CB Draft, 2012 edition - interest thread

[StartOrien]

I had a LeBron cavs Jersey in 2006. I still wear it sometimes when I'm bbq'ing or otherwise doing something smelly. Never wash it. Power Move.

Cooking up any bold flavors while doing that?

[indeedproceed]

I had a LeBron cavs Jersey in 2006. I still wear it sometimes when I'm bbq'ing or otherwise doing something smelly. Never wash it. Power Move.

Cooking up any bold flavors while doing that?

Cheddarwurst with a doritos crust. Its a secret tho. Don't tell anyone, you guys.

[Gainesville Celtic]

My plan (it is rough at the moment) was to start next week with the 1st 5 rounds.



I was hoping for 24 teams. 

We should probably try and reach out to the rest of the CB community a bit.  We picked up 24 quickly, a little outreach might net us a full 30...

We did 24 last year to keep the team even.

24 made things a lot easier. Faster rounds, less missed picks, more participation than previous drafts.

I agree with the 24 teams.

I don't doubt 24 teams made things a bit easier...

On the other hand i thought it made the talent pool a bit deeper than it was with 30 teams.

I'd vote for it being bumped up to 26 or 28.

IMO, conferences matter in CB Draft, but divisions largely don't (outside of seeding which has a minor effect)).

[StartOrien]

While there's some down time, I'd like to make another suggestion:

I'd like to see the Playoff posts be limited to one post, one rebuttal.

I think it hurts the voting process when certain matchups are pages long. Good points get lost in it, and I'm sure it just turns certain people off. Filing through 15 pages of back and forth can be really time consuming in itself, but then you're looking at repeating it 8 times.

If you make it an easier read, I think it improves participation greatly.

[indeedproceed]

While there's some down time, I'd like to make another suggestion:

I'd like to see the Playoff posts be limited to one post, one rebuttal.

I think it hurts the voting process when certain matchups are pages long. Good points get lost in it, and I'm sure it just turns certain people off. Filing through 15 pages of back and forth can be really time consuming in itself, but then you're looking at repeating it 8 times.

With the team with the higher seed having the freedom to choose first post, last rebuttal, or second post, first rebuttal.

Interesting. tell me moar.

[StartOrien]

While there's some down time, I'd like to make another suggestion:

I'd like to see the Playoff posts be limited to one post, one rebuttal.

I think it hurts the voting process when certain matchups are pages long. Good points get lost in it, and I'm sure it just turns certain people off. Filing through 15 pages of back and forth can be really time consuming in itself, but then you're looking at repeating it 8 times.

With the team with the higher seed having the freedom to choose first post, last rebuttal, or second post, first rebuttal.

Interesting. tell me moar.

That's pretty much it. I couldn't really come up with a way to have some q&a without dragging things on too long.

Bottom line is thtat if you make it an easier read, I think it improves participation greatly.

[wdleehi]

While there's some down time, I'd like to make another suggestion:

I'd like to see the Playoff posts be limited to one post, one rebuttal.

I think it hurts the voting process when certain matchups are pages long. Good points get lost in it, and I'm sure it just turns certain people off. Filing through 15 pages of back and forth can be really time consuming in itself, but then you're looking at repeating it 8 times.

With the team with the higher seed having the freedom to choose first post, last rebuttal, or second post, first rebuttal.

Interesting. tell me moar.

That's pretty much it. I couldn't really come up with a way to have some q&a without dragging things on too long.

Bottom line is thtat if you make it an easier read, I think it improves participation greatly.

Then have a match ups debate page? 



I care less about the winner myself versus the actual debate and outside questions. 

[The Walker Wiggle]

While there's some down time, I'd like to make another suggestion:

I'd like to see the Playoff posts be limited to one post, one rebuttal.

I think it hurts the voting process when certain matchups are pages long. Good points get lost in it, and I'm sure it just turns certain people off. Filing through 15 pages of back and forth can be really time consuming in itself, but then you're looking at repeating it 8 times.

With the team with the higher seed having the freedom to choose first post, last rebuttal, or second post, first rebuttal.

Interesting. tell me moar.

I'm on board with this.

[wdleehi]

Do we have a full list of GMs yet?



The last I saw has 23 (including me)


And are any of those listed separately a pair?



I would love to pick up an assistant GM.  Looking for someone who is talented in working the phones since a lot of my time will be taken up by the running of this.  (I would also drop out if we had a lot of GMs looking for a team)

[The Walker Wiggle]

My plan (it is rough at the moment) was to start next week with the 1st 5 rounds.



I was hoping for 24 teams.  

We should probably try and reach out to the rest of the CB community a bit.  We picked up 24 quickly, a little outreach might net us a full 30...

We did 24 last year to keep the team even.

24 made things a lot easier. Faster rounds, less missed picks, more participation than previous drafts.

I agree with the 24 teams.

Me, I liked a larger league. Twenty-four teams really further played to the advantage of teams drafting superstars, easier to find talent at the back end of the second and third rounds. And a full league draft is so rare.

Some of the improved participation can be attributed to IP's hard work, his schedule, which I believe was close to ideal, and fewer histrionics.

[wdleehi]

My plan (it is rough at the moment) was to start next week with the 1st 5 rounds.



I was hoping for 24 teams. 

We should probably try and reach out to the rest of the CB community a bit.  We picked up 24 quickly, a little outreach might net us a full 30...

We did 24 last year to keep the team even.

24 made things a lot easier. Faster rounds, less missed picks, more participation than previous drafts.

I agree with the 24 teams.

Me, I liked a larger league. Twenty-four teams really further played to the advantage of teams drafting superstars, easier to find talent at the back end of the second and third rounds. And a full league draft is so rare.

Some of the improved participation can be attributed to IP's hard work, his schedule, which I believe was close to ideal, and fewer histrionics.

As someone who has had picks in the bottom 5, it hurts.  Out of position to get a good build around star.  To far back to get a great multi pick trade to move back. 

[The Walker Wiggle]

As someone who has had picks in the bottom 5, it hurts.  Out of position to get a good build around star.  To far back to get a great multi pick trade to move back.

But that's true if you're drafting 23rd or 27th.

Do we have a full list of GMs yet?

The last I saw has 23 (including me)

I believe we are still at 23 GMs. With RebusRankin unavailable for a start next week.

1 wdleehi
2 Gainesville Celtic
3 IndeedProceed
4 Yoki_isTheName
5 KCattheStripe
6 Who
7 TheTruthFotIt18
8 Celtic Fan Forever
9 Nickagneta
10 Lucky17
11 Da Walker Wiggle
12 BigAlTheFuture
13. Rondo2287
14. JSD
15. Celticpride07
16. Evantime34
17. Jgod213
18. Riah32
19. ChampKind
20. Kane3387
21. GreenFaith1819
22. GomesFan
23. Edgar
24. RebusRankin (?)

[Fafnir]

Adding 6 more GMs who aren't aggressive about playing (if they were they'd be clamouring to play) = recipe for drop outs.

What's better having dummy teams locking up players that other players might covet, or having a tighter talent spread?

[Evantime34]

Adding 6 more GMs who aren't aggressive about playing (if they were they'd be clamouring to play) = recipe for drop outs.

What's better having dummy teams locking up players that other players might covet, or having a tighter talent spread?

I think we can still add some people that will show enthusiasm, adding 6 might be a stretch though.

[BigAlTheFuture]

Adding 6 more GMs who aren't aggressive about playing (if they were they'd be clamouring to play) = recipe for drop outs.

What's better having dummy teams locking up players that other players might covet, or having a tighter talent spread?

This is true. Previous years some GMs wouldn't even participate in trade talks due to lack of interest.