Drafting for GM-less teams

[DBacks]

The list goes to 100 and includes all prospects, not just draftees, so it is limited and wouldn't work past the first round. I'm not sure FG combines lists of international and MLB draftees, so that makes it tough. I completely get the idea of moving past draft pick order alone in these situations, but it would almost have to be some kind of matrix between lists and that requires they all come out on time (before our draft) and we figure out how to mold rankings and FVs into some kind of formula, in my opinion. And I don't think we need to do that a few weeks before the draft. Presumably, people have factored trades (either buying, selling, rejecting) based on who is likely to fall into place with the expectation of highest drafted going to the vacant team.

No, at least for the past couple years, BB America has put together a "top 100" to draft for first year players. It basically includes draftees & international signings. So it would theoretically work until the 5th round, when no one cares anyway.

[Guardians]

The list goes to 100 and includes all prospects, not just draftees, so it is limited and wouldn't work past the first round. I'm not sure FG combines lists of international and MLB draftees, so that makes it tough. I completely get the idea of moving past draft pick order alone in these situations, but it would almost have to be some kind of matrix between lists and that requires they all come out on time (before our draft) and we figure out how to mold rankings and FVs into some kind of formula, in my opinion. And I don't think we need to do that a few weeks before the draft. Presumably, people have factored trades (either buying, selling, rejecting) based on who is likely to fall into place with the expectation of highest drafted going to the vacant team.

No, at least for the past couple years, BB America has put together a "top 100" to draft for first year players. It basically includes draftees & international signings. So it would theoretically work until the 5th round, when no one cares anyway.

Please post some examples from the last few years

[DBacks]

I tried to upload a screenshot of part of last year's list, but it said it was too large even though it was only 1/2 a megabyte!

[Marlins]

Since we are in the "airing grievances" mood, I am bringing this back up. I hope 10 months is plenty of time to discuss and implement. I also hope this is a moot point and we have 30 GMs for the next draft, but I would prefer this be something added to the official rules.

I know no list will be perfect, but if we can pick a site's annual list that includes ranking of not only draft picks but international guys, I think its the most fair way to give GM-less teams equal talent. I am all for skipping a pick when someone doesnt pay attention to the draft, but for teams with no GM, why penalize them for not existing? Just going by draft order is wrong for so many reasons: a) usually half a year has elapsed since the draft, b) draft order isnt supposed to be talent order as bonus size, demands, etc dictate draft order quite a bit, and c) we are completely ignoring an entire segment of the available players, intl guys. In the 1st rd of this year's draft alone, 6 intl guys were picked (20%).

I am really scratching my head as to a valid reason not to use a list like this for picking for GMless teams other than selfishly wanting better players available for oneself. Sure, we can bicker over which list to use, which is better, whatever. As long as we are consistent year to year and it is known WELL before the draft, any list is 10x better than draft order. We can fight over using the Lambo, the Ferrari, the McLaren, etc but any of them better than the 40 year old Yugo we are using now.

[Marlins]

Great! No response in over 24 hrs, I guess that means we're all in agreement and this will be implemented for next year's draft.

[Athletics]

I would be all for a better list than just gm-less team in the 3rd round gets the 60th drafted player who signed for 100k because he was a college rp and the MLB team wanted to save money.

[Reds]

I’m good with selecting a list as well. Which one would be best?

[Marlins]

I am fairly certain BA makes one every year, link to this year's in the original post of this thread. I could have quoted that post here, but I dont get along with quotes on this site...

[Rockies]

Just use BA, we all pretty much use the site and have for a long time.

[Braves]

I'll chime in agreeing with using the BA list

[Guardians]

Once 100 players is exhausted (roughly 3 rounds), what is the default?

[Cardinals]

BA has a top 500 no?

[Rockies]

They have a top 500 draft, but also a top 100 dynasty.

[Marlins]

I would say we draft for them using the Dynasty list. If that list runs out of players for a GM-less team to draft, then goes to best available in their draft list? Note, in this year's draft, by the end of 5 rounds there still were a decent number of guys on this BA top 100 Dynasty list who were not drafted, so I think an instance of having to go off this list would be exceedingly rare.

[Cardinals]

I think using some list is a good idea.

Larger concern is the vacant teams being neglected over the course of a year and missing out on helium signings. Don't think that any member of the league should be accepting trades for these teams, but perhaps we delegate GMs in opposite leagues with adds/drops for minor leaguers and/or old, crappy MLB players.