IBC

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?

I think the way the NFL does it is money. Have the Person who wins the WS get the last pick and then so on....

I say we keep it the way it is. I certainly don't want the powerhouse teams picking any higher than they have to, despite if a longshot sweeps in and wins the series.

I'm pretty impartial to the way the seeding works...if I am fortunate enough to pull off upsets, it's not like I'll be bummed that I pick 6 spots later

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.

Given a choice between a title and picking #23 instead of #30.... i think almost any member would take the title.

Any additional thoughts on this?

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 agree, I don't think either method is bad. I think the NFL style is a bit better though.

Perryman's suggestion sounds pretty fair to me.

Any additional opinions on this?