I get your point. You want a quick draft. I want a long draft with more discussion in between each pick. You would like 10-15 picks every day. I would like maybe 2 or 3 picks per day. I fully understand this. One downside of my laid back approach is that some days we may have only one or even no picks. I understand that and am willing to accept it. I also understand that people will get restless if one poster is continually taking a long time, and as I said I will address this issue in private with that person should I need to.

Am I understanding everything here?

Assani,

The thing is, this draft is not just for your enjoyment. It seems that while people are somewhat disagreeing on the length of the time limit, you're the only one saying we should stick with no time limit. In things like this, rules such as a time limit that don't directly effect the outcome of the draft can and should be changed on the fly when it is seen that their is a better option that a large majority of the participants would be in favor of.

We already changed the rules once, with the reverse snake.

A 24 hour limit changes basically nothing(thus far). It could eliminate a possible issue at some point in the future, I will give you that.

My point isn't really that a time limit is a bad thing, I don't really care one way or another. My point is that you seem to think that as a result of us instituting a time limit, people are suddenly going to act quicker. As a whole, people are going to be picking at the exact same pace as they currently are.

Also I'm okay with 2-3 picks per day, that is maybe a little slower than ideal, but having one pick in the last two plus days is way too slow. It's just not possible to generate enough discussion when it is moving that slow.

I don't like all the "take my ball and go home" stuff Assani. I appreciate you starting this thread, and you've done a great job. But that doesn't mean that if a great majority wants something your decision is the only one that matters.

Many of us have conformed to your wishes to not name players, even though some of us think it takes away from the discussion. You should have some leeway on your end to.

Selection bias.

This thread is filled right now with the regulars who are here 10+ hours per day and would never take long on a pick.

The people who only check this thread once every few days are not here right now.


Obviously the first group would prefer a strict time limit, while the second group wants a relaxed time limit.

My job as the "commish" of this draft is to try to compromise and see all sides. I try my best to do that, and I've already done that and ruled on this issue once before. My decision was made and is final.

That's what qualifying the hell out of your questions means. I know it would be complex, that's why I don't want to sit around thinking of exact wording to make it work.

lol, as if you have any power.

Dude, I am probably the biggest Nash supporter on this board.

Yes Nash does break out one or two great passes per game. But the majority of pick n roll passes are basic passes that many NBA level PGs could make.

What makes Nash special is his shooting.

See my post about selection bias. Of course the hardcore fans who are here 10+ hours per day are going to want a time limit. And I'd be that those people who are not here much would prefer a more lax time limit(or none at all). But since they aren't here much, their voice isn't going to be heard as much, so its going to appear one sided.

When I started this draft, I wanted to get as many owners as possible. I realized that the hard core basketball fans who were here 10+ hours per day would be in no matter what. What I had to do to make this draft successful was to convince the casual fans who check the board maybe once every few days to be in it. In order to convince them, I chose to have very laid back time limit rules.

Now that they've chosen to be apart of this draft(perhaps in part due to the laid back rules) it'd be very unfair of me to change the rules on them. If there was a large group of people willing to do the draft with a strict time limit, then you should've brought this up before any part of the draft began. As is now, its unfair to those people who thought they were getting into something that they could only check on once every few days.

And as I said, if anyone continually takes too long, I will discuss it with them via PM and try to have them pick quicker.

edited to add: Regarding "just for your enjoyment", I believe I'm the one who is trying to see all points of view. Personally I wouldn't mind the draft being quicker. I've probably put more work into this than anyone, and I've made several tough decisions. Its not easy pleasing everyone, so I'd ask for a little understanding here....I"m trying my best guys.

I agree with this. Yes maybe we will have 4 or 5 instances in this entire 10 round, 400 pick draft where the 24 hours is broken. But in 395/400 of the times, it will change nothing.

Assani,

You need to stop acting like these decisions are yours to make. They are not, they are the decisions of the group as a whole to make, and you have no power to enforce any "ruling" you make, so please just cut with the, "it wouldn't be fair of me to" and "my decision is" crap. You are just 1/40th of the decision maker and your vote weighs no more than anyone elses.

Dude, I'm trying to reflect the opinions of everyone here. You act as if I wouldn't be ok with a fast draft. You guys are the ones that are ignoring the feelings of the other side(those who aren't very active and can't check the internet several times each day). I'm trying to stick up for them. Thats the exact opposite of "take my ball and go home" imo.

We have already had two such instances and are less than five hours away from a third.

in other news, the first of the post-draft implications:

"EL SEGUNDO, Calif. (AP)—More than four months after Andrew Bynum injured his left knee, it’s been decided the Los Angeles Lakers center will undergo arthroscopic surgery.

The Lakers made the announcement Sunday, saying Dr. David Altchek will perform the procedure in New York on Wednesday—the same day Bynum’s team entertains San Antonio or New Orleans to begin the Western Conference finals.

An estimated timetable for Bynum’s return will be provided following the surgery."

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_yl...v=ap&type=lgns

Are you trying to be bothersome here? There have been several issues during this draft in which I've had to weigh both sides, listen to both arguments, and come up with a decision. This isn't an an enviable(sp?) position, as no matter what I choose I'm gonna piss some people off.

Now I've already done that once with this issue. I've thought about it, considered both sides, and made a decision. I'm asking you guys to respect that and not to continue to bring it up. If you don't feel as if I've done a good job organizing things, then I'm sorry. But I can assure you that I'm trying my hardest to do the best I can do and put my personal preferences on the back burner and putting the good of the draft as a whole at the forefront.

I thought only one?

In the first round, Noah didn't pick during his allotted 24 hours, so Clark took over for him a few hours later. Then we just had battschr.

.

MEbenhoe,

All 40 of us signed up to do this draft under certain rules. It would be unfair to change those rules unless EVERYONE agreed. There are most definitely some posters who can't be here very often and are going to take a while with their picks. You guys are the ones trying to enforce your personal opinions, not me. I'm trying to account for the viewpoints of everyone including those who aren't here often enough to make their voices heard.

And I believe that its necessary to have one "commish" organize things and give a final ruling. Otherwise there is chaos. If you feel as if we'd be better off with 40 independant voices, then I respectfully disagree with your opinion. As I said, I've tried my best to remain impartial and put the good of the draft ahead of my own personal wants. Yet for whatever reason you think I'm being selfish or letting power go to my head. "It wouldn't be fair to me"??? WTF? When have I said stuff like that? I'm looking out for the good of the group, not myself. You couldn't be me wrong with that comment.

i think everything changes once the draft starts. if you're proposing we vote on this after the draft starts, i think we need far greater than a 51% majority. it's unfair to the minority.

People seriously just NEED this draft so bad that you just can't go without a pick for a day or two? I agree a few weeks per pick would be excessive, but Jesus Christ.

+1.

lol @ this post and all the other ones in this thread. Do you have memory loss? Do you remember we changed from snake to reverse snake after the draft had begun??? And 9 people voted AGAINST changing it (I would be shocked if even 9 people, let alone the majority voted against the time limit rules we want). Also lol @ looking out for the group when it's clear U WANT a slower draft process which we have and I guarentee the VAST MAJORITY of the group wants a timelimit enforced. YOU ARE LOOKING OUT FOR UR INTERESTS AND PROBABLY 5 OTHERS MAX, INSTEAD OF THE OVERWELMING MAJORITY.

Then when some of us try to do something about it, I create a league and you blackball everyone from the league. Do you think we are a bunch of 3rd graders? You are not fooling us with these comments.