1960 Expansion Draft - Page 2

Pelican · 04-22-2023, 01:59 PM

Late to the party, but in my last expansion draft I only allowed existing teams to protect twelve guys (to start). As they lose a player in the draft, they can replace him with a new protected player. (That prevents one franchise from getting fleeced too badly.). With the guys having less than three years service all automatically protected, this allows teams to keep their core safe. It does make for some tough calls for better teams with loaded rosters - particularly if they have a lot of veterans to protect.

This approach means the expansion teams are still marginally better. They should not lose 100 games; but won’t be competitive.

The other effect is to reduce the dominance of the best teams with the deepest rosters. They simply can’t protect all their better players. This tends to increase parity, as the best teams are weaker (or at least not as deep), and the worst teams are not awful.

Since I play (modern times) with a spending floor and salary cap, over time there should not be dynasties, nor small market teams that never compete. I like my sims to be as competitive as possible. Incremental player development and strategy are rewarded.

I realize that others may prefer the modern tendency toward dominant teams and pathetic franchises. The ultimate example of this - which I like but have not tried - would be a promotion/relegation system, three divisions grouping teams according to strength. If you are going to tolerate inequality in budgets and spending, this seems more logical than teams fifty or sixty game behind the division leader.

04-22-2023, 01:59 PM	#21
Pelican Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2021 Location: Wilmington, Delaware Posts: 2,323 Blog Entries: 1	Late to the party, but in my last expansion draft I only allowed existing teams to protect twelve guys (to start). As they lose a player in the draft, they can replace him with a new protected player. (That prevents one franchise from getting fleeced too badly.). With the guys having less than three years service all automatically protected, this allows teams to keep their core safe. It does make for some tough calls for better teams with loaded rosters - particularly if they have a lot of veterans to protect. This approach means the expansion teams are still marginally better. They should not lose 100 games; but won’t be competitive. The other effect is to reduce the dominance of the best teams with the deepest rosters. They simply can’t protect all their better players. This tends to increase parity, as the best teams are weaker (or at least not as deep), and the worst teams are not awful. Since I play (modern times) with a spending floor and salary cap, over time there should not be dynasties, nor small market teams that never compete. I like my sims to be as competitive as possible. Incremental player development and strategy are rewarded. I realize that others may prefer the modern tendency toward dominant teams and pathetic franchises. The ultimate example of this - which I like but have not tried - would be a promotion/relegation system, three divisions grouping teams according to strength. If you are going to tolerate inequality in budgets and spending, this seems more logical than teams fifty or sixty game behind the division leader. __________________ Pelican OOTP 2020-? ”Hard to believe, Harry.”