|
|
Post by Colorado Avalanche GM on Mar 5, 2013 0:42:33 GMT -5
That said, I can keep my team and never be eligible to partake in auctions. Canes has volunteered to do the same. What do you guys think? I think that's an acceptable resolution to the problems I brought up. |
|
|
|
Post by Colorado Avalanche GM on Mar 5, 2013 0:44:30 GMT -5
I see most of you having a big problem with the silent auction because the GM doing it would know more that you do... How's that different than what we have now? Pens currently makes the decision on who wins the auctions, and he can... and has, puts in his own bid, at the deadline, that beats the bid that's winning... but it's ok, cuz it's Pens, right?! No... everyone knows who's winning. If multiple people bid the same overall just look up their ages.. |
|
|
|
Post by Mike - Former Wild GM on Mar 5, 2013 0:54:52 GMT -5
So, whoever runs auctions will not be allowed to ever bid on a player. There are at least two (myself and Canes) that have already agreed to that in this thread.
Teams that place bids - how do you want the bidding to be worked? Right now, teams are allowed to submit a bid and if someone has the same overall bid they can add a player.
Is it a one-shot bid for everyone?
The way it is now, if an 87 is available, someone will bid an 86 right away, so I don't see a problem with a one-time bid only type deal either.
If we go this route, how do people want it to operate is what I am asking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Mar 5, 2013 1:02:24 GMT -5
but we get people overpaying for players in bidding wars right now which keeps the auction pool with fairly good players for the whole year. Without the bidding wars we will be down to nothing by the end of the year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Mar 5, 2013 1:11:50 GMT -5
Alright... Fuck... lol I was trying to steer clear of this one, cuz this has given me problems in the past... BUT... Something does need to change with the auctions. The snaking at the auction deadlines for starters has gotta change... Yah I brought back my old term for it; don't like it? Tough. Fact is that I've had to take the "if you can't beat'em, join'em" mentality on this one; Doesn't mean I agree with it. And yes, maybe the value of certain players may go down a little, but by enlarge, more teams that don't have a shot at these types of players, in the current format, would have a shot at obtaining them with a silent auction. I've been a "have" team and a "have not" team in this league. And even as a "have" team right now, it'd be nice to see a "have not" team pull one out of their ass for a change. I see most of you having a big problem with the silent auction because the GM doing it would know more that you do... How's that different than what we have now? Pens currently makes the decision on who wins the auctions, and he can... and has, puts in his own bid, at the deadline, that beats the bid that's winning... but it's ok, cuz it's Pens, right?! So, you're against a different senario that allows EVERYONE a better opportunity to get these players more readily, but you're ok with the current system that keeps the top teams at the top and the bottom teams at the bottom? Interesting. This league has lasted, granted... but I see no progression. Just being honest. One of the biggest reasons you and everybody will find that we don't change much here is that just look at all the leagues that have listened and made changes whenever they felt the people wanted something new. I don't see any of them around still. We started something new becuase that is what the people wanted just a month ago and already we have about 10-15 people checking in a day. Change isn't always a good thing. I don't mind trying a change like this, but it will destroy the quality of players that are in the auctions in no time. You guys complain it's the same players in auctions every year. THis will result in the same players from week to week as there won't be any bids for them anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by Colorado Avalanche GM on Mar 5, 2013 1:26:33 GMT -5
I don't necessarily think it will ruin auctions. People may overpay in silent auctions because they want that player that badly and don't want to risk losing him. If it's an 87 you want really badly, you'll bid an 86 and an 80 to ensure you get him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Mar 5, 2013 2:19:11 GMT -5
but the 79-80 players will probably end up with no bids on them
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike - Former Wild GM on Mar 5, 2013 3:00:09 GMT -5
If they get no bids, they go right back up for auctions and eventually they will get a bid. I think people are making up problems they think will happen when in fact no problems will occur.
Hell, if you're that worried about it, the Auctioneer can make it public a day prior to auctions closing that specific players do not have bids.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2013 3:01:18 GMT -5
Yeah they will......
|
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Mar 5, 2013 3:13:55 GMT -5
That would work Mike. I like that idea. That would take care of my concern on it
|
|
