[EricH]

Originally Posted by BrennanB

Yeah while the average may be "closeish" the first/last picks were terrible. If you look at the points distribution over first/last picks quite certain the top 2 picks will on average have a much much higher point average than any other position. So just because your "average" draft order may be semi acceptable, the huge disproportionate first picks between teams I think is a big big issue. You can see that in my post on the main thread.

Ah, yes.

So the real question is not, how do we keep the draft order at acceptable averages.

It's "How do we keep the top 2 (or 3, if it's a deep event) spread evenly so that everybody has a crack at those top points?"

And that could be accomplished by a rotation, but then there'll be that one player who doesn't get as many if the number of events and players doesn't line up right...Or you get folks complaining that so-and-so always gets the top picks at the good events (2056 at just about any event, streak or no streak, just to name one).

What might be done (this is notional) is to randomize as normal, BUT if certain parameters aren't met, re-run the randomization. That is, if team X isn't getting good positioning, then re-randomize (or non-randomize) them into good position until it evens out a bit. Or if team Y is getting really good positioning, same but into a "worse" position.

I do recall that there was one year where the randomizer (not the spreadsheet in this case) just really liked one person... to the point where I may or may not have re-randomized if they came up near the top of the list...