ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Fantasy/CasinoPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=22)
-   -   Alternate Reality Game 1: Chiefs (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=204569)

Hoover 05-02-2009 10:09 AM

He Rainman did you get my request for wanting the Des Moines team?

bdeg 05-02-2009 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 5733463)
Two thoughts:

1. Remember that you can draft undrafted rookies, so you don't have to select only guys who were drafted.

2. Just a thought: what would people think about this option? Using the NFL draft value chart, you can trade up or down by paying a premium of 15 percent. In other words, you can trade up if you pay at least 15 percent more than the stated value of the draft, or you can trade down if you accept 85 percent of the stated value of the picks you're losing. And any trades have to be with one other NFL team, not a combination. If we did this, I think we'd have to not allow trades using future year picks since there's no third-party table of those values. If people like it, let's do it, but otherwise I'm not hard-core about it.

I'd love to be able to trade around

ArrowheadHawk 05-02-2009 10:28 AM

1. The Winston-Salem Warlocks accept the Cassel/Vrable trade.
2. The Winston-Salem Warlocks reject the Tony Gonzalez trade.
3. The Winston-Salem Warlocks reject the 2009 7th Round pick for the 2010 7th Round pick trade.

The 2009 Winston-Salem Warlocks Draft:

#3 - Curry, Aaron OLB Wake Forest
#67 - Tate, Brandon WR North Carolina
#102 - Washington, Donald CB Ohio State
#139 - Bomar, Rhett QB Sam Houston State
#175 - Gardner, Andrew OT Georgia Tech
#212 - Richard, Darryl DT Georgia Tech
#256 - Reed, Nick DE Oregon

Rain Man 05-02-2009 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoover (Post 5733486)
He Rainman did you get my request for wanting the Des Moines team?

Oh. Sorry. You're in. And because of our error, we'll also grant you exclusive TV rights to Iowa City for the 2009 season.

Rain Man 05-02-2009 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdeg (Post 5733499)
I'd love to be able to trade around


Do we have a second? (Robert's Rules of Order.)

ArrowheadHawk 05-02-2009 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 5733544)
Do we have a second? (Robert's Rules of Order.)

Sounds good to me.

chiefscafan 05-02-2009 10:56 AM

LA Cobras accept Vrabel and cassel trade
LA Cobras accept tony Gonzalez trade
LA Cobras accept trade of 2010 7th for 2009 7th

LA Cobras Draft:

#3- Michael Crabtree - WR Texas Tech (49ers)
#67- Jaron Gilbert - DE San Jose ST (Bears)
#102- Brandon Williams - OLB/DE. Texas Tech (cowboys)
#139- Cornellius Ingram- TE Florida (eagles)
#175- A. Gardner- OT Georgia Tech (dolphins)
#212- AQ Shipley- OC. Penn State (steelers)
#237- Darry Beckwith- ILB LSU. (chargers)
#256- Ryan Succop- PK. South Carolina. (chiefs)

chiefscafan 05-02-2009 10:59 AM

Damn only kept one chief pick oh well it fell that way

Rain Man 05-02-2009 11:07 AM

Actually, I just realized that the trade down option won't work. The only players you can pick are those that are below you, so if we allow trade downs, people will always trade down to the point where they can get the player they want. So we can't trade down (or if we do, it'd have to be a huge premium to do so, maybe 30 to 40 percent).

Trade ups wouldn't be a problem, though.

How about we either allow ONLY trade ups, or trade ups at a 15 percent cost and trade downs at a 35 percent cost, and only one trade down per year?

bdeg 05-02-2009 05:52 PM

True, the whole hindsight w/ knowing how long the guy you'd have taken would last does make it too easy to trade down and get your guy. I just figured we'd all have that advantage so it'd at least be even. But this will keep it more realistic, I think those are both good solutions.

Rain Man 05-02-2009 06:49 PM

Let's go with the rules that I'm posting in the original thread. I think it's a reasonable compromise.

bdeg 05-03-2009 06:29 PM

Any chance I could talk you out of the limit? It's a little frustrating when the 2 players you want at the top have the pick value of far less than the discounted #3 but it's impossible to work a single trade. Or possibly allow one trade up and one trade down?

not a big deal though, just tough to give up on a perfect scenario.

Rain Man 05-03-2009 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdeg (Post 5736624)
Any chance I could talk you out of the limit? It's a little frustrating when the 2 players you want at the top have the pick value of far less than the discounted #3 but it's impossible to work a single trade. Or possibly allow one trade up and one trade down?

not a big deal though, just tough to give up on a perfect scenario.

Eh, I'm not wed to anything. I just want to be sure that we don't create a system that gets onerous for the more casual players.

Anyone else want to weigh in?

Rain Man 05-10-2009 01:51 PM

Okay, people, if you want to ever be known as a draft guru or GM guru, you HAVE to participate. No ifs, ands, or buts.

Get rolling on this.

bdeg 05-10-2009 03:06 PM

does the 2nd pick of the 4th round have a 108 or 92 point value? im guessing 92(going by 102 overall) but correct me if i'm wrong


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.