I wasn't a fan of the IL system we had season and I wouldn't support returning to that system. Maybe with a different mechanic I'd be happier, but I don't like having to track that silly shizz and having to check in multiple places to see which FA's are actually available. Really, I think the best solution would be to move the league to a provider that supports games limit for HtH. If we weren't playing every guy every game then the injury issues and the lack of production from rookies wouldn't be a problem. I think that games limit actually mimics the NBA pretty well, since a real NBA team only gets to play each guy 82 games as well. Plus we wouldn't have to track anything extra on a spreadsheet. Anyway, that's my two cents.
Here is a possible solution: Why not just expand our rosters by say 3 or 4 and these roster spots can only be used if the team suffers a mild to severe injury (say the player is out 2 or more weeks - or if Yahoo places the IL next to their name)? That way, the team has the ablity to pick up the player without dropping the injured player. The extra spots essentially serve as an IL system.
Feel free to expand there. You might not like it, but it is a reasonable fix, so if you don't want to go with it I'd like to at least have some idea why not. Mainly because it'll help move us closer to a solution everyone can live with.
As far as the extra slots go, it really isn't all that practical in basketball, which doesn't have a structured injury system like, say, baseball does. Those Yahoo injury tags come and go with no real rhyme or reason, and I think it's not steady enough to base a system on. It might be possible to employ a system like baseball's for our league though, I suppose. Poeple could place players on the IL for a specific amount of time, and provided there was no veto they can use the extra slot. The key there is that the IL in aq scenario like that needs to based on specific duration, not so much on Yahoo's injury tag. That said, in general I think it's complicated (at best) to have actual game slots that are only usable based on non-Yahoo criteria - that inevitably means paperwork and extra tracking, and that was the main issue with the last system. Whatever it is we decide to go with I think it needs to be simple and elegant, which probably means that it makes sense and requires a minimum of extra tracking. I'll get behind any solution that meets those criteria.
Simple and elegant, that's exactly the way we should be heading. The advantages of using the weekly format have become so obvious to me, particularly with these type of keeper leagues as opposed to the anonymous snapperhead one-and-done public leagues, yet I have no doubt there will be howls of protests following this post.
Yeah, I'll say it, weekly leagues are infinitely more simple and elegant than daily leagues.
Daily leagues force you to use your bench in the rotation, or suffer as you watch your opponent do it to you. Having 5 healthy, active players on your bench can be the difference between a win or a loss. The best GM's are often the ones who have no life outside of fantasy basketball and are picking up and dropping players like Tiger Woods does slurries so their roster always has the max number of healthy active players. Daily leagues reward quantity over quality. And the current format coupled with the 7 day contracts only deepens the problem.
Weekly leagues actually allow you to stash a couple of young upside types getting DNP's, an injured starter or two, plus hold a couple of backups in case of further injuries, Like NBA teams do.
Daily lineups make it incredibly easy to tank, all within the rules. All you have to do is load your bench with inactive guys, either upside types or long-term injured players, and watch your team crash and burn each week simply because you play 20 less games as your opponent over the course of a week.
Also, checking rosters for tanking, or any other rules like making sure people are complying with the 7 day contracts and IL guys becomes near 1/7th of the work, a once a week thing for Kal and Red.
Lastly, moving around stupid boxes in yahoo! shits me to tears. Why the hell they haven't automated it so that your active players are automatically subbed in for inactive ones, with use merely making changes when there are more players than slots, is beyond me. I have 4 kids, a wife, a full-time job, a life outside of fantasy basketball, I have better things to do than log in, set my roster, then wait for the shite, slow, cumbersome yahoo! roster update submission process to drag through every friggin day, or alternatively 7 times in a row so at least I don't have to deal with it all again for a week.
On the flip side, the argument against weekly formats is when you're hit with an injury early in the week and are unable to sub a guy in to cover. But this is a totally moot point, as even in a daily league you'd still have 2 or 3 less games than your opponent with an injured player glued your bench. It makes no friggin' difference, or at worst perhaps one game played by the first scrub off your bench.
This league has a lot of great concepts that would work a lot more smoothly in a weekly format than they currently do in a daily format. The problem lies not with the the concepts, 7 day contracts and injured reserve lists, injury exceptions, etc are all great ideas, rather the problem lies with the fact that the daily format $UX A$$.
When it comes to simplicity and elegance, daily format gets a FAIL.
as free time becomes a critical resource for me, i'm beginning to lean towards weekly format as well. i used to not like it, but then i tried it last year for the first time and i really don't have a problem with it anymore. i wouldn't go into which is better, but i would vote for weekly it was put to vote again
p.s. happy holidays to everyone who celebrates them at this time
Weely subs does almost exactly the same thing as using games limit as far as how it treats bench slots, so I'd be able to get behind that for next year. Our league does have a goodly amount of active slots, so the league would still adequately reward deeper teams too. I'd prefer games limit, since it's a little more strategic than weekly subs, but I suspect that usings GL will find even less support than going to weekly subs.
Though I don't feel quite so strongly about it one way or another, I do prefer daily changes. I don't think one is particularly better than the other but they offer different challenges.
Agreed on all that Markos said about being able to set line-ups once a week and be good with it. However it changes the dynamic about how teams are built, particularly in a salary cap league. It's all about how a GM spends his/her cap space and whether they spend bigger dollars on fewer players, or buy depth. Weekly line-ups seem to favor less depth since only a limited amount of players can play in any given match up. Daily lineups favor deep teams that can throw out a stronger option at each position on any given night.
Streaming players is certainly a problem in H2H weeks, but there are league rules to prevent it if necessary - the obvious being capping the amount of moves per week. I don't think that applies to our league because of our contract rules, but I don't think I've seen the 7-day contract be a problem.
I guess the more I think about it, the more I realize I don't like weekly changes for the reason I don't like fantasy football. It seems all to reliant on a single decision. Certainly GMs can/should take the extra time to plan ahead for the week, but generally means a GM needs all that time on Sunday...and Sunday isn't always available. I've missed my share of roster changes because I logged in at 12:30am Monday. Or I logged in Monday morning to make my daily changes up and realize I forgot to put in my weekly changes the day before. Obviously that is on me - I take all the blame. But I don't think weekly changes lessens the amount of upkeep/attention for a GM. For my money, it adds to it, and has greater consequences for not being able to complete it.
Markos, you have an intriguing idea about automatic subbing. It makes complete sense to me in leagues without game caps, especially if GMs are given the option of turning it on or not. I can imagine the last things a ton of GMs would want are the computer deciding who to put in their starting lineup.
Again, with that all said, I am all for a vote. if we as a league want to change it up, let's do it.