JerryvonKramer Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I think if the actual promoters were doing this exercise in 1983, we wouldn't have seen some of these picks. They would take stars and draws first. I think the saves were largely what they would have made -- maybe Watts saves JYD and not Ted -- but I don't think some of the drafts picks would have been the same. I guess that's in the nature of "fantasy" though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Literally wanted Patera or Duggan next... I've come to the point of making a list that's as long as the gap between my picks so I will be less frustrated when someone I want is taken "well I still got these next 6 options even if I lost 4 that I really wanted" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I think if the actual promoters were doing this exercise in 1983, we wouldn't have seen some of these picks. They would take stars and draws first. I think the saves were largely what they would have made -- maybe Watts saves JYD and not Ted -- but I don't think some of the drafts picks would have been the same. I guess that's in the nature of "fantasy" though. There's also the "fantasy" nature where you ignore that there's only so much money to pay top guys, especially in a place like Portland or Southwest where the market is small. Â Don Owen isn't breaking the bank to bring in top names. Joe Blanchard couldn't even afford the $7000 a week payment to stay on USA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 That is also true. It depends on if you roleplay that aspect. If you assume that the picks are all free though, I think you see a different sort of pick. Â I'm not necessarily knocking that Embry pick specifically either. I'm just saying that some guys you can afford to wait on in a market where only you might see value in a guy for whatever reason (regional history, personal preference, potential, whatever). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Of course, this is a board full of Americans, so you all already know this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Of course, this is a board full of Americans, so you all already know this. Hey!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Boricua Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I also think in a market where value is relative you are best off going for people who represent value to everyone. The regional stars are less important. Â I realise I say that after just having made a slightly risk-averse Backlund pick, but I could see Backlund as a 6-year WWF champion having some value in other markets, especially those he'd worked in before like Florida or the West Texas area. And the doubt was enough for me to jump. But I still got him 3rd pick instead of 1 or 2. Â Jimmy Hart was a great pick, certain others slightly less so because the players in question wouldn't have had much competition for them anyway. Â That's certainly a valid way to go about it. But there are also certain considerations specific to each territory that will influence how some of us approach the draft. I'll use my first two picks as an example. Sgt. Slaughter I would classify as someone having wide appeal in terms of value, but he is also someone I feel I can definitely make good use of in a primarily Spanish speaking market that does not get much exposure in the U.S. (basically "what happens in Puerto Rico, stays in Puerto Rico"). Pedro Morales has a bit more limited appeal overall, but he is such a perfect fit for my target audience (native of Puerto Rico, former World champ and recent I-C champ in a top market, at this point int time the most accomplished native wrestler, speaks Spanish, etc.). I went back and forth on whether to pick him second, since due to his more limited overall appeal he would likely be available in later rounds. But at that point I valued more having certainty in who was going to be the face anchors of my promotion and took him (also, my prospective second pick had already been taken and I couldn't really find another good fit). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I'm not necessarily knocking that Embry pick specifically either. I'm just saying that some guys you can afford to wait on in a market where only you might see value in a guy for whatever reason (regional history, personal preference, potential, whatever). There is a very select few picks that I can think might fit this bill specifcially Tommy Rich, Pedro Morales & Jacques Rougeau. But Southeastern was never a big name territory. Tommy Rich kind of was their "name" guy because Armstrong & Fuller didn't mean much outside of their home base. And I can see dawho just wanting to make sure he had the two Rougeaus locked up. I think El Boricua has a clear idea of what he wants to do with WWC which obviously has a heavy emphasis on Pedro Morales. Â But like you said, Backlund also kind of fits in this category also. You valued him higher than everyone else due to your region and wanting him to drop the WWF Title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I'm very curious who will get Jimmy Valiant. I think his value in 83-84 is such that he probably should have gone already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 He might not necessarily drop the title ... Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 What are the chances somebody steals my next pick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cross Face Chicken Wing Posted June 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I think what I've learned so far through three rounds of drafting is that the notion of draft "value" is almost meaningless in this project. Â I seriously considered Heenan first overall, but thought that there was no way he'd go in the first round so I should wait and get better value by taking him in a later round. Well, Heenan went early. The Fabs second overall? Never could've called that one. Embry and Kamala going so early....also guys I had labeled as later round "value" picks that I could pass early and grab in mid-rounds. Wrong. Â If the top guy on your board is still there when it's your time to pick, grab him, even if his perceived "value" might be for a lower-round selection. The way this draft is going so far, he might not be there when your turn comes around again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Well to be fair Cross Face your pick is a giant reach. The Road Warriors had been on TV for less than a month. If we're supposed to be thinking in July 1983 terms no one would have ever taken The Roadies that high but The Fabs were one of the hottest tag teams in the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Crossface makes a good point, but this is only something that has emerged from the established "meta" so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Well to be fair Cross Face your pick is a giant reach. The Road Warriors had been on TV for less than a month. If we're supposed to be thinking in July 1983 terms no one would have ever taken The Roadies that high but The Fabs were one of the hottest tag teams in the country. It's so hard to ignore the upcoming future in this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Just to make it easier for me to sleep tonight, if I passed on Koloff on my last pick would he still had been there for my current pick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cross Face Chicken Wing Posted June 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Well to be fair Cross Face your pick is a giant reach. The Road Warriors had been on TV for less than a month. If we're supposed to be thinking in July 1983 terms no one would have ever taken The Roadies that high but The Fabs were one of the hottest tag teams in the country. Â Um, ok. I suppose if this project only last 3 weeks, then sure, taking the Roadies first overall is a giant reach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I'm just saying that the way you are looking at it isn't the way everyone is looking at it. Some people are looking at it strictly from a July, 1983 standpoint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyin' Brian Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 It is hard to ignore the future. None of my guys are top stars in 1983, but for what I want to do and what interests me, and what I know those guys are capable of, they are good picks to me. Probably should have waited on Cornette, I think the Midnights going right before made me jump the gun, even though he wasn't affiliated with them yet. Â I'm going to make shows that I want to see, and that I think people in the territory in 1983 would have liked to see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainmakerrtv Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Frick again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Ewiak Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Damn it! On to my backup plan for managers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I may just go without one since I don't expect the one I want to last now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I feel like Tully is a little like Rose in that he can also be the leader of a heel group instead of a manager. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkookypunk43 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 My thinking for my picks, Keeping Dibiase: Great heel, cornerstone of mid south. Â JYD: I need that #1 babyface to feud with Dibiase and who better than the greatest babyface in 83 in Mid South JYD Â Murdoch: Really wanted Hansen here as a brawler type heel but since he's on the undraftable free agent list I though Murdoch would be a good alternative. Â Muraco: was conflicted in either getting that #3 heel because I have Andre for 7 dates or getting a #2 babyface and I decided getting a heel was more important here. Â What do you guys think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I think that I am thrilled you took Muraco and not Jim Duggan who I just KNEW was your next pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.