Admin
Draft Mechanics - how many sign each day
August 13, 2010 at 06:52PM View BBCode
I'd like to get your feedback on the number of players that are signing each day.
Let's say there are 260 players available for bidding. Let's assume 200 players have bids on them and the rest are WW fodder.
On the first day of bidding, 10% of the players that have bids on them will sign. On day 2, 25% of the players that have bids will sign. It goes up 15% every day. So the distribution of signings looks like this:
Day 1: 20 sign (10%)
Day 2: 180 left, 45 sign (25%)
Day 3: 135 left, 54 sign (40%)
Day 4: 81 left, 45 sign (55%)
Day 5: 36 left, 25 sign (70%)
Day 6: 11 left, 9 sign (85%)
Day 7: All sign
Does that look about right? Should I make it so more guys sign on Day 1?
Tyson
tm4559
August 13, 2010 at 07:16PM View BBCode
you would think, that with the folks adjusting their bids somewhat (sometimes down, maybe usually down?) after day one, that (real life) players would be kind of inclined to sign on the first day when money was kind of plentiful. especially kind of marginal cases that just hold out on day 1 (because of how low you have the signing rate there). perhaps more of those kinds of players would be taking what they could get, while they could get it (and some of the more high profile players, for the same sort of reason, if that reason exists).
((all that is just kind of a theory.))
Hamilton2
August 13, 2010 at 08:51PM View BBCode
I think that this is a good starting point, but like Tim said, there are some players who would probably look at what they were offered on day 1 and just jump at it, whereas some others might wait longer for the bidding to heat up. At one point in time, we had discussed a point at which an "auto-sign" feature kicked in. Like, if your offer was twice as much as the next closest offer, or something like that. Maybe we could build a matrix of predicted $ values based on OS Age and Overall Grade, and if a player was offered X% over the next closest bidder, and was within Y% of the predicted $ value, he would sign regardless of what day it is.
tworoosters
August 13, 2010 at 11:11PM View BBCode
I think the tendencies in real sports is for a higher % of signings on day one, I'd bump that to 20-25% .
Admin
August 13, 2010 at 11:21PM View BBCode
I guess I'm curious about what you guys think makes for a more interesting/fun experience?
I think the benefit of the current format is you get to see what most people bid at least once before most guys sign.
This suggestion is interesting and would be easy to code:
Like, if your offer was twice as much as the next closest offer, or something like that
Maybe it would be cool if all players on the 1st day who only got 1 bid or who fit the above criteria signed.
Tyson
[Edited on 8-13-2010 by Admin]
tm4559
August 14, 2010 at 12:15AM View BBCode
thats a good point (the seeing the bids thing). this thing was kind of fun. i would play in a salary league, for sure.
BigMacAttack
August 14, 2010 at 01:16PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
What i've noticed in the AML is that with the ability to see other peoples bids, that bids on the stud players tend to go up until they sign, naturally.
Especially when there are lots of people in on the bidding. I would think that in real life as well if a guy gets 5 or 6 or more offers he would tend to hold on a bit and try to drive up the price by working the teams agasint each other (the view bids feautre acts like an agent would that way I guess?) In my mind this could extend the bidding a couple of days as long as the bids are still there and increasing.
With the people who get no bids at the start, I would think would be more likely to then sign quicker when they got a bid, even if it wasn't a huge one, especially if it is a 1 year deal. kind of like: oh crap no one wants me, so I'll take this 1 year deal and try again next year.
Of course if you look at the NHL this off season everyone seemed to be waiting for Kovalchuk to sign so maybe the guy who's not getting offers and the big guns haven't signed yet thinks after those guys sign i'll get some good offers from the teams that miss out on them and waits for that to happen too, instead at just jumping at the first offer he gets.
Sorry this is a kind of rambling post I just thought I'd add my 2 cents in
BigMacAttack
August 14, 2010 at 01:31PM View BBCode
I also agree with the suggesstion that if a guy gets a bid that is way higher than everyone elses they would jump at it
think Gil Meche in KC
barterer2002
August 14, 2010 at 02:33PM View BBCode
I've always liked that idea. Not as sure on the "this is the only bid" getting in. Sometimes teams will bid on the top players the first two days and on days 3 and 4 are scrambling so overbid on lesser players. I'd say anyone who gets an only bid over 5mil would take it but below might wait and see
Admin
August 16, 2010 at 02:14PM View BBCode
I agree with Bart. While I do think it sounds somewhat reasonable that if a player gets a bid significantly higher than any other, he might jump at it. But, I don't think he would necessarily jump at it right away.
As Bart said, in the AML (and truth be told, in real life) everyone focuses on the big guns first. Once they start to drop off, the teams that didn't get them and still have holes to fill will start to hit up the more average players. I've seen plenty of players in the AML who get no bids the first couple days, get many bids the 3rd and final days. And thus their salary can be driven up, especially as teams start to get desperate and scramble.
I think most teams want to see if they can get stars, and then fill their roster with average players to their cap. But, if they can't get stars, then they can maybe fill their roster with good to very good players, and still be equally if not more competitive. Making average players who only get 1 bid on the first day sign right away, would potentially force more people to start bidding on them early. Personally, I'd rather focus on the big guns the first couple days, then feel like I'm forced to bid on everything to make sure I fill my bench with decent players.
Also, Tim, in the AML at least, bids almost never go down. The only time I've lowered a bid is when I thought maybe the other team I was competing against had reached it's cap, and would drop their bid. Or, if I was WAY higher than everyone else and felt they wouldn't go up on that player. But, it's been pretty rare. Most people try to feel the salary on a guy out, and see if they can get lucky on the first day and get a guy cheap. I've seen a guy get bids for around 7m on day 1, and signed for 18m on day 4.
-Jet
tm4559
August 16, 2010 at 02:27PM View BBCode
i believe i was thinking more about me and the players i overbidded on initially. i see that the bids just went up for the so-called stud players.
tm4559
August 16, 2010 at 02:31PM View BBCode
also, the page there where you view the bids? somehow that has to be cleaned up to show the skills, instead of having to open the cards to find out what the players are, and you have to switch back and forth between that and the other page where you edit your bids.
(all this was probably made worse by cloning the beta pool, which is impossibly large, what with all teams having at least close to 25 minor leaguers getting full improvement, and some teams having more (not getting full improvement, but still, more is more and there were waaaaaaaaaaay too many players to look at here. a small point, i am certain in the regular league you guys started, it couldn't have had such a large pool of players, could it?)
barterer2002
August 16, 2010 at 02:51PM View BBCode
Tim, most seasons its not an issue. Remember this is the initial draft. Most seasons the free agency pool is only a fraction of the players and you don't have to fill an entire team. Its like comparing the initial draft pool ranking to an ammy ranking. They're just not the same thing.
thatrogue
August 16, 2010 at 02:51PM View BBCode
By the way, when do the FA bids normally get processed?
tm4559
August 16, 2010 at 02:59PM View BBCode
Originally posted by barterer2002
Tim, most seasons its not an issue. Remember this is the initial draft. Most seasons the free agency pool is only a fraction of the players and you don't have to fill an entire team. Its like comparing the initial draft pool ranking to an ammy ranking. They're just not the same thing.
i was kind of asking, because inital drafts is where we're going to be if we want to start a new league like this. if we do, will it start with this many players? because this seems like an awful, awful, lot.
(and i assume the initial pool for a real new league wouldn't have this many highly skilled players in it. this is way too many.)
Admin
August 16, 2010 at 03:58PM View BBCode
(and i assume the initial pool for a real new league wouldn't have this many highly skilled players in it. this is way too many.)
It depends on which league you pick to clone.
I'm really after the big items during the beta testing and making sure there aren't any bugs. There will be some things that aren't perfect but people can live with them for now.
Tyson
tm4559
August 16, 2010 at 04:17PM View BBCode
awesome. i can't imagine any league you cloned having as many players as the beta league. but i could be wrong about that.
(in fact, there has to be a 75% chance i am wrong about everything. 99.44% if you ask my wife.)
Pages: 1