And that's a wrap......

The draft order should be settled just like the NHL where the higher a team goes into the playoffs, the lower draft position it receives. The Stanley Cup winner doesn't receive the 15th pick because they were better than the other 15 teams, even if they were the worse team of the 16.


Come on! Don't tell me you can't see the obvious flaw in this rule!!!

Looking at your 4-7 record Ray, it certainly does seem like you deserve a better draft pick. If we scratch a bit deeper though the picture gets muddier.

One of your losses was 6 points.
Another of your losses was 12.9 points.

Just an assist or two here and there and you would have had a 6-5 record which would have put you in 4th overall place.

The whole damn thing is tricky. What we need to come up with is the fairest possible system for all which still keeps intensity high and the incentive to lose out.

If the current system has failed us, let's either tweak it or dump it and replace it with a better system.

You can put whatever spin on this that you want, but it is an injustice. If I lose by 6 points, or 106 points, those are the breaks of a head-to-head league and I am fine with the results from that. But to punish a team that loses is not right, no matter what you tell me. I have been doing fantasy leagues for 20 years and never have I seen anything like this. Because that is what you did to teams who lost.

With all do respect, I would have had to beat Fitzy to get a lower pick ? I had 3 wins all season and a freak week... And now I draft 8th? What moron came up with this idea....and where does he draft and how many wins does he have....? If you want to have a lottery for bottom 3 teams to see who gets the 1st pick that would make more sense than judging a whole seasons performance on one weeks results during the playoffs.

Not to mention that a tie breaker of most goals in a given week can determine the outcome of a single game ....the impact of that scenario could also determine where we draft from 3rd to 8th round? Lol that is not very well thought out. Sorry.

The Fairest possible way is to have the worst teams getting the highest picks...you want to take out the obvious winners and put in the lowest finishers ...throw names in a barrel and pick the bottom 3 order out of a bag... If the final four have equal records than put four balls in barrel... The worst team will draft no worse than fourth...

Look at it from the point of view of the 1 seed playing the 8 seed....the benefit for finishing 1st is playing the WORST team in the playoffs....why would you want to favor them again in the draft? How does that help the 8th seeded team get better to compete next season...not well thought out....keep rewarding the winner ....I don't get this one at all.

One thing that sets our fine league apart from the NHL is that our sample size is much smaller. If memory serves, a normal regular season for us is 19 weeks in length while the NHL plays 82 regular season games. The records come the end of their regular season are, therefore, far more meaningful.

In the new system, the top two teams get the last picks while the bottom two teams get the top picks. It is the 'mess' in the middle that then competes for the remaining picks. Is it perfect? Certainly not. But I maintain that nothing we have done yet was any more fair. There have been teams in the past that have generated fewer points overall, but by good fortune have ended up with a better record and hence a lower draft pick. That is flawed as well.

I proposed this system in hopes that it would improve our league. There was a vote and it was 9-1 in favour I believe. With the season behind us, we can examine the results and if they are disappointing we can either tweak things or tear it down and replace it with a better system.

I am sorry Ray that things have not worked out perfectly. I did my damndest.

Let's fix it and move on.

Accdording to this rule, there are 5 teams who had a better regular season record than me get a better draft position than me, and the only way I could have gotten a better draft pick is if my team (which according to record was pretty bad) had beaten a team that had a better record than me, in a one-week playoff round which would benefit the better team to begin with, as made obvious by the results of our playoffs.

I had to play a team that lost twice all season.... Unless I won I now pick 7th or 8 th instead of 3rd is asinine...

I had 4 wins all year and a tie breaker back doomed me into playoffs... How does this indicate the 8th place team is equal to the 3rdplace team?

I had 4 wins all year and Chris also only had 4 wins all year an d we get the 7th and 8th picks of the draft???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I won, I would have gotten the 3rd overall pick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can't you see that this is clearly not fair in any sense of the word?

Just to clarify... The one week of playoffs supersedes the entire season?

And I'm sure the others will side with you because they have the better draft positions when, if they rationally think it through, the rule doesn't make sense. Or the end results of the rule is not fair.

What moron came up with this idea....and where does he draft and how many wins does he have....?

Getting a touch personal now I find. Not exactly the best route to finding a solution to a problem.

This system was discussed. This system was voted on. This system was implemented.

If this system has failed us, then we need to have GM's propose a better solution.

The intent was never to hurt the weaker teams.
The intent was to remove the incentive to lose while keeping intensity up from start to finish.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

I should mention Chris that you lost R2 by less than 13 points to Soo. Had you won that match up, you would have went on to play Scoop where you would have beaten him. That would have given you the 5th overall pick. This is more in line with what were hoping for.

As the 8th seeded playoff team, I am forced to beat the best team in the league in 1 given week or else I loss 5 places and 3 keepers?... How the heck is that fair????

There are clearly reasons why teams finish at the top of the standings and teams finish at the bottom. But like Chris says, you expecting lower seeded teams to beat top seeded teams to gain better draft positions is clearly at a disadvantage to begin with. Obviously, miracles do happen, but that is the cost of playing head-to-head.

Why do we even play a head to head season if all that will dictate the draft are the playoff single week outcomes? Greg ....look at this and tell us where the lower seeds will ever benefit.... They suffer through a tough season, tied for worst record and now get bumped out of there keepers and slid down to bottom of draft order....how did they NOT get crushed?

I want to be perfectly clear to you both about this:

I am not saying that this is the perfect system. I have never claimed that this is the perfect system.

It was proposed. It was discussed. It was voted on. It was implemented.

I repeat, if it has failed us then let's solve the problem and move on.

I am dumbfounded as to how I am given the 8th overall pick. I had 4 wins all year, and none in the playoffs. WOW!

Than lets fix it.....Do you recognize the problem?

And since I draft 8th, I get to keep one less prospect as well, if not more? Tell me how this is fair? I know I'm not being unreasonable here.

Read this thread guys please:

https://nutbarsducanucks.forumotion.net/t1225-put-your-thinking-caps-on-and-grab-a-bit-of-alchohol-while-you-are-at-it

You are both pointing your fingers at me as if I was soley responsible for this entire situation. It is simply not the case. You both hold equal share of the reponsibility. The idea was proposed. It was discussed in detail. It was voted on. It was implemented.

The vote was 9-1 in favour of the new system.

If it is flawed and can be replaced with another improved system I am all in favour of that.

I understand the voting, the process, but obviously, no one foresaw the huge flaw that resulted from this rule.

Secondly, we are upset and discussing this. You are a co-commissioner and the only one on. So you are bearing the brunt of our discussion. I am in now way badgering you, just pointing out my side and you keep pointing out all these nuances of head-to-head competition without realizing the obvious flaw this rule has created.

Being a commissioner is sometimes having to deal with matters that are unpleasant, but something needs to be done soon. When events happen that result in unfairness, it is the commissioner's job to resolve it in a matter that if fair to all, and uphold the integrity of the league.

I have made many tough decisions on events that were obviously flawed and unfair but they have to be done.

Again, I am not picking on you, just stating my case.

Ray

This rule, in my opinion, is worse than what we had before trying to stop people from tanking games. Not only can teams still tank games, but now it favors the better teams as well.