2012/13 season discussion - Fantasy Basketball Cafe 2014
Fantasy Basketball Cafe


Return to FBC Salary Cap

2012/13 season discussion

Moderators: RedHopeful, silentjim, Fenris-77, DVauthrin, dasein

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby silentjim » Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:11 am

I'd be interested in moving Evan Turner if anyone else has interest in acquiring him.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11486
(Past Year: 794)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby RedHopeful » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:23 am

You've raised some interesting points, scully that I think we all as a group need to address regarding the entire rookie draft process. I'd also be in favor in figuring out a way to make the system more friendly to the lower ranked teams...
Image
RedHopeful
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse Team LeaderFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 18235
(Past Year: 708)
Joined: 11 Jul 2007
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: http://twitter.com/Redhopeful

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby So-Tex » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:33 am

RedHopeful wrote:You've raised some interesting points, scully that I think we all as a group need to address regarding the entire rookie draft process. I'd also be in favor in figuring out a way to make the system more friendly to the lower ranked teams...

I was trying to put something together as a suggestion to do just that. But I don't know that it will be an simpler, just a different process - one that would be more friendly to the bottom 8 teams, but still give the top ones who need that extra umff (3rd - 8th place) a chance at a lottery pick.

I'll keep working on it and post it when I get a chance...again, only as a suggestion. ;-)
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1039
(Past Year: 217)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby DVauthrin » Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:42 am

RedHopeful wrote:You've raised some interesting points, scully that I think we all as a group need to address regarding the entire rookie draft process. I'd also be in favor in figuring out a way to make the system more friendly to the lower ranked teams...


For starters, this needs to be changed:

9th -12th in the regular season standings get 12% chance to win the lottery
13th -16th in the regular season standings get 11% chance to win the lottery


Look, I understand we all want to prevent tanking, but giving teams with better records a greater chance to win the lottery isn't the way to do it. Bad teams need those top picks to rebuild and start competing at a higher level. Also, since the plan is to have only active owners in the league, I don't see tanking as that big of an issue.
DVauthrin
Basketball Scribe
Basketball Scribe

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6341
(Past Year: 166)
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby So-Tex » Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:20 am

DVauthrin wrote:
RedHopeful wrote:You've raised some interesting points, scully that I think we all as a group need to address regarding the entire rookie draft process. I'd also be in favor in figuring out a way to make the system more friendly to the lower ranked teams...


For starters, this needs to be changed:

9th -12th in the regular season standings get 12% chance to win the lottery
13th -16th in the regular season standings get 11% chance to win the lottery


Look, I understand we all want to prevent tanking, but giving teams with better records a greater chance to win the lottery isn't the way to do it. Bad teams need those top picks to rebuild and start competing at a higher level. Also, since the plan is to have only active owners in the league, I don't see tanking as that big of an issue.

I agree with this mindset as well.

In the "proposal" (for lack of a better way of calling it) I was trying to work up, those numbers would be reversed - 13th-16th would get 12%, while 9th-12th would actually get 10% (instead of 11%). And from these 8, the team winning the top spot in the lottery drawing would be guaranteed no lower than the #3 pick overall. That way, you could still incorporate the "prize" into the playoffs of "winning" a 2% or 4% chance of getting a lottery pick, including picks #1 or #2. Those teams finishing 3rd, 5th and 7th are also trying to improve so they can try and "win it all" the next year. And I'm sure the incentive would be there for teams to play out the 7th place game and get a 4% chance to move into the lottery.

The odds are stacked as such that a playoff team probably won't win a lottery pick anyway. But in the event it did happen, or worse, all three playoff teams got the top 3 lottery picks, at least you would have that guarantee in there to break it up and still give a "true" lottery team at least a top 3 pick.

I'll try and work something out and post it.
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1039
(Past Year: 217)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby KalElen » Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:53 am

i like this idea of scully19's:
scully19 wrote:Simple solution would be to have the draw the same way it is outlined, but if you don't win the top 3 picks drawn like the then you get put back based on standings of the regular season. In this way they can still have the opportunity to win the lottery, but they do not automatically jump up positions because they are a part of it.

like the real nba does, all this while keeping current percentage structure.
that way gm's who remain active til the end and win consolation match ups get some reward for it, all bottom teams fight and scratch to avoid being in the bottom 4 and they are still guaranteed high picks, worst team in the standings 4th pick at worst, 2nd worst 5th pick at worst etc.
we aim at having 16 ultra-competitive gm's here, but we hoped for it last year as well, and look where we are now. league was almost disbanded and we had to replace almost half of gm's. even if all 16 of us were ultra-competitive, i'm afraid that if 9-12 don't get that +1% on 13-16 some gm's will tank, not because they are quitting on the league, but because it makes sense for them to do it. in real nba this is ok, beacuse league allows it, but i don't like that practice. it allowed lakers to snatch gasol and shift balance of power and while we have veto system to prevent such one-sided trades, having to use veto complicates things and relationshios between gm's. it's worth avoiding at any cost. scully19's idea of having just top 3 picks decided in lottery combined with current percentage distribution is the best way to go imo

regardless of what happens with this rule, i'm glad to see people thinking about it and talking about it ;-D
my kung fu is the best
KalElen
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterLucky Ladders ChampionMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 4208
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Smederevo, Serbia

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby dasein » Thu Aug 26, 2010 6:27 am

Well, Yahoo! fantasy basketball is up and running. :-)
It supports draft auctions now, so presumably players can be allocated to teams by the commish, along with monetry values. I don't know exactly how you guys were running this before, but does the new functionality make things easier for this league?
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 917
(Past Year: 434)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby KalElen » Thu Aug 26, 2010 10:14 am

dasein wrote:Well, Yahoo! fantasy basketball is up and running. :-)
It supports draft auctions now, so presumably players can be allocated to teams by the commish, along with monetry values. I don't know exactly how you guys were running this before, but does the new functionality make things easier for this league?

i'll look into it, when i'm feeling little better. since all the bidding has to be done at the cafe for the record keeping sake, i don't think we'll gain much by that feature, but i still don't know how it works, so i can't say for certain
my kung fu is the best
KalElen
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterLucky Ladders ChampionMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 4208
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Smederevo, Serbia

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby Markos » Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:14 pm

Regarding the tanking / lottery issue, the best solution I've seen is to have a consolation playoff series for the lottery teams, with some extra lotto balls going to the teams that do well. Aside extending the season, and igniting interest, for the non-playoff teams, it discourages tanking and still leaves crap teams with lottery help.

My suggestion would be to base the odds of winning the lottery off the NBA's format, then use the lotto balls reserved for NBA teams 9 through 14, which we don't need here, as the winnings for the consolation playoffs. That works out to be about an extra 10% chance, or 6% for the winner and 3% for the runner up.
Eradicating Marijuana one blunt at a time
Markos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster

User avatar

Posts: 289
(Past Year: 5)
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Down Under

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby Fenris-77 » Thu Aug 26, 2010 2:46 pm

I don't think we need rules against tanking, aside from maybe adding it to the league 'constitution' (although we don't actually have one :-b ). I'd rather leave the lottery as much like the NBA and just make obvious tanking cause for expulsion from the league. This is supposed to be a friendly league with high-end managers, and I think we can plan the rules to reflect that. That said, I'm fine with the idea of giving managers some incentive to play right to the end too, since it helps keep all the managers active until the bitter end.

Oh yeah, and I'd like see if we can't figure out a better way to track IL guys. Personally, I'm all for just having them on the actual rosters since that saves all the record keeping and double checking trouble and keeps them out of the potential player pool. I guess it would require the teams to be expended by two bench slots that can only be used for declared IL players. I got heartily sick of having to double check the IL every time I was looking at FAs. Even if they're not on the rosters (although I think that's simplest) there should be a more elegant solution than the one we used last year.
Fenris-77
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
EditorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6300
(Past Year: 410)
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues




  • Fantasy Basketball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact