Welcome stoyko new GM New Jersey Celticsblog Draft 2010 Interest Thread

[Kwhit10]

Wondering if there has been a better way to determine ties than just another vote off and if there has been any change to the voting process like not being able to vote for your own team or anything like that?

There were a bunch of good suggestions after some of the voting drama from last year and I wonder if there was anything changed? Or are we going to have to wait for the rules to be posted?

I think the vote-off idea was fine for most people. The only time that people ran into problems was when they created drama, spammed the board with messages, or made enemies otherwise that turned the votes against them. If everyone plays a fair and social game, then there's no problem with the voting mechanism.

A tall order for the CB Draft, but if you can make it through the draft without getting into a [pee]ing match you'll probably be subject to a fair vote and that makes sense in determining the right team in a tiebreaker. Annoy a lot of people and you subject yourself to a backlash vote, which may not be totally fair, but I like the idea that if you're being a jackass, you stand to risk a few points at the polls.

Then, the idea of an over-committed GM freaking out and lashing out at the board with an all-caps post yelling about nothing in particular (or taking the opposite road and moping through the rest of the Draft activities) is generally pretty enjoyable as well. So, yes, I like the tiebreaker vote-off and the idea that the draft community can police itself to a small extent.

The point I was referring to was later on in the voting when there were times when there was, if I remember correctly, a second and/or third run off vote.

What it came down to eventually was people were just voting for the same teams over and over again and the process just came down to who's voters were going to consistently show up for the re-vote.

I didn't mind the runoff vote (of course I won the one I was in).  But I think teams should not be allowed to vote for themselves.  Some teams have co-GMs and some don't and whatnot.  So to remove that bias just you can't vote for your own team.

The situation I am referring to isn't the one Champkind described above(which BTW I think was a swipe at someone more than anything else) but when there's a tie after a run off vote. I didn't have a problem with them, per se, just that they could get redundant and turned out to be just a matter of who's voter's came out the second and third time.

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

Yea I think that sounds like a good tie breaker.

[indeedproceed]

Wondering if there has been a better way to determine ties than just another vote off and if there has been any change to the voting process like not being able to vote for your own team or anything like that?

There were a bunch of good suggestions after some of the voting drama from last year and I wonder if there was anything changed? Or are we going to have to wait for the rules to be posted?

I think the vote-off idea was fine for most people. The only time that people ran into problems was when they created drama, spammed the board with messages, or made enemies otherwise that turned the votes against them. If everyone plays a fair and social game, then there's no problem with the voting mechanism.

A tall order for the CB Draft, but if you can make it through the draft without getting into a [pee]ing match you'll probably be subject to a fair vote and that makes sense in determining the right team in a tiebreaker. Annoy a lot of people and you subject yourself to a backlash vote, which may not be totally fair, but I like the idea that if you're being a jackass, you stand to risk a few points at the polls.

Then, the idea of an over-committed GM freaking out and lashing out at the board with an all-caps post yelling about nothing in particular (or taking the opposite road and moping through the rest of the Draft activities) is generally pretty enjoyable as well. So, yes, I like the tiebreaker vote-off and the idea that the draft community can police itself to a small extent.

The point I was referring to was later on in the voting when there were times when there was, if I remember correctly, a second and/or third run off vote.

What it came down to eventually was people were just voting for the same teams over and over again and the process just came down to who's voters were going to consistently show up for the re-vote.

I didn't mind the runoff vote (of course I won the one I was in).  But I think teams should not be allowed to vote for themselves.  Some teams have co-GMs and some don't and whatnot.  So to remove that bias just you can't vote for your own team.

The situation I am referring to isn't the one Champkind described above(which BTW I think was a swipe at someone more than anything else) but when there's a tie after a run off vote. I didn't have a problem with them, per se, just that they could get redundant and turned out to be just a matter of who's voter's came out the second and third time.

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

Yea I think that sounds like a good tie breaker.

I don't...assuming everyone thinks the same teams will win, then the series winner will be whichever side thinks will be less of a blowout.

[Gainesville Celtic]

Brian Scalabrine remains unsigned...perhaps we could have him come in and be the celebrity judge to break ties... failing that, maybe the Deli guy? 


it's all for fun. I'm fine (as someone who lost the tiebreaker) with simply flipping a coin... sometimes that's how little some NBA series turn on --- a missed call here, a freak injury there. Just ask the Suns.


I applaud the serriousness folks are bringing to the table -- i take Celticsblog draft serious too -- but above all let's remember to have a lot of UBUNTU!!!

[nickagneta]

Brian Scalabrine remains unsigned...perhaps we could have him come in and be the celebrity judge to break ties... failing that, maybe the Deli guy? 


it's all for fun. I'm fine (as someone who lost the tiebreaker) with simply flipping a coin... sometimes that's how little some NBA series turn on --- a missed call here, a freak injury there. Just ask the Suns.


I applaud the serriousness folks are bringing to the table -- i take Celticsblog draft serious too -- but above all let's remember to have a lot of UBUNTU!!!

If it comes down to a coin flip I want Tim Donaghy flipping that coin!!

Hehehehe.



Oh, and BTW, whatever Faf comes up with will be fine. I just think there were some scenarios that occurred last year that were never accounted for before, being the game is only into it's fourth year. Sometimes when playing a game it's just best to have all contingencies accounted for before the game actually starts.

[RebusRankin]

I had no problems but we Canadians are just diplomatic eh. 

[celticinorlando]

The Minnesota Timberwolves would gladly accept an Asst. GM if anyone is interested.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Some draft elements I've enjoyed from other recent community drafts:

Don's draft lottery was an early highlight of last year's 30 team draft.

Who's participation in Roy's Pick Two draft.

Also from the Pick Two draft - trades prohibited until the completion of the first round. I'm doubtful many would like to see the same measure here, but a shorter pre-draft trade window might temper burn-out, mean more involvement at the end of the draft? Also the most lopsided trades have often happened well before the first selection.

Nick's Historical Draft awarded BPA to a franchise that missed its pick the evening of the round in question.

And Redz' Ultimate Draft has far and away the best and most frequently edited Subject Titles.

[Fafnir]

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

I don't like this idea, it allows for people to "weight" their playoff votes. Some would weigh in good faith, others would spike it with 4-0 predictions.

[nickagneta]

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

I don't like this idea, it allows for people to "weight" their playoff votes. Some would weigh in good faith, others would spike it with 4-0 predictions.

Don't people already do that in the conference standings voting though?

[The Walker Wiggle]

First thought - only consider new votes in any run off? Although it may be hard to drum up enough interest and lead to an unpalatable 1-0 or 2-1 victory.

Have a Deputy Commissioner to break ties?

[Fafnir]

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

I don't like this idea, it allows for people to "weight" their playoff votes. Some would weigh in good faith, others would spike it with 4-0 predictions.

Don't people already do that in the conference standings voting though?

Yes but that's unavoidable if you're rating 15 teams, you have to rank them somehow for it to make any sense.

I don't think a voter should be able to make their vote more valuable than another by designating it a sweep.

[nickagneta]

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

I don't like this idea, it allows for people to "weight" their playoff votes. Some would weigh in good faith, others would spike it with 4-0 predictions.

Don't people already do that in the conference standings voting though?

Yes but that's unavoidable if you're rating 15 teams, you have to rank them somehow for it to make any sense.

I don't think a voter should be able to make their vote more valuable than another by designating it a sweep.

Yeah but ranking a really good team really low or vice versa can have as much if not more of a playoff effecting effect as someone putting down a 4-0 sweep vote on a second tiebreaker on an already tied situation.

For instance lets say the Boxers decide to draft for Team of the Future and I draft 8 rookies and 4 second year players. Obviously that team is probably going to finish in the bottom two of a conference. But if I vote the Boxers as the best team in the conference and vote a fringe playoff team low, that one vote not only could that cost the fringe playoff a playoff spot but could effect the seeding and playoff matchups.

If however I vote in an already tied vote off for a team to lose 4-0, the only way that vote counts is if there is once again a tie and then will only be meaningful if the final win total is within 3 wins in the second tiebreaker AND if I did it deliberately to effect a vote. Some people are just going to believe that one team could sweep another, after all.

[bdm860]

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

I don't like this idea, it allows for people to "weight" their playoff votes. Some would weigh in good faith, others would spike it with 4-0 predictions.

Don't people already do that in the conference standings voting though?

Yes but that's unavoidable if you're rating 15 teams, you have to rank them somehow for it to make any sense.

I don't think a voter should be able to make their vote more valuable than another by designating it a sweep.

I always thought the best way to settle ties would be to call on a few respected posters who don't participate.  I think you could easily get like 5 active posters who aren't playing to weigh in.  Jeff, Bahku, dark lord, ACF, Drucci, FlCeltsFan, Jsaad, myself, etc. (but I guess whether I'm respected or not is a different story, lol).  Send a PM to ACF, ask him to vote on who would win a 7 game series, and you'll likely have a response within hours.  Repeat several times with other posters, and any tie is easily settled.

[Edgar]

If in doubt just " Ask Edgar "

[Rondo2287]

Thought I remembered a suggestion that someone gave during the suggestion thread last year that during runoff votes between two teams, have everyone give the series game results, like 4-2 or 4-0 and if after the run off vote it's still tied, add up the # of games won. Or something like that. I thought that a good suggestion.

I don't like this idea, it allows for people to "weight" their playoff votes. Some would weigh in good faith, others would spike it with 4-0 predictions.

Don't people already do that in the conference standings voting though?

Yes but that's unavoidable if you're rating 15 teams, you have to rank them somehow for it to make any sense.

I don't think a voter should be able to make their vote more valuable than another by designating it a sweep.

Yeah but ranking a really good team really low or vice versa can have as much if not more of a playoff effecting effect as someone putting down a 4-0 sweep vote on a second tiebreaker on an already tied situation.

For instance lets say the Boxers decide to draft for Team of the Future and I draft 8 rookies and 4 second year players. Obviously that team is probably going to finish in the bottom two of a conference. But if I vote the Boxers as the best team in the conference and vote a fringe playoff team low, that one vote not only could that cost the fringe playoff a playoff spot but could effect the seeding and playoff matchups.

If however I vote in an already tied vote off for a team to lose 4-0, the only way that vote counts is if there is once again a tie and then will only be meaningful if the final win total is within 3 wins in the second tiebreaker AND if I did it deliberately to effect a vote. Some people are just going to believe that one team could sweep another, after all.

And you never know sweeps are entirely possible, look at Atlanta and Orlando, I thought Orlando would win but never did i think they would sweep, but they did.