Draft Seeding
Draft Seeding
The ExCo is currently discussing revisiting how we seed the draft for playoff teams. Right now, we go by regular season record, however, this means that we could have a situation where a team with the 9th best record (or worse) wins the World Series and still gets a much better pick than the other playoff teams.
The discussion revolves around the idea of switching it so that the last pick goes to whomever wins the WS, second last to whomever lost the WS, 3rd to the team with the best record of the two LCS teams, 4th to the team with the worst record of the LCS losing teams and so on, much like the NFL.
This is not something that would effect this year's draft, but rather next season.
Any thoughts?
The discussion revolves around the idea of switching it so that the last pick goes to whomever wins the WS, second last to whomever lost the WS, 3rd to the team with the best record of the two LCS teams, 4th to the team with the worst record of the LCS losing teams and so on, much like the NFL.
This is not something that would effect this year's draft, but rather next season.
Any thoughts?
- Cardinals
- Posts: 8041
- Joined: Sat May 18, 2002 1:00 am
- Location: Manch Vegas, CT
- Name: John Paul Starkey
draft seeding should be indicative of a teams success in a given year. success in any pro sport isn't measured by regular season wins and losses once the playoffs start.
i think how the NFL does it is indeed money. This serves as a better way to judge our IBC seasons via the draft. Whoever is #1 should pick #30. Plain and simple.
i think how the NFL does it is indeed money. This serves as a better way to judge our IBC seasons via the draft. Whoever is #1 should pick #30. Plain and simple.
12, 14, 15, 17, 22
- Rangers
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4048
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:00 am
- Location: Prosper, TX
- Name: Brett Perryman
I'll re-post my opinion from exco since there hasn't been a lot of input and most of what there is is from exco guys.
I don't have a very strong opinion on this, fwiw. I do feel like the WS winner should pick last, and I haven't read the other thread carefully, but I tend to think that the NFL has the right basic setup, in that playoff teams pick after all non-playoff participants. I get some feeling of fairness in getting some compensation for being unfortunate enough to have a great record but missing the playoffs.
I'd probably say that the best order would be all non playoff teams in order of their regular season record, then all playoff teams in order of their regular season record, then WS winner last (maybe WS loser next to last, but I'd probably lean against that). That would seem to me to balance fairness with reality the best.
But again, we're not talking about horrible options however we do it.
I don't have a very strong opinion on this, fwiw. I do feel like the WS winner should pick last, and I haven't read the other thread carefully, but I tend to think that the NFL has the right basic setup, in that playoff teams pick after all non-playoff participants. I get some feeling of fairness in getting some compensation for being unfortunate enough to have a great record but missing the playoffs.
I'd probably say that the best order would be all non playoff teams in order of their regular season record, then all playoff teams in order of their regular season record, then WS winner last (maybe WS loser next to last, but I'd probably lean against that). That would seem to me to balance fairness with reality the best.
But again, we're not talking about horrible options however we do it.