i5s General Discussion

[GoLions]

Think it was a fair assumption.

Can't think of any other draft game off the top of my head that doesn't have trading.

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
  They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

Why doesn't it? If we keep 3 players, then the top (almost) 150 players will be unavailable to draft each year, and the bottom teams can't improve. If less players are kept, then the bottom teams can actually draft a decent player and improve their team.

[Ziplock]

This comp has had gradual input and will continue to evolve. So using  you drafted to keep 3 players as an argument isnt fair. Especially considering you'll normally take the best player available  in your top 3 picks anyway. And I don't think the gap between the strong pools and weak pools was fully realised.

Is it really much diff for stronger teams in a drop from 3 keepers to 2? its a massive difference for the poorer teams. As the pool next year will be stronger

regardless of discussion #draft2

[upthemaidens]

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
  They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

Why doesn't it? If we keep 3 players, then the top (almost) 150 players will be unavailable to draft each year, and the bottom teams can't improve. If less players are kept, then the bottom teams can actually draft a decent player and improve their team.

That was the original concept that we drafted for.   Trading is a different issue that shouldn't affect the keeper rule.

[GoLions]

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
  They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

Why doesn't it? If we keep 3 players, then the top (almost) 150 players will be unavailable to draft each year, and the bottom teams can't improve. If less players are kept, then the bottom teams can actually draft a decent player and improve their team.

That was the original concept that we drafted for.   Trading is a different issue that shouldn't affect the keeper rule.

How do you think teams are going to improve though if everyone is allowed 3 keepers then? Look at who every team has as their 4th best player, and that's who the bottom teams will be drafting to "improve". Here's probably the best 4th round picks, although granted some players taken later then your 4th round pick could be better:
Aish (will likely be kept if 3 keepers though)
Billings
Darling (will be kept though)
Breust (probably be kept)
Kelly (might retire)
Burgoyne (might retire)
Christensen
Jroo
Langford
Hurn
Leuey
Walters
Motlop

That's not a lot, and when you have top 3s of, for example using myself and Turkey, A Swallow, Ebert, Dunstan vs Rockliff, Shiel, D Smith, there is no chance of me ever scoring as well as him if we have 3 keepers and no trading.

[upthemaidens]

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
  They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

Why doesn't it? If we keep 3 players, then the top (almost) 150 players will be unavailable to draft each year, and the bottom teams can't improve. If less players are kept, then the bottom teams can actually draft a decent player and improve their team.

That was the original concept that we drafted for.   Trading is a different issue that shouldn't affect the keeper rule.

How do you think teams are going to improve though if everyone is allowed 3 keepers then? Look at who every team has as their 4th best player, and that's who the bottom teams will be drafting to "improve". Here's probably the best 4th round picks, although granted some players taken later then your 4th round pick could be better:
Aish (will likely be kept if 3 keepers though)
Billings
Darling (will be kept though)
Breust (probably be kept)
Kelly (might retire)
Burgoyne (might retire)
Christensen
Jroo
Langford
Hurn
Leuey
Walters
Motlop

That's not a lot, and when you have top 3s of, for example using myself and Turkey, A Swallow, Ebert, Dunstan vs Rockliff, Shiel, D Smith, there is no chance of me ever scoring as well as him if we have 3 keepers and no trading.

The problem is though that argument for only two keepers, could be used for only having one keeper. Which in turn could be used for not having any keepers.
  (Don't have keepers, next years draft will be even stronger)  :P
     
If the decision to trade happens then so be it, but Coaches drafted under the three keepers rule.
   

[ADEZ]

And again I agree 100% with GL, he continues arguing very relevant, very accurate points. Surely everyone can see that 2 keepers and/or trading is the way too an equal competition and I honestly do not believe that people drafting w/ 3 keeps in mind would have drafted noticeably differently if 2 keepers were settled on

[GoLions]

Whether or not there ends up being trading involved, that shouldn't influence whether we keep 3 players or not. 
  They are two different subjects.   One was a rule the other was just a possibility.

Why doesn't it? If we keep 3 players, then the top (almost) 150 players will be unavailable to draft each year, and the bottom teams can't improve. If less players are kept, then the bottom teams can actually draft a decent player and improve their team.

That was the original concept that we drafted for.   Trading is a different issue that shouldn't affect the keeper rule.

How do you think teams are going to improve though if everyone is allowed 3 keepers then? Look at who every team has as their 4th best player, and that's who the bottom teams will be drafting to "improve". Here's probably the best 4th round picks, although granted some players taken later then your 4th round pick could be better:
Aish (will likely be kept if 3 keepers though)
Billings
Darling (will be kept though)
Breust (probably be kept)
Kelly (might retire)
Burgoyne (might retire)
Christensen
Jroo
Langford
Hurn
Leuey
Walters
Motlop

That's not a lot, and when you have top 3s of, for example using myself and Turkey, A Swallow, Ebert, Dunstan vs Rockliff, Shiel, D Smith, there is no chance of me ever scoring as well as him if we have 3 keepers and no trading.

The problem is though that argument for only two keepers, could be used for only having one keeper. Which in turn could be used for not having any keepers.
  (Don't have keepers, next years draft will be even stronger)  :P
     
If the decision to trade happens then so be it, but Coaches drafted under the three keepers rule.

I don't think many people would be using that argument for 0 or 1 keepers :P
Honestly, if we have 3 keepers and no trading, there's not really any reason for me to continue with this comp. I joined under the assumption that we would be able to trade, as with every other fantasy comp. Surely you can see that the teams who are around the bottom early on will struggle to improve? People will just stop playing after the first or second season if those rules are in place, because why would you want to remain a shower team for years on end.

[Big Mac]

I think GL is right here. There is no real reason for weak teams to keep playing each year if they don't have a realistic chance to improve.

[Nige]

Trading hasn't been ruled out entirely though, I'd say it's highly likely trading will be brought in at the end of the first season.

I think a decent portion of the comp is just happy to see how year one of i5s plays out first and that way we'll be able to see what went wrong and what went right.

[GoLions]

Trading hasn't been ruled out entirely though, I'd say it's highly likely trading will be brought in at the end of the first season.

I think a decent portion of the comp is just happy to see how year one of i5s plays out first and that way we'll be able to see what went wrong and what went right.

I'm 100% ok with trading not happening until the end of the first season. But, and trying not to sound like a little dog (damn you and your new filter HP :P) here, if we get to the end of the first season, have 3 keepers, and no trading, it's likely that it will also be my last season. Just wouldn't be anything to keep me interested in the comp tbh.

[Nige]

Trading hasn't been ruled out entirely though, I'd say it's highly likely trading will be brought in at the end of the first season.

I think a decent portion of the comp is just happy to see how year one of i5s plays out first and that way we'll be able to see what went wrong and what went right.

I'm 100% ok with trading not happening until the end of the first season. But, and trying not to sound like a little dog (damn you and your new filter HP :P) here, if we get to the end of the first season, have 3 keepers, and no trading, it's likely that it will also be my last season. Just wouldn't be anything to keep me interested in the comp tbh.

Without knowing for sure, I'd be fairly confident in saying that won't be the case.

[Vinny]

What's the point of the competition if we got 3 keepers and no trading?

Top teams continue to dominate, bottom teams continue to get destroyed. Dave is right, don't see how there is any motive for a bottom team.

[GM]

What's the point of the competition if we got 3 keepers and no trading?

Top teams continue to dominate, bottom teams continue to get destroyed. Dave is right, don't see how there is any motive for a bottom team.

Keep 1 player only.

[upthemaidens]

  I would of thought having a perceived weaker team would be considered a challenge.  "Can't win so I'll quit" attitude didn't enter my mind.

  Premiums change from year to year, if there is seeded drafts in the future, squads will even out.

[Ringo]

Can we just agree to settle down and let this competition run for the season and then look at what we need to do to enhance the comp after analysing what was good and what was bad.

Trading (and only have ezipc here in the states to verify) has only been ruled out for the beginning of this season which is fair enough.

A number of the scorers people have selected may not be around next year as well, Personally I am in favour of the three keeper rule as that is the basis of drafting,  In my case I drafted 3 players who I thought I could build a strong team around for next year onwards.

Team can even up with a seeded draft next year as well as trading,

So finally just chill and try not to take the fun out of the competition.  May lose traction before it starts if we keep arguing the way we are, I for one am getting tired of the same old arguments being put up day after day.  It is obvious that there is not consensus on some issues and yet we have not had a ball kicked in the competition.