Re:Ben's question whether tying keepers to specific rounds is useful.
Legal Principals: (a) Reward fantasy player for efficient draft by allowing said drafter to keep the cheap player at that price for at least an additional year; and (b) interesting trade possibilities, since I can trade someone with a high round value for someone with a lower round value in order to rebuild my team for the future (e.g. trade A-Rod, who would presumably cost a round 1 pick to keep, for two young bucks who would cost, for example, rounds 14 and 22).
Problems with this system:
a) how long can i keep the player at the cheap draft pick rate? The best idea so far in my view is one year, with subsequent resignings costing highest remaining draft pick.
b) overall complexity... this is not that bad... the commish will have to keep a good record of the draft, but that can simply be posted on the blog...
Why is this better than each keeper costing highest remaining draft pick? In my view, the most important difference is the strategic off-season trading possibilities... a team close to contention can trade young, cheap players for a highly valued player - just like real life.
It is also better than the 3rd party rankings because that system is fundamentally flawed. It does not really reward an efficient draft, because you have to pay for the keeper based on his production (e.g. i draft the 4th most valuable player in the 23rd round, i still have to pay a first round pick to keep him - the same result as the simple keeper=highest remaining pick system). In fact, since most players will only keep their best players, the 3rd party ranking system will usually lead to the same result as the simple (Omar) system, but with needless complications. The only difference will occur when Andy wants to keep some scrub.