PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft An alternative draft idea


Rain Man
04-29-2011, 02:04 PM
This is prefaced on having a rookie draft salary cap and salary scale, so first, imagine that every team has the same amount of rookie money to spend. And they have to spend that money. The can't leave it on the table.

Next, imagine that we have 160 or so price levels for rookies. These roughly correspond to the slotting levels we have now by draft pick. They aren't negotiable because it's a rookie salary scale.

Now imagine that we don't have a draft.

Starting in March or thereabouts, we begin a bidding process.

We start at Price Level 160, which is the cost of a #1 pick. The league opens the floor for bidding at the 160 level. What teams would like to nominate a player at that price? If they do, and no one else bids on that player, they get him for that price. If multiple teams bid, the team with the worst record (old-time draft order) gets him.

This is an open bid process where all teams submit their list at the same time, and when the names are posted, other teams can then come back in and add the names of any players who have been nominated. So if for example the first bid goes and the Bears and Bengals both nominate Cam Newton, other teams can also throw their names in the hat for Cam with this new information. However, in the end the team with the worst record gets him.

We then move to Price Level 159. It's the exact same process, but with one twist. Let's say that the Lions, Cardinals, and Browns all submit the name of Patrick Peterson. Other teams can then toss their name in the hat afterwards as normal, so imagine that the Vikings and Packers also bid. However, instead of Patrick automatically going to the worst team, those five teams all have the opportunity of bidding up a price level to 160. Among those who do, the worst team gets him at a 160. If none do, the worst team gets him at 159.

For lower levels, every time there's a tie the bidding moves up. So let's say we're at Price Level 130. The Chiefs, Jets, Falcons, Broncos, and Texans all bid 130 for Bruce Carter. Bidding then moves to 131, and the Chiefs, Jets, and Texans go up. It then moves to 132, and the Chiefs and Jets match. It then moves to 133. Neither team matches, so Bruce goes to the Chiefs at a price of 132.

You don't have to have one player at each price level. Maybe no one gets signed at 120, but four players get signed at 118. It's an efficient market because everyone pays exactly what they want to pay.




The advantages of this system are:

All teams have a chance of getting any player, other than the case where the worst team goes for the top price on a player.

Teams can budget their money and go with different strategies. A team can blow their wad by paying big money to a couple of good guys or they can get a whole bunch of lower-tier players for low price levels if they don't bid high.

Trades involving players would still work because you would trade rookie salary cap space instead of picks. You could also trade cap space across years if you wanted.

It would work well for the players because they would maximize their value. If more teams want them, they move up the scale during the bidding. They're also more likely to end up on a team that's a good fit for them.

It would work well for the teams because they can target players they want and if they're willing to pay for them they'll get them.

It would let the talent dictate the pricing. If the talent level is high, the bidding is higher (and probably fewer low-end players get picked). If the talent level is low, maybe there's not a lot of high-dollar bidding and you get more players signed at the middle and lower pricing levels.

Plus, it would be loads of fun. You'd have a draft that would last much of the offseason with news every day and maneuvering every day.

What do you think?

Otter
04-29-2011, 02:05 PM
Are you sure your brain isn't doing crystal meth when you're not looking?

Sofa King
04-29-2011, 02:06 PM
Nope.

seclark
04-29-2011, 02:06 PM
could you please repeat the question?
sec

Rain Man
04-29-2011, 02:07 PM
Seriously, people. This is the best idea since A&W root beer. Think about it, let it soak in, and then embrace it.

KCrockaholic
04-29-2011, 02:08 PM
What in the Willie Wonka Fuck?

DMAC
04-29-2011, 02:08 PM
Are you sure your brain isn't doing crystal meth when you're not looking?

:LOL:

bevischief
04-29-2011, 02:08 PM
That would be a long time and one way of spreading football over a longer period of time during the off season.

Rain Man
04-29-2011, 02:20 PM
That would be a long time and one way of spreading football over a longer period of time during the off season.


Yes. Yes. You're a visionary who is seeing the value of this.

This is superior to the current draft format in every way.

bevischief
04-29-2011, 02:22 PM
It would be just like having an auction that last the whole off season.

Rain Man
04-29-2011, 02:47 PM
It would be just like having an auction that last the whole off season.

Yeah, more or less. But I think this structure would work well within a rookie salary structure and team rookie salary cap.

Ebolapox
04-29-2011, 02:52 PM
Cody : Corey Dillon :: Rain Man : Bruce Carter

ChiefGator
04-29-2011, 04:15 PM
I must get new glasses.. somehow it looks like there is no Gaz option...

I would leave the entire process up to Gaz. He could step into a smoke-filled room and just assign rookies to teams. That is by far the fairest method.

EDIT: And we sure as hell would get a nose tackle this way as well... Gaz did love himself some defense.

patteeu
04-29-2011, 05:39 PM
I think I see a characteristic about this plan that I consider a problem. I think a team would be best served by getting a small number of superstars and filling in undrafted free agents around them. Because of that, I'd expect the worst team in the league to bid 160 on however many players they could afford (2 or 3?). Since they're the worst team in the league, they're sure to get those players.

Rain Man
04-29-2011, 05:55 PM
I think I see a characteristic about this plan that I consider a problem. I think a team would be best served by getting a small number of superstars and filling in undrafted free agents around them. Because of that, I'd expect the worst team in the league to bid 160 on however many players they could afford (2 or 3?). Since they're the worst team in the league, they're sure to get those players.


Hmm. Yeah, maybe. But if it's a different team that's worst the next year they'd do the same thing and the benefits would rotate.

Oh, wait. How about this? You're starting at the 160 level, or the highest-paid players. Once the worst team wins a tiebreaker they move to the bottom of the tiebreaker priority and the other teams all rotate up one. That's an easy solution.

patteeu
04-29-2011, 06:02 PM
Hmm. Yeah, maybe. But if it's a different team that's worst the next year they'd do the same thing and the benefits would rotate.

Oh, wait. How about this? You're starting at the 160 level, or the highest-paid players. Once the worst team wins a tiebreaker they move to the bottom of the tiebreaker priority and the other teams all rotate up one. That's an easy solution.

I like that better. :thumb: