I recant my earlier suggestion on helping build a webform/spreadsheet option. I looked at the what the DKC is doing is and it seems they do official voting within surveymonkey.com pretty often. That seems like it would be an easy method of collecting all the rules in one efficient survey/ballot that everyone can vote on before the start of the season. Just a suggestion. I don't care how we handle the method of voting, but as there are a handful of members who don't visit CB daily, it might be a nice way to get their input in one large blast as opposed to an ongoing time-consuming thing.
I'll list off some of the previous rule changes we've discussed or I remember hearing.
#1 - Behavior ClauseCurrent language: N/A
Suggested language: (per Harry):
"All league members have to maintain a standard of respect towards each other at all times, in celticsblog forums, in yahoo forums, in PMs, in emails, and in all forms of communication between league members. If this standard is not maintained, GMs will be warned once, then kicked out on following offenses."Pros: People should adhere to basic human decency. Show people respect.
Cons: A little concern about the language not being clear. What constitutes "standard level of respect"? Is this rule really necessary? One could claim that sending a lowball offer is "disrespectful"
#2 - Fix 75 missed game ruleCurrent Language: "
Team who have more than 75 unused games will be ineligible to keep a top-3 pick should they finish with one after the lottery (however, should such a team have traded away the rights to such a pick, the team holding those rights will not be so penalized)."Amendment Suggestion: "Team who finish the season with 75 or more unused games will be ineligible to receive top-3 pick should they finish with one after the lottery. Note 1: This only applies to the draft pick owned by the original team and not an acquired pick from a different team. Note 2: If a team is projected to miss 75+ games and trades away their draft pick, the penalty will carry over to the new team unless the original team drops below 75 missed games before the end of the season. Note 3: If a team (projected to miss less than 75 games) has traded away their draft pick and subsequently misses 75+ games, the penalty will not carry over to the new owner of the draft pick."
Pros: This is intended to prevent inflating the value of draft picks through tanking. This also closes a loop hole where a team with over 75 missed games can trade away their draft pick and have it suddenly be top 3 eligible for the new owner of the pick. Lastly, this closes a loophole which would allow someone to trade away their draft pick and then "sabotage" it by exceeding 75 missed games.
Cons: This is overly confusing. While loopholes exist in the original language, adding this extra language will just make things more complicated. Also, it's challenging to track projected missed games and how it applies to draft picks. Teams might not be aware that the draft pick they are trading for carries a "75 missed game" penalty unless they are following the league closely.
#3 - Ammend GM activity ruleCurrent language: "6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement."Ammendment suggestion: "6. GM activity is vital. GMs who are inactive without a roster move, post, trade response, or other demonstrable proof of logging on and checking one?s lineup for 7 straight days are issued a warning. A second warning is grounds for replacement in the league. 14 straight days of inactivity is also grounds for replacement. GM's are also required to respond to trades during the offseason.Pros: Requiring trade responses will assure that every single trade offer is responded to. This is vital to GM activity and should be included
Cons: It's unreasonable for every single trade offer to receive a response, especially in the offseason. GM's often receive too many offers as-is and it's perfectly acceptable to ignore bad offers. A GM can be active without responding to every trade.
#4 - Switch to H2H LeagueCurrent Method: We currently have a points-based league. The winner is chosen based on who scores the most points at the end of the year.
Suggested Method: Switch to a h2h league. The same scoring system will exist, but each week teams will match up against each other. When a team outscores an opponent that week, they receive a victory. At the end of the season, only the top 8 teams will advance to the "playoffs" and will be pitted against each other.
Pros: Some feel the current method is boring. As the season progresses, it becomes difficult to stay invested when your team is out of the running. Adding the element of playoffs will give hope for upsets and boost the excitement of the league.
Cons: The current method has worked fine for 8 years. The recent addition of Spring and Winter tourneys helps boost some of the league engagement as the season progresses. Also, H2H leagues are notorious for the unpredictability of their playoffs seeing as it typically takes place over the final month of the NBA season when stars are being rested for the real NBA playoffs and young players are getting extra minutes in extended garbage time. This would heavily impact the structure of the league as in most h2h leagues the goal is to outscore your opponent each week. This requires smart teams to add/drop players weekly to maximize the points they score.
#5 - Switch league name officially to CelticsBlog Points League (CBPL)Current name: "Lucky17's Yahoo! Points Hoops League"
Suggested name: "CelticsBlog Points League" (CBPL)
Pros: Lucky17 himself seems to want us to change the name now that he's no longer the league commish. The microsite already refers to the league as CBPL (
http://www.nedyken.com/cbpl ) ... It's an easy way to distinguish this league from others as it's (I believe) the first pure points-based league created on CelticsBlog.
Cons: It would be nice to continue to honor Lucky17 for his years of service.
#6 - Trading of future draft picksCurrent language: "15. Future draft picks may be traded on draft day, but no further than one year into the future. This is also true for trades made after the draft or during the regular season."
Suggested language: "15. Draft picks a more than a year into the future can not be traded. Example: In the 2015-16 season, you can trade 2016 draft picks, but not 2017 or 2018 draft picks. During the offseason trading period, the league allows the trading of picks this year and next. Example: In June 2015, you can trade 2015 picks as well as 2016 picks. "Pros: You still can not trade draft picks many years into the future, but this language permits the trading of "next year's" draft picks as soon as offseason trading opens. In other words, as soon as the commisioner opens up the "offseason trading period" in summer 2017, you'll be allowed to trade 2017 draft picks (pertaining to the 2017 draft happening that summer) as well as 2018 draft picks (next year's draft picks). Previously, you needed to wait until the day of the actual NBA draft until you trade next year's draft picks.
Cons: Although it only opens up a window of a few extra weeks (the month leading up to the NBA draft), it is best to wait until the actual day of the NBA draft until we officially allowed to move next year's draft picks.
That's off the top of my head. I'm not married to any of the new language and would appreciate suggestions that add more clarity. These are all things that could be included on the official pre-season voting ballot.