2010-2011 Season Stuff - Fantasy Basketball Cafe 2014
Fantasy Basketball Cafe


Return to FBC Salary Cap

2010-2011 Season Stuff

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

Re: NOW VOTING!!! Lets roll with weekly lineups NOW VOTING!!

Postby So-Tex » Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:07 am

TheRobSays wrote:Why not eliminate the bench entirely and have all players on active roster spots? Or reduce bench to two guys and go with weekly lineups or something like that. solves the problem of "man games" as everyone is treated equally and you have two bench spots to park rookies and injured players, almost like the real NBA.
Fenris-77 wrote:Well, the real NBA dresses 12 and sits three, but it's not the worst way to go. The issue there is that you hav every little room to carry injuries and developmental players, which is counter-productive in a salary league like this one.

Here's the real issue I see with this whole debate.

There's going to come a time when we have to draw the line at how we mimic the real NBA. This league needs to function as it's own game. We can add nuances to mirror the NBA (like the rookie draft, contracts, salary cap rules, etc.), but the bottom line is we need to address concerns to make this league not only more enjoyable, but more competitive.

Now...

I don't like weekly lineups either, but that's a personal preference. I can see the arguments for them though, even without trying to get my head around the math (x amount of missed games here, vs. y amount of missed games there, times the diameter of the sun... :-S ). The one thing I DO see coming from those arguments are how weekly lineups seem to alleviate all the headaches which go into guessing who's sitting on any given night for any given reason. And that's fine. And I also get the gist that by going weekly, things will be easier to settle with regards to auctions (as long as the tie-breaker issue is settled).

But the more I read about it, the more I catch myself thinking "That's almost like fantasy football." And if I wanted to play that, I'd sign up for 6 more FF teams and just have at it when the season starts (if it ever does). Fantasy basketball is NOT supposed to be played like fantasy football. They play one game a week - basketball teams could conceivably play as many as five during a given seven day period. I could go off on several more comparisons here, but then I'd be waaaay off topic. Bottom line, fantasy football is NOT like fantasy basketball. And to me, going to weekly lineups sounds veeeeeeery fantasy football-ish.

Like Red and some others suggest, I actually like managing my team on a daily basis. I realize not everyone has the time to do so. But I do. And that's how I like to do it - play for the day while keeping an eye out for potential scratches, especially if I have bench guys who could fill the spot that evening. It's a bit selfish, I know, but that's where I draw the line.

I personally think we should move into something along the lines of what TRS says above. I've always felt that it really doesn't do any good to have the standard number of available slots, when all you can play are a bunch of rookies and scrubs who may not even play that night in real life. What makes more sense to me is to cut it down to size. PG, SG, G, SF, PF, F, C, UTL - eight slots available on any given night. Or we could do one better and go PG, SG, SF, PF, C, UTL, UTL - seven slots. This would allow most teams to compete during any given match up, while still allowing for injuries and "projects" to sit on their bench. Remember, this isn't the total amount of players on a roster - we can still keep those limits in place - 12 to 14. But for game play, during our weekly match ups, I think a shorter lineup would make teams more competitive - or, at least able to compete without having to rely on some bench warmer who may get three minutes in garbage time.

As far as weekly lineups go, I vote no. But it's not a game-changer for me - if the majority rules in favor of weekly lineups, so be it. I'll just have to adjust. But I honestly think that going with a shorter lineup for actual game play is how much of this debate will get settled.

Just my two... ;-)

EDIT: Sorry Fenris, didn't mean to gloss over the rest of your post and just use the first sentence as a quote. You actually say it best with this:
Fenris-77 wrote:I do agree that this league could use a format that better allows teams to carry projects and injuries, I just don't want to move to weekly subs to get that done.

+1 ;-D
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1051
(Past Year: 180)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: Blind Waiver System - Proposals Welcome

Postby So-Tex » Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:55 am

A lot to sort through...

I like the ideas, but I don't see where it will help teams like my own in situations like last season.

Last season, I felt handcuffed by the cap rules. I get that they're in place to mimic the NBA and all, and it IS part of the fun of this league (the auction process I mean). However, it was VERY frustrating for me last season, to the point where I didn't even WANT to participate. And that's not what we want in this league.

I'll say again, like I said in the other post: there comes a time when we have to make this league it's OWN game, not a mirror of the NBA. All these ideas about contract improvements and such are great. But it doesn't mean squat if next season I hit the soft cap and can't bid on any other available players because a) if I put a min bid, someone can just beat me by bidding 100k more, or b) I can't put a bid for two players at the same time because even though I HAVE the cap space remaining, I'm handcuffed by the soft cap rules.

And another thing that scares me is all this "Point-based" tie breaker talk. My team, as some others in this league, totally sucked last season. And as willing as I would be to blame my own managerial skills on that, fact is I didn't build this team, I inherited it. And like an ownership change in the NBA, it takes time to rebuild a team into one that doesn't suck. With ALL the current rules in place, I don't stand a snowball's chance at rebuilding this team into a decent squad within the next five years. And now with all this new talk of Champions getting x amount of points and runner-ups getting y amount of points, I'm starting to get that sinking feeling...again! :-{

I do like the idea of a blind waiver system, but I didn't think the idea of open bidding was so bad either. In my opinion, it was flawed because of the rules regarding who could bid and not bid, and what would happen if there was a tie. Quite honestly, if teams had been allowed to bid more (without going over the hard cap), many issues with the tie-break system would be alleviated - guys would just out-bid each other...period.

I think this is going to turn into more of a revamping of the whole cap rule system for this particular league. I'm not proposing that debate just yet - but if I don't see any changes in how I can target free agents to help make my crap squad successful, I think we'll need to re-think how this league operates with regards to the salary cap. Maybe change the rules for soft cap bidding? Maybe get rid of the soft cap entirely?

Fact is, I'm not seeing things addressed which caused me the most frustration last year. And I know that's a little selfish minded, but there were some issues which seemed to resonate with the league.

I'm going to keep reading some more and see if I didn't miss anything...
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1051
(Past Year: 180)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: Amnesty Clause

Postby So-Tex » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:43 am

This coming from an inherited team's manager: if we make the provision for those of us who inherited bad squads, we should make it for all, regardless.

Remember, the bad deal being dropped could be for any number of reasons. And even if you've managed your squad from day one, and have made several "bad" deals during that time, dropping one of those is not going to give you any more of an advantage than one of the "inherited" squads dropping one of their bad deals. At least not in my mind.

Each squad should have the opportunity to drop one bad contract from their salary without penalty. Or maybe we could go one better/simpler - make it so each team has the option to drop one contract during the off-season to clear cap space.

Some time ago, I remember kicking around the idea of having "guaranteed" contracts vs "non-guaranteed" contracts. The NBA does this if I'm not mistaken. Basically, if a contract is guaranteed, you're obligated to pay it, whether you keep the player or not (except with regards to trades). If the contract is "non-guaranteed", you can drop a player from your roster and not worry about any cap penalties. I know that's not exactly the way it works in the NBA, and I know it would need some tweaking (like what does it count against your cap if you drop a player mid-season, or what's the min/max amount of players you can have under guaranteed/non-guaranteed contracts). But that's the general idea. And it might make it easier to keep track of cap space and such.

Anyway, back on topic...I think we should allow for each squad the ability to drop one contract from their roster without it hurting their current, or future, cap space. ;-D
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1051
(Past Year: 180)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: NOW VOTING!!! Lets roll with weekly lineups NOW VOTING!!

Postby RocketsDWM » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:34 am

100% agreed SoTex. Well said.
RocketsDWM
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 624
(Past Year: 143)
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Draft picks (Non-Guaranteed Contracts)

Postby RocketsDWM » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:46 am

Something also discussed during last season - Can we make contracts of certain draftees non-guaranteed? Say anything beyond top 10 is a non-guaranteed contract that can be dropped during the season without penalty. Its such a waste to have a 2nd round project on the bench and a manager being forced to keep him because they are wary of the cap penalty.
RocketsDWM
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 624
(Past Year: 143)
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Amnesty Clause

Postby RocketsDWM » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:48 am

I think it would have to be an option for everyone. Would be a mess to figure out who would be eligible for it.
RocketsDWM
College Captain
College Captain


Posts: 624
(Past Year: 143)
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: Draft picks (Non-Guaranteed Contracts)

Postby silentjim » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:24 pm

I think we agreed last season that second rounders shouldn't be guaranteed and I'm up for moving that up more if others agree as well. Maybe top 15 or so.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11523
(Past Year: 565)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: Amnesty Clause

Postby silentjim » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:29 pm

Could we possibly explore just allowing x amount of money being droppable as well without penalty? Meaning it could be three players worth 10M or 1 worth 10M? I could just see it being a huge benefit for some teams and not much of anything for others.
Image
silentjim
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 11523
(Past Year: 565)
Joined: 23 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Fundamentals are the crutch of the talentless.

Re: Draft picks (Non-Guaranteed Contracts)

Postby scully19 » Sun Jun 26, 2011 8:10 pm

Top 15 is basically the first round, which I think is what the rule should be. First round guaranteed, second not.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1367
(Past Year: 186)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

Draft lottery

Postby scully19 » Sun Jun 26, 2011 8:23 pm

Might as well make it's own thread. So we talked about fixing the draft up where it is more weighted for the worst of the league to get the highest pick in the draft, something closer to the nba draft weight.

Something off the cuff to start working with:

Seed Chances
1 250
2 199
3 161
4 125
5 95
6 71
7 54
8 45

What I did is take the odds of winning the draft from the nba, and the picks 9-14 that are not in the draft because our league is not big enough are added to the bottom going up (so the 9th pick odds are added to the 8th, 10th to 7th, 11th to 6th, etc). This gives the lower guys a bit better chance at winning.
scully19
Head Coach
Head Coach


Posts: 1367
(Past Year: 186)
Joined: 8 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: scully19 and 0 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues



Get Ready...
The 2014 NBA season starts in 6:14 hours
(and 58 days)


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