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 DVauthrin » Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:00 am

barrec wrote: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.


I agree with this post 100%. My biggest problem with weekly changes is the deadline yahoo uses to set your lineup. It should lock your lineup after the first game of the week starts, but instead they lock changes 12:01 am on monday. My other issue is if you suffer an injury or two during the week you are screwed because you don't have the option of getting a replacement in your lineup. An NBA team can sign someone to a 10-day contract or recall one of their players from the D-League.

Also, in my experience I've found it takes about 10-20 minutes maximum for me to set my lineups(in all 6 of my leagues) on the weekend before the next week. There is even an app for the iPhone that allows you to set your lineups and make adjustments without having go through Yahoo. It's called fantasy monster.

I do like the idea of automatic subbing as well.
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 DVauthrin » Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:38 am

Another issue I think needs to be discussed is how to best deal with max contract caliber fantasy players hitting free agency. Right now we give teams 10 points in our tiebreaker system when trying to resign their own free agent, but that's less than the amount of points the league awards to a team with a top 5 regular season record.

In the NBA a team trying to resign its own bird rights free agent can offer an extra year of the maximum salary(in our league that would be 5 years, instead of 4) as an incentive for the player to stay with their current team. Plus, NBA teams get the right to try and re-negotiate with their players over the course of their contracts, which isn't logical for our league.
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 Fenris-77 » Mon Dec 27, 2010 11:49 am

DVauthrin wrote:Another issue I think needs to be discussed is how to best deal with max contract caliber fantasy players hitting free agency. Right now we give teams 10 points in our tiebreaker system when trying to resign their own free agent, but that's less than the amount of points the league awards to a team with a top 5 regular season record.

My biggest issue actually isn't the tie-break points or the points for reg season, it's how those points aren't tied at all to who's actually on the team. A guy can trade away a third of his team and the system treats him just the same. I don't think that reg season should be bumped either, at least not at the expense of playing time. The system is already really skewed towards the previous seasons standing as it is, and the matter of positional openings is essentially useless as far as accruing points goes.

I think the whole system needs a re-think. I'd like to see the bonuses tied to quality of player on the team more than the previous season's record. I think a small bonus for the home team is fine, it just needs to be set appropriately next to the other points.
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

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby KalElen » Mon Dec 27, 2010 4:40 pm

we've talked a lot about changing points system so i'm gonna skip that issue here and concentrate on it when the time comes for decision making
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 So-Tex » Tue Dec 28, 2010 12:02 pm

I've been going back through the last few pages of this thread since I haven't been around for a few days (work and holidays):

Regarding Daily v. Weekly lineups, I fall on the side of Daily. I actually do similar to DVauthrin in that I set my lineups for the entire week, then just make adjustments as I make moves, or players get hurt, or for whatever reasons. I know I'm fortunate enough to be in front of a computer a majority of my day, and can afford to make moves on the fly at any time - but that doesn't mean I'm all over my fantasy teams every five minutes either. My feeling is if we go with weekly lineups, we might as well make the league's format roto, which lends itself more to the quality of player signed, as opposed to running out as much of a squad as we can every night.

I play fantasy football as well, and the one reason I have a love/hate passion for that game is one and the same - on any given Sunday, any player can go off in any matchup. Most of the time, a manager can be spot on in figuring which players will have big games. But every so often (and more often than not, it seems), players will come out of nowhere and win (or lose) you a week. It becomes more a matter of luck than anything else.

Basketball isn't like that though. Because games are played throughout the season, you can analyze trends, pick up those "hot" players who would benefit from getting more playing time, or simply get a bench guy or two, who gets you 8 points and 9 rebounds per game. As much as luck is a factor, there is some skill involved in understanding how to build your team and play your matchups.

And I really don't buy into the argument about "if a player gets injured, you only lose a game or two, so no big deal". Heh, tell that to the Dirk Nowitzki owner in a weekly lineup league, especially if Dirk goes down this whole week. Dallas has five games this week, so losing that slot for that many games, when you probably have at least a body you can plug in, is pretty brutal. Now, I realize that's the exception to the rule - most teams average three games per week. But even losing three games to injury is tough when your trying to out-count your opponent's counting stats. If you lose a cat by one or two points (or heaven forbid, several cats for that matter), those three games could have made a difference.

And to be honest with you, if the tipping point for weekly lineups is the "time" factor (which I understand - I have three kids, a wife, and a life as well), then there's no reason we should be worrying about things like "inactive managers" or "tanking" and such. I'm sure we could find a few managers out there who would be able to come in, set there lineups weeks or months ahead of time, and then not check back in again until the All-Star break. In fact, it sounds like there were a few of those types in this league last season.

All right, all right ;-7 ...no, I'm not saying we should do that - just trying to take a point to the extreme. But in a way, it is true.

Bottom line - if you don't like spending your "quality" time during the week on your fantasy team (which I totally understand), or, if you can't spend time because of work/school/life, then it's simple - set your lineups for the week ahead and then forget about them. At least that way, if you hear news that your Player X has gone down with a knee injury, you can decide to jump on for five minutes, make the changes to your lineup, and then move on with you life. Maybe even make an add or drop.

Whatever floats your boat. :-b

At least you'll have the option. ;-)
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 hi chi » Tue Dec 28, 2010 3:04 pm

I would have to agree. I am not a huge fan of weekly changes. I like the daily changes as we get a chance to use "strategy" in our attempts to win each week. I am surprised by the amount of complaining over injuries in this league. Injuries happen, they are a part of the game. When your team has too many injuries your team will struggle to win just like an NBA team does. I really don't see the issue. I have been getting my butt handed to me week in and week out, and I hate that, but that is the reality of the team I have inherited. It is my job to make it better. I think this attitude needs to be picked up by guys with injuries. If you don't like having injured players trade them. I think making big changes to our league format to accomodate for injuries is a little bit overboard. There is a reason Yahoo doesn't have a IR slot in its game and I have to say I like it that way.
hi chi
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1076
(Past Year: 132)
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby Markos » Tue Dec 28, 2010 3:59 pm

So-Tex, you've missed my point regarding injuries. I'll try to use your example.

Dirk goes down so you sub in your best sub ie. Mbah-a-Moute. You're still screwed.

Secondly, you would have played Mbah-a-moute at the utility spot anyhow on most days both DAL and MIL play, since there are open spots on the active roster most days.

So at best you get one extra game of Mbah-a-Moute as compensation for 3 or 4 games less of Dirk. ;-D I understand some guys prefer daily rosters regardless, but the injury argument is fatally flawed.

And I spend a lot of quality time following fantasy basketball, I just consider the time I spend in yahoo! setting my roster as lost time, I could be actually learning something about the league instead of dealing with yahoo!'s crap interface 7 times more often each week than is necessary :-P

Lastly, most NBA teams use about 8 or 9 spots for active duty, and the remainder for injury reserves and for stashing young players. Conversely in our league we need to use our entire bench as active duty players and rotate them in and out of the lineup constantly in order to be competitive. Carrying one or two injured players is enough to cost a team 5 or 6 games a week, and that's before we even mention young players getting DNP's. Combine the two and you're almost guaranteed to get a loss against a team that has a legit bench.

That's alright for one-and-done public leagues, but not for keepers. The best keeper leagues reward GM's that have picked some players and watched them rise to the top, any old fool can snatch them off waivers once they've had a good couple of weeks.
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 So-Tex » Tue Dec 28, 2010 6:12 pm

Markos wrote:So-Tex, you've missed my point regarding injuries. I'll try to use your example.

Dirk goes down so you sub in your best sub ie. Mbah-a-Moute. You're still screwed.

Secondly, you would have played Mbah-a-moute at the utility spot anyhow on most days both DAL and MIL play, since there are open spots on the active roster most days.

So at best you get one extra game of Mbah-a-Moute as compensation for 3 or 4 games less of Dirk. ;-D I understand some guys prefer daily rosters regardless, but the injury argument is fatally flawed.

But in my mind, it's no more flawed than the argument for setting your roster ahead of the week. In that scenario, if Dirk goes down on Monday, you lose all games for the PF slot for the rest of the week, period. It doesn't matter who I start in the UTL slot(s), I still lose those PF games.

And I'm not arguing that having a healthy scrub start for an injured Dirk makes up for anything, not by a long shot! What I am saying is that a savvy manager will find a way to maximize his or her roster to try and make up for losing a player like Dirk. Maybe they lose the week 7-2 because of that injury. But maybe they only lose 5-4. At least then they had the chance to win the week despite an injury to a top ten player.

I do see where having multiple injured players in this type of league can hurt you - hell, I own Yao Ming, so I get that! But like hi-chi said, if you've got too many injuries, and they're keeping you from winning week in and week out, it's simple - trade those players! Drop them! Microwave them! Saute them! Do whatever. No one says you have to sit on those guys for any length of time before you do something about them. (Unless you own Yao Ming, and you're waiting on the Injured Player Exception to be available once he becomes eligible this season. ;-7 O:-) ) And the same goes for "rookies" or "prospects", or whatever you want to call them. If you're tired of them taking up a bench spot, then move them somehow. Make them work for you. To ask for inactive roster spots so you can "save" your future prospects or injured players, and still be allowed to fill an active roster, is equivalent to the proverbial "having your cake and eating it too". At least by making all slots active, we're saying what is true of real life (true for the most part, at least) - that "you CAN'T have your cake and eat it too"!

Buuuuuuuut...

What you CAN do is trade your cake for some ice cream...or a strawberry-banana milkshake! ;-D

In other words, if you want to be competitive this season, then make whatever moves are necessary to be competitive this season. If you want to be competitive next year, then sit on your guys and take a pounding this year - knowing that you'll come back strong next season.

Otherwise, there's no reason to complain about injuries, or lack of developed talent, or lack of players who actually see the floor during games. It's like I've said before, there's no way my bench warming scrubs are going to beat half of the teams in this league, even if they played twice as many games in any given week.

Now, if I used my "foolish" skills correctly, and picked up solid players off the wire, well then maaaaaybe I'd have a chance. But I can tell you right now that I'm not beating anyone with the likes of Sonny Weems, Daniel Gibson, or Shelden Williams on my roster.

Difference is, you don't hear me complaining about it! :-B :-D ;-D B-)
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 dasein » Tue Dec 28, 2010 9:02 pm

I don't have strong feelings over weekly/daily in principle. I use daily for the leagues I run, for reasons of injury and in-game flexibility. And I think the time consideration is being grossly overstated here. Yes, setting a daily lineup for 7 days takes 7 times longer than doing it once for a weekly setting, but when one set takes all of 10 seconds...well, crying time-waste is a little silly. Having said that, I could see some form of game limitation, be it weekly lineups of game limits, being beneficial for this league.

At the moment, the good teams have stacked rosters from 1 to 14 and only a few player-games have to be missed every week, so to be competitive there is no place for roster stashes. If I want to win, then holding an Avery Bradley or Kevin Seraphin is just wasting a spot. This doesn't really mesh with the whole emphasis on long-term team building and the rookie draft. As it stands now, most of us are happy to throw in picks left right and centre to get a trade done, which shows that they aren't really all that valuable under the current settings. The current settings are also not realistic; in the NBA the rosters are 15, but rotations generally only go 7 or 8 deep, while pretty much every player on our rosters get to play. So I see a big opportunity to improve the league by tweaking the settings so that the total number of games your team can play is much less than the number your roster is capable of playing. Deep rosters with limited roster spots will allow for long term stashing, long term injuries, and may open up the trade market a bit more. :-)
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 scully19 » Tue Dec 28, 2010 9:07 pm

The change in dynamic i think makes it much more realistic, because now you can have projects and can hold onto young guys for future years without destroying your current year, the way it is actually done by GMs right now.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1338
(Past Year: 196)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
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