Darell
General Manager
Houston Astros
Posts: 21,352
|
Post by Darell on Nov 13, 2014 15:50:51 GMT -5
Do the lottery like longballer, lose 100 or morr and your pick has a chance of dropping more than 2 spots. True. Lottery was my idea. I like it. YEE
|
|
Darell
General Manager
Houston Astros
Posts: 21,352
|
Post by Darell on Nov 13, 2014 15:51:32 GMT -5
|
|
Broph
General Manager
Oakland Athletics
Im no longer a shitty GM
Posts: 29,215
|
Post by Broph on Nov 13, 2014 15:51:34 GMT -5
lotto would solve the issues, give the bottom x teams an equal shot at number one. That way finishing 10-152 is no different than 50-112
|
|
Darell
General Manager
Houston Astros
Posts: 21,352
|
Post by Darell on Nov 13, 2014 15:51:56 GMT -5
Why haven't we gave Haberman the white sox yet.
|
|
Darell
General Manager
Houston Astros
Posts: 21,352
|
Post by Darell on Nov 13, 2014 15:52:30 GMT -5
lotto would solve the issues, give the bottom x teams an equal shot at number one. That way finishing 10-152 is no different than 50-112 not equal but a chance nonetheless
|
|
|
Post by Erbes on Nov 13, 2014 15:52:45 GMT -5
lotto would solve the issues, give the bottom x teams an equal shot at number one. That way finishing 10-152 is no different than 50-112 The way we implemented it in LBB was a team couldn't fall more than two spots than your projected pick. So it's a lottery in essence, but the true risk isn't there.
|
|
|
Post by stooolfan on Nov 13, 2014 15:52:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by stooolfan on Nov 13, 2014 15:52:59 GMT -5
True. Lottery was my idea. I like it. YEE get on vent!
|
|
Darell
General Manager
Houston Astros
Posts: 21,352
|
Post by Darell on Nov 13, 2014 15:53:15 GMT -5
Like 1-5 would have very similar percentages to get the first pick but it drops off a little after that.
|
|
|
Post by Erbes on Nov 13, 2014 15:53:28 GMT -5
Meaning a bottom team would almost never jump more than 2-3 spots...
|
|
Darell
General Manager
Houston Astros
Posts: 21,352
|
Post by Darell on Nov 13, 2014 15:53:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by If your not first your last on Nov 13, 2014 15:53:45 GMT -5
well we took away penalties dropping picks for these horrid teams year in and year out, hmmmmmm that's right we took that away right around the time the yanks were loosing a bunch
|
|
|
Post by Erbes on Nov 13, 2014 15:54:16 GMT -5
well we took away penalties dropping picks for these horrid teams year in and year out, hmmmmmm that's right we took that away right around the time the yanks were loosing a bunch Do you read? I wouldn't have penalized by the old rules.
|
|
Darell
General Manager
Houston Astros
Posts: 21,352
|
Post by Darell on Nov 13, 2014 15:54:19 GMT -5
lotto would solve the issues, give the bottom x teams an equal shot at number one. That way finishing 10-152 is no different than 50-112 The way we implemented it in LBB was a team couldn't fall more than two spots than your projected pick. So it's a lottery in essence, but the true risk isn't there. Should try it out, can't hurt.
|
|
Broph
General Manager
Oakland Athletics
Im no longer a shitty GM
Posts: 29,215
|
Post by Broph on Nov 13, 2014 15:56:01 GMT -5
going with scrambling the say last five spots would likely be enough.
|
|
Broph
General Manager
Oakland Athletics
Im no longer a shitty GM
Posts: 29,215
|
Post by Broph on Nov 13, 2014 15:56:56 GMT -5
ehh, that may not work though, 5 would end up making everybody tank harder
|
|
Broph
General Manager
Oakland Athletics
Im no longer a shitty GM
Posts: 29,215
|
Post by Broph on Nov 13, 2014 15:57:36 GMT -5
could pretty easily institute an NBA style lotto though, would take three GM's but there would be no crossover and worry of cheating it
|
|
|
Post by If your not first your last on Nov 13, 2014 15:57:54 GMT -5
well we took away penalties dropping picks for these horrid teams year in and year out, hmmmmmm that's right we took that away right around the time the yanks were loosing a bunch Do you read? I wouldn't have penalized by the old rules. you fucking changes the rules right when it was time to start loosing that way if your shit stunk that bad you would not be dropped picks don't sugar coat it with all these rules chages made to favor certain people
|
|
Broph
General Manager
Oakland Athletics
Im no longer a shitty GM
Posts: 29,215
|
Post by Broph on Nov 13, 2014 15:59:54 GMT -5
people still tank in that though, guaranteed top 4 is meh
|
|
|
Post by Erbes on Nov 13, 2014 16:00:19 GMT -5
I wonder if there's some way we could do a lottery based just on a team's record. So if you lose 110 games we apply a percentage that your pick would drop at 50%. If it comes up yes, then your pick drops to [HASH]2 (if you were [HASH]1). But if you lose 100 games then that percentage might only be a 35% chance of dropping. Would it get applied to all teams or just the [HASH]1 team... hmmmmm. Probably all teams. Or maybe the bottom 10. Wouldn't be based on where you finish though, just on the amount of losses you have. So scratch bottom 10. Let's say there are two teams with 110 losses and 3 teams with 100 losses...
112 - 50% - drops 111 - 50% - stays 109 - 35% - drops 108 - 35% - stays 107 - 35% - drops
So the end product would be...
111 112 108 109 107
107 doesn't drop out of top 5 because the next team's losses are 99 and that doesn't qualify for modified lotto.
|
|
|
Post by If your not first your last on Nov 13, 2014 16:00:45 GMT -5
last couple years though the gap was not as large a lot of teams with 60+ wins
|
|
|
Post by Erbes on Nov 13, 2014 16:01:02 GMT -5
Is that harsh enough?
|
|
Birdie Sanders
General Manager
Cincinnati Reds
Blaze all day, every day Each way, the right way My way, greenhay, we high
Posts: 22,220
|
Post by Birdie Sanders on Nov 13, 2014 16:01:04 GMT -5
Why would winning teams complain about other teams tanking....lol are you fuckin clowns high?
|
|
Broph
General Manager
Oakland Athletics
Im no longer a shitty GM
Posts: 29,215
|
Post by Broph on Nov 13, 2014 16:01:17 GMT -5
I wonder if there's some way we could do a lottery based just on a team's record. So if you lose 110 games we apply a percentage that your pick would drop at 50%. If it comes up yes, then your pick drops to [HASH]2 (if you were [HASH]1). But if you lose 100 games then that percentage might only be a 35% chance of dropping. Would it get applied to all teams or just the [HASH]1 team... hmmmmm. Probably all teams. Or maybe the bottom 10. Wouldn't be based on where you finish though, just on the amount of losses you have. So scratch bottom 10. Let's say there are two teams with 110 losses and 3 teams with 100 losses... 112 - 50% - drops 111 - 50% - stays 109 - 35% - drops 108 - 35% - stays 107 - 35% - drops So the end product would be... 111 112 108 109 107 107 doesn't drop out of top 5 because the next team's losses are 99 and that doesn't qualify for modified lotto. my brain does not want to process what you just said
|
|
Broph
General Manager
Oakland Athletics
Im no longer a shitty GM
Posts: 29,215
|
Post by Broph on Nov 13, 2014 16:02:19 GMT -5
the goal would be to make it so the benefit of losing 150 vs. 100 is negligible,
|
|