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 dasein » Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:26 pm

Well, its looking like we'll have a season. ;-D

Can someone PM everyone to let them know we're drafting and that we need to decide on some rule changes. I don't have the league set up as a group for messaging purposes, and Ive got a plane to catch today and don't have time to work it out.
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 RocketsDWM » Sun Nov 27, 2011 4:01 am

I agree with all of the proposals on the table except for the blind bidding.
RocketsDWM
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 589
(Past Year: 144)
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: 2010/11 season discussion

Postby Fenris-77 » Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:08 am

RocketsDWM wrote:I agree with all of the proposals on the table except for the blind bidding.

I get that not everyone likes it. What we really need are other better options if you don't like it. The current system is flawed and unwieldy and something really should be done about it, but the question is what.
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 Markos » Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:36 am

I still think the biggest issue we face is the need for a commish.

Ultimately, given a lot of the issues are not only divisive but half the league is inactive in the discussions, we need someone to take the authority, make the calls. The rest of us would have to live with some decisions we may not have liked, for example I will likely have to live with daily rosters despite their shortcomings, but at least we'd start moving beyond the discussion stage and actually have some rock solid decisions made and the rules amended accordingly. It just seems right now, with noone having a clear mandate, it only takes one or two GM's to express dislike for a proposal and we reach an impasse, while the GM inactivity level makes voting on anything near impossible. Even midseason it's hard to get a decent turnout for a league vote.

There has been a spike in activity lately, dasein and Fenriss in particular seem to be putting in some time to try to work through the issues, a few of us others have dropped in on occasion, but we still have a lot of work to do just to get the system in place before we can kick off the season. And the clock is back on, with Christmas Day being the likely day for tipoff. That's less than a month, and I think if the system issues aren't resolved in another week or two we'll be in trouble, there has to be a couple of weekends minimum for us to finish drafting, resolve both restricted and unrestricted free agency, knock a yahoo! league up, finalise our rosters, check salaries etc. I don't see it happenning without someone agreeing to be the commish, and putting their stamp on the league.

The commish does the shovel work, they hold the shovel, therefore they choose where to dig the hole.
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 DVauthrin » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:16 am

I'd like to propose moving to a straight hard cap of 72.5 million(half way between our current soft and hard caps). I feel this will create more player movement in the long run and balance out the league.

I also propose this tiered tiebreaker system for offseason free agency:

Playoff teams from a year ago: 2 points
non playoff teams from a year ago: 0 points

Best player at the position outside top 10(positionally) in BBM per game value: 6 points
Best player at the position ranked 6-10 in BBM per game value(positionally): 3 points
Best player ranked 1-5 in BBM per game value(positionally): 1 point

No players at players primary position: 6 points
1 player at players primary position: 3 points
2 or more players at players primary position: 1 point

Teams resigning their own player(regardless of ranking): 3 points

This gives teams trying to keep their own talent an advantage, but also accounts for winning, and playing time.

For in season free agency tiebreakers, i'd just use the best player on each team involved at the position. The team with the weaker player(previous season BBM per game value ranking used) gets the player as in season free agents are looking for more playing time than anything else.
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 » Sun Nov 27, 2011 11:57 am

I came up with a rough top 10 positional list based on last season's per game values.

here's the google docs link:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... 0lnd3RBRkE

Last Name Position BBM value

Paul PG 0.62
Curry PG 0.39
Rose PG 0.34
Williams PG 0.28
Westbrook PG 0.24
Billups PG 0.18
Felton PG 0.11
Kidd PG 0.09
Nash PG 0.08
Rondo PG 0.01(replaced lowry with him, because rondo is a top 10 pg in h2h)

Wade SG 0.45
Ellis SG 0.36
Ginobili SG 0.32
Martin SG 0.29
Allen SG 0.24
Bryant SG 0.21
Gordon SG 0.18
Richardson SG 0.08
Matthews SG 0.04
Afflalo SG -0.01 (could put Jason Terry here instead, value -.06)

Durant SF 0.69
James SF 0.6
Gay SF 0.38
Pierce SF 0.35
Wright SF 0.31
Anthony SF 0.29
Granger SF 0.18
Wallace SF 0.14
Gallinari SF 0.07
Iguodala SF 0.07

Love PF 0.52
P. Gasol PF 0.52
Nowitzki PF 0.48
Amare PF 0.40
Garnett PF 0.38
Aldridge PF 0.37
Brand PF 0.29
Millsap PF 0.29
Smith PF 0.25
West PF 0.2

Horford C 0.37
Jefferson C 0.35
Howard C 0.20
Noah C 0.18
Nene C 0.17
M. Gasol C 0.1
Bynum C 0.05
B. Lopez C 0.04
Bogut C 0.01
Chandler C 0.00
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 dasein » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:46 pm

I'm overseas and will have intermittent internet access this week, which is a pain because I'd be happy to do some heavy lifting.

Just a few things from the last few posts. I don't think that having a strong commish deciding everything is the way to go here. Thats not the way to achieve sustainable solutions. Well, he could make decisions on the minor detail but not biggies like blind bidding. We're close to the stage where we can put various changes up for vote- it really just requires someone to type out the proposals. People that don't vote have nobody to blame but themselves if they don't like the changes.

Regarding DV's tie breaks. I'd strongly argue against having a 'top 10' list or any other arbitrary number for the reasons discussed here:
viewtopic.php?t=68541&start=30

I also don't like the idea of having previous season standings as a determinant. We need to be avoiding rich get richer tie-breaks. Ideally, we need to take a few of these tie break proposals (I think there are about 3 out there at the moment) and just try them out with our current rosters and see which make sense. I would do it, but I won't really have time this week unfortunately. :,-(

I do like DV's idea for getting rid of the soft cap and running with a 72M-ish hard cap. This eliminates a lot of (IMO, unnecessary) complication in the game.
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 So-Tex » Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:33 am

dasein wrote:I also don't like the idea of having previous season standings as a determinant. We need to be avoiding rich get richer tie-breaks.

I agree with dasein on this point, and not just because I was one of the inheriting managers of a poorly built fantasy basketball squad. I just see it that in real life, it's easier to have tie-breaker situations based on success than it is for the fantasy game. In real life, any GM has a shot at signing any FA for the simple reason that "money talks". And sometimes, as we've seen many times over, it's not always the highest bid (or best offer) which wins out - a player can decide to play for a squad simply because he likes the other players, or he likes the coach, or the city. For obvious reasons, that doesn't happen on the fantasy level (yeah, I haven't had the chance to return Mr. James's calls lately ;-7 :-B ). So with that in mind, I feel it's better to skew things (although not drastically) towards those managers who need the help to make their squads competitive. It's been said before, and I don't mind saying it again - I feel we've got an honest enough bunch here to believe that no one would "tank" a season on purpose just to try and build a "super" squad two or three years down the line.

As it is, I don't even think you need as much talent as you would in a standard size league in order to win here. It just depends on good management and choices. But allowing guys with better records, or playoff success, to have the upper hand (tie breakers) in acquiring FA's and such, doesn't seem conducive to the types of managers we have in this league. It's not like half the league is full of the "Need Help! Durant vs. LeBron Trade! WHIR!!!" types. Everybody here pretty much knows what they're doing, and what makes this league even more fun is all the extra nuances of figuring out salaries and making things work based on a budget.

dasein wrote:I do like DV's idea for getting rid of the soft cap and running with a 72M-ish hard cap. This eliminates a lot of (IMO, unnecessary) complication in the game.

Ditto here as well. For me, most of the issues I have is with how we work within the soft cap. I just think it's waaaaaay too restrictive. And for a team like mine, with salary issues to begin with, it makes it even more frustrating to try and "right the ship" with FAs. If we were to just eliminate that part of it outright, it would take many of those issues I have right off the table. And simpler is always better in my mind. ;-D
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 Fenris-77 » Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:24 am

I'm fine with a hard cap set at 72.5M.

I think the previous season's success should be a ways down the tie break list. Team needs should be at the top.

I like dasein's list more than DVs for a bunch of reasons, mostly because it's based on tangible value seperate from positional divisions. Dasein's and DVs lists would function exactly the same way, we just need to decide if we want to favour positional balance or actual production when we put the list together.
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 DVauthrin » Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:58 am

Fenris-77 wrote:I'm fine with a hard cap set at 72.5M.

I think the previous season's success should be a ways down the tie break list. Team needs should be at the top.


I agree with you, that's why I weighted the quality of players a team has at the player's position more heavily. My goal is to include a small bonus for being successful(thus the 2 points), but weighting the tiebreaker heavily in favor of playing time and home team advantage in resigning their own players(thus 3 points for resigning and the 6-3-1 structure). Figuring out the appropriate weighting structure is the tricky part and I don't have that much time to test it. My hope is the only time a non playoff team will be at a significant disadvantage in a tiebreaker would be when a playoff team is resigning their own player. But realistically, they would have to outbid a good team in the real NBA to get them to play for a rebuilding team.

Fenris-77 wrote:
I like dasein's list more than DVs for a bunch of reasons, mostly because it's based on tangible value seperate from positional divisions. Dasein's and DVs lists would function exactly the same way, we just need to decide if we want to favour positional balance or actual production when we put the list together.


His list is more refined, and I have no problem using it. I developed mine last night by taking BBM per game values from last season, then using ESPN depth charts and player splits to figure out their primary position.
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

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