2012/13 season discussion

[scully19]

I like that better now that I think of it, since it means the worst team in the league can at worst get the 3rd pick in the draft. Doesn't hurt them TOO much yet leaves your promotions in for non-tanking.

[So-Tex]

first of all it is easier to talk about detecting tanking then actually do it. if somebody went all out and benched all 9 starters, that would be pretty obvious and easy to detect. on the other hand, smart person (and i think all of us here fit that description) will approach things in a different way. he'll start his best players, but will sneak in a scrub over a productive player as often as possible. he will stop looking to improve his team with free agent pickups. he will be late a day or two with using il. he won't check up on his team as often. how are we supposed to monitor all of this? much more efficient way to prevent tanking is to reward those who don't do it then to punish those who do. that way there is no need to judge other gm's and their activity/effort level, which holds potential for conflict. lottery odds in place stimulate all 16 teams to compete to the end. with amendment of only top 3 picks being decided by the lottery, bad teams still get high picks, but tanking hurts their lottery chances in stead of helping them. for me that is a perfect solution. rewarding rather then punishing is always better way to go imo

btw anybody who is tanking/inactive is gonna be kicked out, so we have to be very careful when accusing somebody of doing it

as for biding procedure change, i see no reason for it. 24h is more then enough and bidding procedure isn't complicated at all. if somebody makes invalid bid he has only himself to blame for it. by allowing the clock to be reset with invalid bids, we prolong the bidding and not only waste time, but also affect people's bidding strategies. even an honest mistake can screw over other people so there is no reason for us to do that

First off, I noticed that there have been some more posts since I started writing this, so I just wanted to make it clear that I'm not directing this at anyone in particular. I just think it should still be said though, partly because it's another opinion, but mostly because it took me some time to put it all together.

Regarding the whole "How do you tell?" argument, you make some good points Kal. A good example of asking "How do you tell?" is what happened to me in my own league last year.

Last season, I had a rough year in the first league I ever commished - it was a H2H league with 8 playoff teams, no bye week. I started the season with a win in week 1 - after that, it was all downhill - injuries, players under-performing, the other guy's players over-achieving, you name it, it happened. And I tried every move every way to next Friday and nothing helped - trades, add/drops, the whole nine yards. Just when I looked like I was done though, my guys woke up! I started winning again! Made a few more moves, and suddenly, it looked like I might actually make the eighth seed of the playoffs. I had an easy match-up that last week, and was hoping I could do well enough to leap-frog the 8th place team. He had a tough match-up with a solid looking playoff team, and I figured it would be tough for him to hold his lead over me.

Well, I come to find out the first day of that week, my competition's opponent purposefully benched his whole lineup! Needless to say, I was pissed! I thought he was tanking just to keep me out of the playoffs, or maybe there was collusion involved, or even just to spite me - you know, all sorts of bad stuff went through my mind. But as commish, I still had to be careful and address it in a fair manner. I openly called out the manager who was tanking because I wanted to hear a legitimate reason for his actions. And guess what. He responded. Turned out, he did the math, crunched all the numbers, and figured his odds were better if he LOST that week, thus being slotted a seed lower.

So basically, he tanked so he could have a better chance at winning in the first round of the playoffs. Now, I didn't agree with the strategy one bit, and I told him that. But I respected his decision and didn't change a thing. He had a good reason to do what he did for his chances, and in the end it worked - he got the match-up he wanted. Of course, karma reared it's head as he lost in the first round anyway.

Fact is, managers will do different things in order to win. And sometimes, albeit very rarely, tanking is one of them. But what we want in this league is something to play FOR, regardless of where we end up in the standings. And I agree with Kal - it's better to figure out a way to reward play from top to bottom rather than try and police everyone, and punish the "offenders".

Which brings me to my other point: What seems to be lost in this whole discussion is that a good manager with a bad team doesn't deserve a top draft pick. He doesn't deserve anything! NO ONE deserves anything! You gotta earn it! And you do that by fixing things - make some trades, sign some free agents, draft a few guys when you can, do your homework, crunch your numbers. Sure, it's just a fantasy game - but in a league like this, it takes work to have success.

You remember back when we were selecting our teams? I could easily have taken a better team that would have given me a better chance to win or do well. But part of me said, "Hell, that's too easy! I want to earn my place here." And I like the challenge of taking something so bad and turning it around. I'd rather start with a bad team, do my thing, and finish 4th with some respect, than start with that same bad team, blame the old manager for screwing it up, then ask "Can I have my first round draft pick please, because I "deserve" it!"

In my opinion, if you're a good enough manager - not an uber-geek, mind you, but just a good manager with common sense - you can take any team in any league, and make it competitive - even in this league! But success is not going to happen simply because I finished in the bottom four with the chance to pick a top rookie for next year. That's just crazy talk. How many of those rookies are going to be top 20 players next year? One? Maybe two?

If this was a straight redraft league, or even a keeper league with a redraft of Free Agents, then I'd have issues with the potential for guys to tank. Because then, you KNOW you would have a chance at getting some legitimate value and talent next year - so where's the incentive to finish in 14th? Just tank, finish dead last, and get the #1 pick in next year's re-draft - get you a solid veteran, and suddenly you're on your way. Now THAT, to me, is taking the easy way out. And that's the type of behavior we should discourage.

But we're talking about drafting rookies - and everyone knows that drafting rookies works great for real life teams, fantasy not so much. Sure, there will be those gems we find here or there, I agree. Hell, this year there may be several! But if I do any damage in this league this year with the squad I took on, it's going to be because of the trades I made, and the free agents I signed. Not because I drafted Cole Aldrich in the first round.

I do agree we need to address the system in order to make it competitive for everyone, including whoever will be ranked 16th this season. But we also need to keep the "tanking" conversation in perspective. I'm certainly not going to tank a game, a week, a season, just to get a 1st round draft pick, even a high one. If I DO manage to end up with the #1 pick overall next year, great! I'll do what I can to build around him for the future. But he won't be the reason why I win anything. I will.

Sorry if I went off on everyone, but I just had to air my two cents...

And with regards to the latest posts, any idea that makes the league a better, more competitive place is fine with me.

[KalElen]

wow. i love the enthusiasm So-Tex

i haven't really thought of that scenario (tanking a week to get a better match up), but it definitely makes the whole tanking punishing situation more complicated. another reason to go reward rather then punishment route

[dasein]

Well, I come to find out the first day of that week, my competition's opponent purposefully benched his whole lineup! Needless to say, I was pissed! I thought he was tanking just to keep me out of the playoffs, or maybe there was collusion involved, or even just to spite me - you know, all sorts of bad stuff went through my mind. But as commish, I still had to be careful and address it in a fair manner. I openly called out the manager who was tanking because I wanted to hear a legitimate reason for his actions. And guess what. He responded. Turned out, he did the math, crunched all the numbers, and figured his odds were better if he LOST that week, thus being slotted a seed lower.

In the H2H league I commish, I had this exact same decision to make last year. I was already in the playoffs, and in the last week I was playing an opponent who was a favorable match up for me. If I win, he misses out of the playoffs. If I tank and loose, I get him as my 1st round opponent, which would surely mean an easy win for me. In the end, I decided this was bad juju and played it straight up. My reward? A first round loss to my brother, who had a similar season to that which So-Tex described, and squeaked into the playoffs because I just beat his competition for the last spot. Where do the good guys finish again?

[dasein]

Here's my 5cents regarding tanking.

Firstly, it's really only the no.1 spot (maybe 2) that anyone would consider tanking for. Its not often that there are sure things in the draft, especially in fantasy terms. Also, the rookie scale that we use is actually quite high. Is a chance to pay James Harden 3M really that much better than a shot at unearthing a Collison or Thornton for 1M or less? Simply having a "top 5 pick" isn't of great benefit in general, because the rookie draft is a lottery in itself.

I also think it's silly that the playoff teams have a good chance at getting the No.1 spot. Personally, I dont need added incentives to win the 5th/6th playoff. I want to finish as high as I can anyway! Your fantasy profile is forever! (mine will be taking a significant hit because of taking on this team btw )

I do agree with kal that building a system which renders it useless to tank is much easier than trying to police a system where there is motivation to do so. Having said that, I think we are overstating the importance/likelihood of potential tanking for the reasons I've discussed above. I would think that as long as finishing last doesn't guarantee (or proportionately increase) the chance of landing no.1, then there would be no reason to do so. Consequently, I see no reason for complex formulas. Why not keep it simple; all non playoff teams go in the draw for no.1 (and maybe 2) with equal odds. How the picks are distributed after this is less important, although giving the top 8 picks to the bottom 8 teams seems to make sense.

[KalElen]

in one very competitive league i called out a guy who didn't set his team in a match up for 3rd place and another gm, who is very good and competitive himself, defended him by saying that it doesn't matter who ends up 3rd or 4th, only thing that mattered is winning. i don't agree with that attitude, but there are people who do. that's why i added certain, relatively small, incentives for playoff teams who win consolation match ups to get top pick. i want everyone playing to the end
as for teams 9-16 having same shot at top pick, that is extremely similar to what we have in power (1% difference between 13-16 and 9-12), but it might cause people to lose interest as soon as they are out of the playoffs. i hope it wouldn't and that we have 16 great gms, but i hoped for the same thing last year too. i prefer to motivate people through small rule tweaks then to just have to hope that we all are really as committed as we should be.

heads up for the new guys. i have tendency to argue over rules extensively, but don't think that i don't respect your opinion just because i'm countering your arguments. i have been known to occasionally accept other people's ideas . in the end all decisions here are reached through league wide vote (if there are multiple options that is), so i just try to present my arguments. in the end league decides and you are free to post any and all suggestions and opinions at any time

[Markos]

Kal, I love your passion, and I think we can all see you love the league and are only looking for the best solutions. Kudos brother, keep it up, and know I'm in this for the long haul.

That said, I'm going to speak candidly. Like you I'm not afraid of an argument, and I also have 4 years of commish experience in my own salaried keeper league, which I'm happy to say has been a success and is going as strong as ever.

I think it's clear the lottery system needs an overhaul. I understand the point you're making, rewarding teams 9 through 16 for winning, as opposed to losing, will discourage teams from losing interest and/or tanking. But there are shortcomings with the current system, and there are ways to have both, a lottery with odds that favour the lower teams, like the NBA's, and an way to prevent tanking that doesn't demand much of admin.

First, give GM's the benefit of the doubt, and don't sweat the small stuff.

he'll start his best players, but will sneak in a scrub over a productive player as often as possible. he will stop looking to improve his team with free agent pickups. he will be late a day or two with using il. he won't check up on his team as often. how are we supposed to monitor all of this?

The simple answer is don't.

If over the last month or so of the season a GM occasionally sneaks in a scrub for a productive player, or is a day or two late with an IL move (more on that later), is it really going to affect the final standings? Probably not, or at most perhaps one spot, giving them ie. and extra 3% chance in the lottery. It's not worth skewing the entire lottery odds, to the detriment of the teams that genuinely need help, merely to discourage a little "covert" tanking from happening. Give them the benefit of the doubt, let it slide, but keep the lottery true.

As for FA pickups, in a keeper league a GM out of playoff contention should be looking to add FA's on 2+ year deals to go into next season with, not add vet scrub rentals to move from ie. 14th to 13th. Currently the system punishes for taking Dorell Wright over Grant Hill.

Anyone team whose GM is obviously tanking, as in benching players for clearly inferior ones, or just not setting their roster, is penalised in the draft. Rather than busting out the calculator and pouring over countless matchups, approximate the damage and reverse it in the draft order after the season. If the GM is allowed to return, push them up one spot again. The end result is, if you tank or go AWOL, you not only lower your place in the final standings, you actually lower your lottery odds as well, which is what I think we are all aiming at.

Another suggestion I'll make, which we're going to do in my league stating this season, is to expand the playoffs. Reward the top 4 with a bye in the first round, and let 9 - 12 have a crack at upsetting 5 - 8. Then have the losers of the first round meet the bottom 4 teams for a consolation playoff series that sees the winner add to their lottery odds. It extends the season for everyone, and gives the bottom teams something to play for.

As for the inactive list, I'll suggest you drop the concept altogether and just expand the bench by 2 spots. The reason being is that having an IL isn't worth the cost, in terms of having to screw around with every teams IL players mixed in the yahoo! FA pool database.

I realise expanding the bench 2 spots but keeping the IL rules would be an absolute nightmare to administer, so I can see why last season you kept them off the rosters, but I'd rather have the added flexibility and depth of 2 extra bench spots, an uncontaminated yahoo! database, simpler rules and less administrative work for you and Red, and forgo the novelty of having an IL. It reminds me a bit of the D-league bench restrictions concept my league started with, which we have now totally abandoned and in hindsight I wish I never bothered with.

In conclusion, the changes I'm proposing:

1) expanded playoff format, 1 through 12, with teams 1-4 having a 1st round bye
2) consolation finals (1st round losers vs 13-16)
3) Teams 1-8 don't get a lottery pick, only 9th through 16th.
4) NBA based lottery odds for teams 9 through 16
5) Only the top 3 picks should be lottery, then reverse standings, like the NBA.
6) Remaining 12% lotto odds (reserved for teams 10-14 in the NBA) the consolation finals booty
7) Admin approximate gains through tanking/inactivity after the season, and reverse them.
8) 1 place penalty in lottery odds for GM's

[KalElen]

those are some interesting ideas man. i'm not sure that yahoo allows for the playoff format you are suggesting though

as for the il list, i can tell you it was huge pain in the ass to maintain it. i'm inclined to agree with those who think we are better off with additional two bench spots and no il, though i still like the idea of il. implementation in practice is just too complicated/demanding for it to be worth keeping

[dasein]

It sounds like what was happening before was that IL players were in the FA pool, but managers had 'dibs' on them according to some IL list? If so, that is a pretty silly system.
If we want to keep the IL thing, and I'm personally not sure it is adding a whole lot, I'd suggest this: we get 2 extra roster spaces, but these are only to be used for inactive players. We know who a manager's inactive players are by having them displayed in the "smack talk" bar, which is highly visible and easily accesible. There can still be a thread for recording movements in and out of the IL spots. This way its clear who the IL guys are and they are not in the FA pool.

[Markos]

Yeah, one problem with the extended playoff format is yahoo! won't support it, so the results in the yahoo! league and everyone's yahoo! profile may not exactly reflect what actually happens. Doesn't bother me personally, I'd rather do things however we prefer and just use yahoo! to do the math