player, thus the increase in auction leagues.

 

However, it's possible to win from any draft spot, and every year there are debates about the merits of drafting from any spot in a standard serpentine draft.

 

3RR supposedly balances out the imagined unfairness of a later 1st round pick (I know there was supposed to be math behind it, but what I have seen was based on pick values that assume the right player is picked at every spot).

 

Your twist seems like a fun alternative to a standard serpentine draft. I couldn't make a strong argument that it is any more fair, or unfair, than a standard serpentine or 3RR draft, it just adds another layer of randmomness to it by changing the order every other round. The assumption in all draft formats is that the pairing of each odd/even round pick is essentially balanced (ie the combo of #1 and #24 are equal in value to the #12 and #13 picks). In practice, the #1 and #24 has a higher trade value than the #12 and #13 (most owners would want to get additional value to give up the #1 pick), but in reality, the players drafted at #12/13 could very well outscore the players drafted at #1/24.

 

Out of curiosity, do you determine the full draft ahead of time, or are spots drawn right before the odd number rounds are set to begin?

[SeductiveNun]

I suppose technically no "draft" system is inherently fair, as not everyone has an equal shot at every player, thus the increase in auction leagues.

 

However, it's possible to win from any draft spot, and every year there are debates about the merits of drafting from any spot in a standard serpentine draft.

 

3RR supposedly balances out the imagined unfairness of a later 1st round pick (I know there was supposed to be math behind it, but what I have seen was based on pick values that assume the right player is picked at every spot).

 

Your twist seems like a fun alternative to a standard serpentine draft. I couldn't make a strong argument that it is any more fair, or unfair, than a standard serpentine or 3RR draft, it just adds another layer of randmomness to it by changing the order every other round. The assumption in all draft formats is that the pairing of each odd/even round pick is essentially balanced (ie the combo of #1 and #24 are equal in value to the #12 and #13 picks). In practice, the #1 and #24 has a higher trade value than the #12 and #13 (most owners would want to get additional value to give up the #1 pick), but in reality, the players drafted at #12/13 could very well outscore the players drafted at #1/24.

 

Out of curiosity, do you determine the full draft ahead of time, or are spots drawn right before the odd number rounds are set to begin?

 

We draw the numbers the night of the draft, so everyone gets to draw their odd round position before the draft starts. We get all rounds drawn and accounted for before we start the draft, so to answer your question in a better manner, we determine the full draft ahead of time.

 

And we do allow trading of draft positions, but nobody seems to ever try to do that. Last time I think it happened was 2009, and that guy traded down in the 5th and 7th to the #12 spot in each.

[stevegrab]

I don't see anything wrong with it. We still do a straight draft in our league, 5 keeper (18 roster) and draft order is set based on prior year's finish.

 

As BC said, no draft order is really fair.

 

What bothers me (as a commish) is that many in your league who seem to have been ok with this draft style for almost 20 years are now remaining silent. The loud complainers may eventually convince them they are right, or they'll go along just to shut them up and get on with the season. I've seen some decisions go like that in our league and hate it, because they give no real thought to what they're doing. Those 2 owners who don't like that should leave the league and play in one that has the rules they like. I hate when a small number of owners wants to change a league to better suit them, never mind what others want or how it has been for a long time.

 

Good luck.

[Skarzon]

I know you don't want to change and I don't see anything glaringly unfair about your current setup.

 

I do see a big difference in his other league draft though. Having round 1-2 set in reverse by the previous year standings, then a re-draw for odd rounds after, takes out the possibility of a run of bad luck draws for the guys that finished at the bottom the year before.

[Savage Beatings]

I don't know that I would say that what you are doing in unfair, but I don't agree that it is a wash if someone gets screwed in the draw. The reason being, that as the draft progresses there are clear drop-offs in the talent pool available. I wouldn't want to keep getting crappy odd round picks, just to have to make it up on the even round picks. If that happens more than once, especially early on, you would have a hard time making up for missing out on a higher tier of player.

 

It makes it riskier, and maybe more exciting.

[SeductiveNun]

I don't know that I would say that what you are doing in unfair, but I don't agree that it is a wash if someone gets screwed in the draw. The reason being, that as the draft progresses there are clear drop-offs in the talent pool available. I wouldn't want to keep getting crappy odd round picks, just to have to make it up on the even round picks. If that happens more than once, especially early on, you would have a hard time making up for missing out on a higher tier of player.

 

It makes it riskier, and maybe more exciting.

 

So at what rounds does this dropoff happen? Let's say for sake of argument the first 6 rounds are what makes or breaks your draft. Even if you're #1 in the first round, and then get unlucky draws at say #6 in the 3rd and #7 in the 5th, how is the talent dropoff an issue? If you were to do a standard snake draft and those owners at the #6 and #7 spots have to deal with a more depleted talent pool then, how is it fair for them in a standard snake?

 

Basically, I'm looking for something definative the odd round players are much more valuable than even round players to support this contention. Not specifically from you Savage, but I am curious as to if there is truly a dropoff between players picked in odd rounds versus even rounds (based on that years final performance, not on perceived value). Which although those two hanyucks in my league haven't even come close to stating, I am going to go off the assumption that may be their ultimate argument.

[Big Country]

So at what rounds does this dropoff happen? Let's say for sake of argument the first 6 rounds are what makes or breaks your draft. Even if you're #1 in the first round, and then get unlucky draws at say #6 in the 3rd and #7 in the 5th, how is the talent dropoff an issue? If you were to do a standard snake draft and those owners at the #6 and #7 spots have to deal with a more depleted talent pool then, how is it fair for them in a standard snake?

 

Basically, I'm looking for something definative the odd round players are much more valuable than even round players to support this contention. Not specifically from you Savage, but I am curious as to if there is truly a dropoff between players picked in odd rounds versus even rounds (based on that years final performance, not on perceived value). Which although those two hanyucks in my league haven't even come close to stating, I am going to go off the assumption that may be their ultimate argument.

 

 

The bolded is a near impossibility to state. So much of that comes down to what a particular player drafted at a paticular spot does, so the answer to this would be different for every single league.

 

What we do know as fact is that performance drop off is not linear - the drop off from the #1 player to the #10 player at a position is much steeper than the drop off from the #10 to #20 player. The level of this drop off may change from year to year, but averaged out over several years it is clear that this is true. What we don't know ahead of time is exactly what players will put up what numbers. If we did, there'd be no point in playing the game. Now, in theory, having an earlier pick gives a better chance at selecting the higher performing player, and if it is expected that the performance drop is more steep early on, the difference in the projected value between the #4 pick and the #9 pick is greater than the expected drop between the #16 and #21 pick, even though both is only a shift of 5 picks. These just happen to be the 1st/2nd round pairing of picks from the 4 and 9 spots in a 12 team serpentine draft.

 

It is this projected drop off that led many to contend that the value ofthe #1/24 combo is more than the #12/13 combo, because the projected drop off from #1-12 is greater than the drop off from #13-24 - thus the 3RR draft was constructed on the theory that the combination of #1/24/36/37 was closer in projected value with #12/13/25/48 compared to #1/24/25/48 and #12/13/36/37.

 

I personally don;t thnk it makes a huge difference in terms of projected value, especially when actually applied, as it still comes down to selecting the right player in those spots. Where 3RR makes a bigger change is in draft strategy, as you may be willing to do certain things at the 12/13 swing if you know you only have to wait 12 picks for your next pick vs. waiting 24 picks.

 

If we go with the idea that all odd/even pairing are equal, then randomizing as you do has no bearing on projected value. If we assume that there is unequal value to the odd/even pairings, then all you are doing is introducing an element of luck to the projected value each owner receives by making the order of each pair of odd/even rounds independent from one another.

[Def.]

Let me first say I don't see a problem with the way the draft is conducted. That being said, I would be careful about not wanting change because "that is the way it's always been". If you're the only one voicing anything against the 2 others, then maybe some of those that are silent want that change as well. Have had this problem in my main league as well. Everyone wants to argue their point like its some huge political fight while the others cower and wait for one of the arguing sides to show weakness before joining in the fray. Obviously a constructive discussion about what is best for the league and its members should be led by the commish, but both sides should be ready to accept that they may not be in the majority. It is very possible that others want a standardize draft order because it is more consistent and/or easier to strategize, while others like you may want to keep with tradition. Just some thoughts.

[Company of Heroes]

Of course I don't think it is completely unfair, but I also think minor occasional changes in a long standing lead can keep people interested/invested.

 

CoH

[SeductiveNun]

Big Country - I could live with the argument as you presented it and deal with an honest debate with the other owners if they presented something similar - but their screaming "unfair because it makes it hard for me to wiin" without any reason as to why they think it's unfair just pisses me off to no end.

 

Def. - The last vote we had on the issue was 2 years ago, and we voted to keep it as is by a 8-4 margin. Previous years we discussed it at our league party and it never even became a close vote, so there is a showing trend that some people are looking to change. It also coincides with an influx of newer owners over time - so I admit I feel a bit peevish about losing something the old guard never had problems with.

 

I was commish of this league for the last 13 years, and I stepped down because I was getting burned out on it. The new commish is actually the original commish taking the reigns once again. We have a poll up on our league website with different drafting options for this year, and as of now it stands like the old method may be getting the axe (which is a departure from how we have done rule changes in the past but that is a different issue).

 

I commished the league longer than anyone, and I admitted to the league 2 years ago that I needed to step down because I was taking things too personally when it came to changing rules, etc. I basically told them I felt like the league was mine and I didn't want to change things as they were, which is the wrong way for a commissioner to feel, so I needed to step down. There was some backpedaling by others and I stayed on another year (at their request), but I knew I couldn't be an unbiased commissioner anymore at least as far as proposed rule changes. I liked the league the way it was and didn't see anything wrong with it. Part of it is it's kind of hard for me to let go, but I'll be damned if I'm just going to let people throw out claims that they aren't willing to back up.

 

Anyhow, thanks for the feedback, and you guys have given me some much needed perspective on this.

[BA Baracus]

I think it's cool that y'all draft that way, it sounds like a lot of fun. There is zero difference in the 'fairness' of this method vs a typical snake draft.

 

Anyone who says they can't win because of something to do with the draft sucks at fantasy football. Championships are won on the waiver wire.

[MustOfBeenDrunk]

I think it's cool that y'all draft that way, it sounds like a lot of fun. There is zero difference in the 'fairness' of this method vs a typical snake draft.

 

Anyone who says they can't win because of something to do with the draft sucks at fantasy football. Championships are won on the waiver wire.

 

 

This plus trading & lots of luck ,

Back to the question of changes, in our original local that started not many years before the league in question here

We have made many changes to keep up with what most other league are doing now and all of the changes were tough to get passed when we made them but now its the norm. Such as PPR , points for yards , extra points for FG's longer than 30 yards , Def scoring points & No more Team QB's ,,, back in the day it was basically a TD & FG only league and we used the New paper to add up points but now the game has progressed & I for one like the changes

[robotpimp]

This is a different intriguing way to prepare for a draft, the guys that are coming in from other leagues probably like to prepare for one draft style (like auction and snake draft).. I played a 14 team league that re-rolled draft position 15 minutes before the start and we re-rolled just like this at the end of every even round.. so essentially the same except you didn't know your 3rd, 4th draft position until end of rd 2.. It's fair unless the cards were fixed. I would have no issue with a draft like this but as MustofBeenDrunk said the rest of the league rules on original local leagues need to progress with the times... not necessary a re-roll draft.

Edited July 10, 2014 by robotpimp

[Dolphin_Akie]

The only advice I would give is to let both sides make their arguments trying to use clear facts as to why the method of drafting should change/stay the same (basically avoiding saying its unfair with no reason as to why or saying we've always done it like this) and then get the league to vote.

 

Every year we have an AGM (mainly an excuse to meet up and get drunk) but we compile a list of topics to discuss and then vote on any potential changes. Most points are tiny changes like adding TE to the flex position but every year the main debate is around the draft order (re-draft league where the draft order is reverse standings). So people make suggestions with reasons then we all vote so at least the league as a whole has had their say.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Dolphin_Akie

[lennykravitz2004]

...and then get the league to vote.

 

Every year we have an AGM (mainly an excuse to meet up and get drunk) but we compile a list of topics to discuss and then vote on any potential changes. Most points are tiny changes like adding TE to the flex position but every year the main debate is around the draft order (re-draft league where the draft order is reverse standings). So people make suggestions with reasons then we all vote so at least the league as a whole has had their say.

 

 

Welcome to the boards.

 

Agree with your statement 100%.

 

Do most leagues wait until (relatively) just before the season starts to change rules? What seems to work fairly well for my local is rules are typically addressed right after the season or towards the end, while everything is still fresh from the year. Worst problem is finding the email the following summer which sums up any changes. No last minute stuff about any changes, having to find a new league-mate if somebody is PO'd enough to quit (which hasn't happened to us), etc. Works very well for us. Our Commish says every year how easy our league is to manage because of things like this. Here we are about 2 months from the season starting, and instead of looking forward to having fun, this league is stressed at having to monkey with this.

 

I would seriously consider starting this dialogue about rules changes at the end of the season instead. Sure, something may come up during the off-season that somebody didn't think about "until just now", but I think leagues with solid FF players won't run into that very often.

 

With respect to the actual draft order for this league, I've always been of the thinking: "are we all playing by the same rules?" Unless there is something inherently and obviously unfair about the draft, then there shouldn't be an issue. Personally, I'm not a fan of the explained drafting method (just seems too involved/weird for my taste), however, if I'm asked to join an established league, presented with all of the league rules, and I accept, then who is that "on"? (At the same time, each person does have the right to request changes, yes?)

[Dolphin_Akie]

Welcome to the boards.

 

Agree with your statement 100%.

 

Do most leagues wait until (relatively) just before the season starts to change rules? What seems to work fairly well for my local is rules are typically addressed right after the season or towards the end, while everything is still fresh from the year. Worst problem is finding the email the following summer which sums up any changes. No last minute stuff about any changes, having to find a new league-mate if somebody is PO'd enough to quit (which hasn't happened to us), etc. Works very well for us. Our Commish says every year how easy our league is to manage because of things like this. Here we are about 2 months from the season starting, and instead of looking forward to having fun, this league is stressed at having to monkey with this.

 

I would seriously consider starting this dialogue about rules changes at the end of the season instead. Sure, something may come up during the off-season that somebody didn't think about "until just now", but I think leagues with solid FF players won't run into that very often.

 

With respect to the actual draft order for this league, I've always been of the thinking: "are we all playing by the same rules?" Unless there is something inherently and obviously unfair about the draft, then there shouldn't be an issue. Personally, I'm not a fan of the explained drafting method (just seems too involved/weird for my taste), however, if I'm asked to join an established league, presented with all of the league rules, and I accept, then who is that "on"? (At the same time, each person does have the right to request changes, yes?)

 

 

Cheers, been looking for a good FF forum for a while!

 

We have ours in March so the dust is well settled on the season but most issues are still fresh in the mid. At the end of the day if its decided democratically then there can't be any complaints about how the league is run because the majority are happy with the rules in place. If two guys are unhappy with those rules then there are thousands of other leagues that may suit them better.

 

As in the quote above, this is the period when the excitement builds to the draft and the witty putdowns are starting to come out ahead of the season rather than the league being mired in an argument over draft position (tend to find people become too obsessed with draft position from my experience, as long as its fair).

[SeductiveNun]

Our league rules changes have worked like this:

 

The first 15 years or so of the league we held a league party at the end of the season. Owners who showed up could propose rule changes, we would discuss them, vote on them, and then they would be good to go for the next season. If an owner didn't show up to the party and something was passed they didn't like, the response was too bad - this is what the party was for and everyone had plenty of advance notice to attend.

 

For the last 3 years we changed that slightly. We still used the party to discuss what rule changes would be proposed, and we settled on language of the newly proposed rule. About a month prior to the draft, we would post all the proposed rules on the league message board and every owner would then vote yes or no for the proposed rule change. New rules could not be passed unless 7 votes approved it. That worked extremely well and everyone was happy.

 

Last year at the party, only 4 of us owners showed up, so we talked about a couple new rule ideas - modifying our free agent time period and possibly creating a post-season tournament for some additional cash. That was all that was discussed. The new commish also stated on the league board that these are the only two issues we will be voting on this year.

 

Now then, the other two owners leading the charge started raising hell about the draft method - neither were at the party. One has never attended one since he's been in the league, the other has been to one in the last 10 years or so. So they get their rancor up, and the new commish puts up a poll about changing the drafting method. To me it seems like a weak move adding this now since we are now breaking with our method for rule changing, as well as the aforementioned "we wan't it changed because it's unfair, but we can't explain why it's unfair" reasoning.

 

So yes, they do have the right to request a change. But there is a set procedure with how we do that, and this year that method is being circumvented by two owners and I fear the commissioner as well. If I was still commissioner and tried to do this there would be holy hell raised (by one of the owners pushing for the draft method change no less) but so far nobody had made a peep about it. I think it's time to get back on the league board and start pointing some of these things out.

[Big Country]

Our league rules changes have worked like this:

 

The first 15 years or so of the league we held a league party at the end of the season. Owners who showed up could propose rule changes, we would discuss them, vote on them, and then they would be good to go for the next season. If an owner didn't show up to the party and something was passed they didn't like, the response was too bad - this is what the party was for and everyone had plenty of advance notice to attend.

 

For the last 3 years we changed that slightly. We still used the party to discuss what rule changes would be proposed, and we settled on language of the newly proposed rule. About a month prior to the draft, we would post all the proposed rules on the league message board and every owner would then vote yes or no for the proposed rule change. New rules could not be passed unless 7 votes approved it. That worked extremely well and everyone was happy.

 

Last year at the party, only 4 of us owners showed up, so we talked about a couple new rule ideas - modifying our free agent time period and possibly creating a post-season tournament for some additional cash. That was all that was discussed. The new commish also stated on the league board that these are the only two issues we will be voting on this year.

 

Now then, the other two owners leading the charge started raising hell about the draft method - neither were at the party. One has never attended one since he's been in the league, the other has been to one in the last 10 years or so. So they get their rancor up, and the new commish puts up a poll about changing the drafting method. To me it seems like a weak move adding this now since we are now breaking with our method for rule changing, as well as the aforementioned "we wan't it changed because it's unfair, but we can't explain why it's unfair" reasoning.

 

So yes, they do have the right to request a change. But there is a set procedure with how we do that, and this year that method is being circumvented by two owners and I fear the commissioner as well. If I was still commissioner and tried to do this there would be holy hell raised (by one of the owners pushing for the draft method change no less) but so far nobody had made a peep about it. I think it's time to get back on the league board and start pointing some of these things out.

 

 

Given you have a set method for how/when rule changes happen, perhaps you could propose that there is no issue having the discussion about draft methods, but given the league rules/precedent on league changes, that no vote/change should be implemented until the following season. Play this season under the existing method as set forth in the rules, allow both sides time to articulate logical reasons why the draft method should change/should not change. You could even allow the vote to happen this summer with an implementation of next season, or, allow all of the owners more time to review the options and vote on it next year when you do the rest of your rule changes.

[BA Baracus]

Our league rules changes have worked like this:

 

The first 15 years or so of the league we held a league party at the end of the season. Owners who showed up could propose rule changes, we would discuss them, vote on them, and then they would be good to go for the next season. If an owner didn't show up to the party and something was passed they didn't like, the response was too bad - this is what the party was for and everyone had plenty of advance notice to attend.

 

For the last 3 years we changed that slightly. We still used the party to discuss what rule changes would be proposed, and we settled on language of the newly proposed rule. About a month prior to the draft, we would post all the proposed rules on the league message board and every owner would then vote yes or no for the proposed rule change. New rules could not be passed unless 7 votes approved it. That worked extremely well and everyone was happy.

 

Last year at the party, only 4 of us owners showed up, so we talked about a couple new rule ideas - modifying our free agent time period and possibly creating a post-season tournament for some additional cash. That was all that was discussed. The new commish also stated on the league board that these are the only two issues we will be voting on this year.

 

Now then, the other two owners leading the charge started raising hell about the draft method - neither were at the party. One has never attended one since he's been in the league, the other has been to one in the last 10 years or so. So they get their rancor up, and the new commish puts up a poll about changing the drafting method. To me it seems like a weak move adding this now since we are now breaking with our method for rule changing, as well as the aforementioned "we wan't it changed because it's unfair, but we can't explain why it's unfair" reasoning.

 

So yes, they do have the right to request a change. But there is a set procedure with how we do that, and this year that method is being circumvented by two owners and I fear the commissioner as well. If I was still commissioner and tried to do this there would be holy hell raised (by one of the owners pushing for the draft method change no less) but so far nobody had made a peep about it. I think it's time to get back on the league board and start pointing some of these things out.

 

 

It's a shame that the commish is allowing this to happen. He should have nipped it in the bud and never posted the poll. 99% of league BS and infighting can be prevented if the commish has some balls.

[flemingd]

It's a shame that the commish is allowing this to happen. He should have nipped it in the bud and never posted the poll. 99% of league BS and infighting can be prevented if the commish has some balls.

 

 

 

All due respect, that's a crock of honda. It isn't the commish's league, it's the players' league. The commish's only job is to determine what issues players want to discuss and facilitate clear, respectful communication that stays on topic. It's up to the league itself to decide what kind of league it "should" be via vote.

 

The commish can knock out infighting very easily - just tell the owner "quit bitching, write up a rule proposal, and I'll put it in front of the owners at the appropriate time. If they like it it's done, and if they don't like it, it's done." It's that simple. I commish my homer this way, and we don't have any drama like this - this from a bunch of D&D geeks that have been gaming together for 20+ years so yeah, we know how to split a hair and argue over it for 3 hours.

[SeductiveNun]

Given you have a set method for how/when rule changes happen, perhaps you could propose that there is no issue having the discussion about draft methods, but given the league rules/precedent on league changes, that no vote/change should be implemented until the following season. Play this season under the existing method as set forth in the rules, allow both sides time to articulate logical reasons why the draft method should change/should not change. You could even allow the vote to happen this summer with an implementation of next season, or, allow all of the owners more time to review the options and vote on it next year when you do the rest of your rule changes.

 

You and you're damn even minded logic. This sounds like the best way to approach it. Thanks!