WXV Discussion

[Jroo]

That's actually a pretty good idea, meow.

But it would really slow down the draft.

[meow meow]

Well, seeing as my first draft pick is 84, I feel that this is relevant to me  :P

It could be relevant if you nominated some players to see what you could get for them.

[meow meow]

Another example is that I might not think it's worth trading Lester for 15 now, but if he gets picked at 15 during the draft and Petracca is still available, I might want to do the trade at that point.

[Nige]

Too left field for me.  :P

[Vinny]

I really like it as well, good idea Meow. The slowing down is a bit of a problem but we got plenty of time.

[elephants]

Can't fully read the idea atm buuuuuut time really shouldn't be an issue imo :P

[nrich102]

Yeah, I also like the idea.

[meow meow]

The second round of the draft shouldn't take too long.

[kilbluff1985]

i like it

but

it's kinda like trading a pick for a player so do they need to be voted on?

like what if a team uses pick 5 on Lester or somebody not worth pick 5

[Vinny]

Since it's a simple one for one, I don't think it can be too bad. It'll also come down to people's faith in their own ability to draft.

[meow meow]

i like it

but

it's kinda like trading a pick for a player so do they need to be voted on?

like what if a team uses pick 5 on Lester or somebody not worth pick 5

If the team selecting him thinks he is worth pick 5, how is that any different from them selecting Oleg Markov if they think he is worth pick 5 even though they'd be the only person on the planet who thinks so? Should that be voted on too?

[DazBurg]

on one hand i see the merit on the other i dislike it

the trading period is for trading players

your plan changed when no mids were left?
well maybe you should of thought ahead then and not screwed yourself over

it could make it way to complicated imo
what happens if you rated lester say top 15 but your at work or out etc and he gets taken at 23 before you got to take him out
too bad then? (which if this was implemented then yeah it should be)

but in saying that you shouldn't be ble to when you first nominate say his up till pick 25 then gone as that is a form of draft tampering if you think his worth that much then trade for a pick in that number zone

if every single team nominates say 2 players each

then after 1 or 32 get picked we then need to keep track of not only draftees but what of those players are available

but then holz takes but only 1 of his and we take back both
so need to then keep an eye on that as well

dunno i see what your trying to say but
it doesn't really mirror the afl much and like i said complicates things further
and really i can see in future ppl not trading certain players if they feel they are being offered unders just to take it to the draft

or on the other hand of it for example
if you had of put taylor adams up (yes i know traded but point is)
and NDT took him with #5 which is what was rejected
does that then make it
A: kinda pointless to have voted on that trade
B: kinda like a bit dodgy like draft tampering or i dunno not in the spirit of the comp

basically i can see this leading to opening a can of worms and undermining in some cases the trade period

(btw meow not directed solely at you in use of lester and adams was just you mentioned lester so easy to use and the adams trade was a straight forward pick for player one to get my point across to everyone ;) )

[Ringo]

Do not want to be too negative here but are we trying to complicate Worlds even further with this idea.  It is as has been said going to be difficult to keep an eye on all through the trading period.

Think we can do without this additional complication.  It is bad enough trying to keep track of the cap.

[meow meow]

Haha feel free to say it's the dumbest thing you've ever heard, I won't take it personally. I just like to float ideas from time to time.

I don't think it is very complicated though. It's just the option of in-draft trading of a few selected players, but it's probably completely unnecessary with such a long trade period.

[Nige]

Yeah, I guess you kind of said it yourself meow. I mean, we have such a long trade period anyway, I don't really get why it needs to continue or happen in-draft as well. Let drafting be for drafting imo.