Franchise Player Idea.....again

I wanted to revisit this.  The idea would be that every KFBA team could choose one player on the roster each year to keep for next year.  No pick would be given up.

One of the arguments agains this has been that there would not be availibility of some of the marquis names.  I wanted to show what the early drafts looked like this year and then what the top franchise players might be for next year:

2006 Draft order

LeBron
Kobe
Wade
Nowitzki
Duncan
Garnett
Ming
Brand
Pierce
J.O'Neal
Carmelo
Amare
Shaq
AI
Arenas
McGrady
Marion

End of Year numbers (Top Averages)

Wade
Ming
Duncan
Kobe
Garnett
Nowitski
Boozer
Carmelo
LeBron
Gilbert
Z. Randolph
Amare
Shaq
Gasol
J.O'Neal
Baron Davis
Nash
Bosh
Pierce

So, I don't think simply because someone had Bron or Kobe they have a huge advantage.  Who knew that Boozer would have a better average than LeBron?  Boozer could be what drives several franchises to the top this year while Wade nurses his shoulder and is completely useless to winning a championship.  Think of the kind of trades you might have if this were the rule:

1. Upgrade keeper trade.  Late in the year I might be out of the playoff picture, but I want a franchise center.  I could trade one lower franchise player and another reasonable player for a Duncan or Ming.

2. Injured Star trades.  If you have Wade and he has a season ending injury before the trade deadline, he still has value.  You could trade him to a non-playoff team for a lesser franchise player like Amare or Gasol.  This can be a huge deal.  People who's first round pick gets a season ending injury are pretty much out of the playoff hunt.  With this rule, the player still has the value that he should have.

3. After season trades.  If I have built up a playoff winning team with arguable two or three franchise players, I can try to upgrade that to a Wade, Duncan or Ming.  You might even see some good keepers for franchise players in the offseason.

Overall, I think the trading would be much more interesting.  It would also be more realistic like real NBA deals.  Anyway, I will keep posting the idea forever.  I like it and think it makes sense.  The Colonels facist refusal to accept it will not hinder me from wasting my breath!

you are the best kfba player in the land, so you input has to carry some weight, good idea mr peery

This gives value in ending the season with atleast one star on your team, as opposed to the current situation where that star would be traded to a team that is already powerful for a few keepers. It may deter a few of the star-for-keeper trades.

I still dont like the top 12 players or so always on the same team, maybe if the Franchise player has to be a player not projected to be taken in the first round or top so many players

I guess my point is that the top 12 players would probably change hands more frequently with this kind of scheme.  There would be reasons to trade them, hold them, etc.  The other point is that the top 12 are fluid.  Changes happen all the time.

Interesting.  I think it should be settled before draft picks are issued.

Maybe we could try it out in the ABC for a year.  The problem is, this is a rule that makes more impact year after year than in the short run.

If you were going to do it, you would have to make the rule now for the upcoming year....in other words, the draft for 2007-2008 would not have a franchise player, but it would be known that it would be the case for 2008-2009 right from the draft forward.

jcpeery wrote:

If you were going to do it, you would have to make the rule now for the upcoming year....in other words, the draft for 2007-2008 would not have a franchise player, but it would be known that it would be the case for 2008-2009 right from the draft forward.

Makes sense.  This was discussed last year after I had traded away my first round picks from a couple teams.  For the team with Amare and Howard as 2nd round keepers, that wasn't a problem, but otherwise, yes.

I love this idea. I think it adds an element of strategy that changes things significantly though, which is why it might be opposed. I'd love to hear opposition to this. Choosing the franchise player, and decidiing each year whether to trade based on scenarios mentioned by jcpeery or just replacing with a younger franchise player would add a layer of strategy which would just be really cool. Also woud make the first couple rounds of drafting more complex with more strategy when factoring in the desire to land the next KFBA rising star, vs. selecting the safer veteran star with less upside.

I think it could recruit more long term owner loyalty a specific league, and minimize league hopping for attractive buys in other leagues, that would be good.

I think older players that are still top 16 (Shaq, AI) may be left available in lieu of a younger player with long term franchise potential, that's why I agree it would resemble a bit more what an NBA owner might wrestle with (minus all the contract BS).

Also, it might make the number one draft pick that much more valuable (being that it would come from a smaller, less talented pool of available players), making ditching stars for keepers less attractive. You'd really have to think about leaving your cuboard totally bare if you know it meant the difference betweeen an AI vs. say Ray Allen in the first round. Anyway, it's very intriguing.

You KFBA powers that be.  Can we do a league like this this year?  We could convert a current league or start a new league using the idea.  From a programming stand point it should be easy to do.  The first round of the draft would be the keepers so that we maintained the same 16 round format.   In the keeper list, we would have a "K" option that would allow us to keep one player that year.

Let's get it on!!

Wow how cool is it that we have threads that started 1200 days ago and are still active!

jcpeery:

You KFBA powers that be.  Can we do a league like this this year?  We could convert a current league or start a new league using the idea.  From a programming stand point it should be easy to do.  The first round of the draft would be the keepers so that we maintained the same 16 round format.   In the keeper list, we would have a "K" option that would allow us to keep one player that year.

Let's get it on!!

I like the idea of trying it in one league, and I like the rule much better than the rule that you can't trade a first pick.  One issue we'd need to resolve; what are the options / restrictions for changing your "Franchise Player?"

I'll handle the technical implementation if you can get the Colonel on board.

Colonel.....do you have any problems with starting a new league like this or would you rather have us convert an existing league?  The basic idea here is to give a team a little more of a franchise feel and curb some of the stars for keepers trading at the end of the year.

The only rule change would be that one player per team must be kept as a franchise player.  No designation would have to be made until the keeper decision deadline.  In other words, no restrictions on trading at any point.  You choose your franchise player for that year when you choose your other keepers.

If we are starting a new league to do this, I would probably suggest haveing the keeper pick be one round ahead of last years position rather than the two positions higher as with the other leagues.  Again, just to give a team more of a franchise feel....potential for more continuity year to year.

 

OK so the franchise player can be kept by forfeiting a pick one round above where he was drafted or kept in the previous season.  And if he was drafted / kept in the 1st, then he can be kept in the 1st right?