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: Roll Call

Postby DVauthrin » Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:51 am

6. DVauthrin
7. Barrec(confirmed to me in a PM that he's in)
8. TheRobSays(confirmed to me in a PM that he's in)

Re: do you plan on playing in the salary cap league this season?

TheRobSays wrote:Count me in ...

barrec wrote:Oh yeah, I'm in.
DVauthrin
Basketball Scribe
Basketball Scribe

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6347
(Past Year: 112)
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: New Rules Summary Thread

Postby dasein » Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:01 am

my preferences for dealing with the bench question would be:

1. weekly game limits. Can't really be arsed going to espn though.

2. 9-3-3 or 8-4-3 or something similar with the smacktalk inactive notification. Penalty for playing an inactive player is you loose 0-9 that week, and the other team gets a 9-0 win. Motivation to check for it (which is easy and you only have to do it once at the end of the week), and big motivation not to do it. We police each other, and leave the commish out of it. This assumes the commish can manually change wins and losses though- I'm not sure about that.

3. Weekly lineups would be the last resort, but not the end of the world.
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 985
(Past Year: 376)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: New Rules Summary Thread

Postby Markos » Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:26 pm

dasein,

What's your opinion on simply expanding the bench slots to 16 (Internationals exempt) or 18?
Eradicating Marijuana one blunt at a time
Markos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster

User avatar

Posts: 291
(Past Year: 6)
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Down Under

Re: Bidding, Tie Breaks, Salary tidbits

Postby Markos » Tue Nov 29, 2011 2:14 pm

Just read dasein's summary of the tie breaker system, thought it better I discuss it here instead of the season discussion thread. Here's the link for anyone yet to see it:

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id ... Dpz1RnVlro

I really like it. I also like the idea of reversing the 3rd tie-breaker to avoid competitive balance, which dasein mentions in the final sentence.

Also, I support the one-off blind bidding system, and am pretty easy with regard to how you rank the players. GMs will bid on the players they like regardless of how you tier them, so I wouldn't be too concerned with how you use bbm rankings etc. Also, GMs can place bids a day or two ahead of time if they aren't going to be around, so there's no need to miss out on anyone.

We use a dual system in my league, where the initial poster determines whether the auction is public or private, and everyone else follows suit. The private bidding process was added a few seasons ago and, although a little extra work is required, has been a pretty popular addition. Now all our restricted free agent auctions are done privately, and if I had my way I'd ditch the public system altogether and go completely with blind bidding. One flaw with having both is the initial bidder must indicate when they've placed a private bid, so other GM's don't come along and start a public auction. If it were only private, the initial bid can remain under wraps, which means you can snag the next big thing without advertising it and having everyone else in the league checking out the player's recent boxscores to see if they want in on it.

A couple of questions, how much time will it take to work through all the free agents, and how many players per day would be up fro grabs? I'm guessing 2 or 3. But if we only get 12 GM's back and decide to reboot, will we just roll with public auctions initially and use this system next offseason, or would the entire player pool be auctioned off using this system out using this until the rosters reached ie. 12, enough for us to field rosters on day one, with everyone else hitting unrestricted free agency and slowly getting picked up?

Nice work Fenriss and dasein, and anyone else involved coming up with this. While a tweak or two will probably be in order once we've seen it in action, I'm pretty confident this will work well.
Eradicating Marijuana one blunt at a time
Markos
High School Hoopster
High School Hoopster

User avatar

Posts: 291
(Past Year: 6)
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: Down Under

Re: Roll Call

Postby hi chi » Tue Nov 29, 2011 3:35 pm

9. Hi chi in the house!
hi chi
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1098
(Past Year: 131)
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Home Cafe: Basketball

Re: Roll Call

Postby So-Tex » Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:27 pm

Sorry I missed this post earlier. Red was ragging on me for being "late" for my first pick in the BOSF draft.

So since then, I've been glued to my monitor, constantly refreshing the BOSF draft thread, taking liquids intravenously and using a foley, while completely zoning out the rest of the world and all it's glory... :-B

Yeah...I'm in! :-D ;-D
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1051
(Past Year: 181)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: New Rules Summary Thread

Postby So-Tex » Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:05 pm

Lot of stuff to sift through, but here are my initial thoughts:

1. I really don't like the inactive list idea. I know we can police ourselves and all, but as it is, we've got several other leagues to deal with, and the last thing I need to be worrying about is if my opponent is sneaking in guys to his lineup - not that it will happen, but I can guarantee you I won't be looking for it.

2. Again, I also don't like weekly lineups - get enough of that with fantasy football. Basketball is a daily game, and should be managed as such.

3. I'm strongly for the limiting of active roster slots - in other words, run with something like:

PG, SG, SF, PF, C, C, UTL, UTL -OR- PG, SG, G, SF, PF, F, C, UTL

The number of bench slots doesn't bother me, and I get the idea of some guys wanting to hold onto players for "development" purposes. So the number of bench slots can be whatever you desire - 14, 15, or 16. But for me, it's all about maximizing my lineup within our league's settings. In a normal league with standard settings, that's what we'd be doing anyway, right? I mean, how many of us play in H2H leagues, where we DON'T try to get the most points, the most assists, or the most rebounds per week?

This league is NOT normal, by nature - we can't really stream, and we don't even use a limit on adds/drops per week. Why? because we don't NEED it - we're always having to watch salaries along with our budgets. And even if we had 16 guys on our rosters, there really are no advantages to running guys through the active roster on a daily basis... unleeeeeeeess we as managers happened to pick up on talent which is actually playing and performing! If that be the case, then we're usually considered savvy GMs, right?

So in my mind, we don't NEED the normal setup with active roster slots. Hell, there's one guy I know over at Busersports who has a league set up where there are only 5 or 6 active roster slots (can't remember which for sure) and 10 players total on each roster (this I know for certain) AND it's a 20 team league!

So we could limit the number of active roster slots as I stated above, which would allow us to play our best players on any given night, but still allow for the flexibility of playing that "breakout" FA or rookie. I mean, if I have Deron Williams playing 4 nights out of a week, then I want him in the PG slot for all four of those nights. But if my 2nd round draft pick, Joe Shmoe, is all of a sudden the starting PG for a team, AND he's getting huge numbers, I want the option of playing him on off nights, or in the UTL slot, or even in lue of D Will himself. Not that it will happen, but you never know.

4. I like the idea of non-guaranteed contracts, but I think we should take it a step further and apply it to FAs as well. If I come out and give fair notice to the league that I'm signing Linas Kliza to a non-guaranteed contract, and then he goes and sucks eggs like he did last season, I should be able to drop him and not worry about that 2.5 M hitting my bottom line. We usually don't hear about them, but I'm sure there are MANY non-guaranteed contracts in the NBA in real life, regardless of a CBA or Player's Union or whatever. We would just have to make sure it is stated during the bid process, or when a manager declares a waiver on a player. I could even see it as a possible 1-up tactic during FA bidding (GM A bids 5M + 5M, non-guaranteed, but GM B counters with 5M + 5M, guaranteed). Now, realistically, I don't see it working for a 3 or 4 year deal, and even a 2 year (like the example I just used) is debatable. But for these 1 years deals, it makes sense to me, especially if we're trying to pick up guys during the season to help make our teams more competitive. Just eliminate all the 7 day contract stuff, and make any 1 year deals, for whatever amounts, automatically non-guaranteed. Or, give GMs the option of making them guaranteed, but with the condition that if they drop said player, it will count against their cap as per normal rules. The plus side to this would be that the GM would get the right to re-sign the player at the end of the season using our system of tie-breakers and what not.

Either way, we could flush things out and use something like this for more than just 2nd round draft picks.

5. As I've said before, I'm ok with a hard cap at 72.5, but I would prefer 80M, simply because it's a nice round number and all.

6. Amnesty clause I like, for one player on each roster. Every manager gets one, but it's optional to use it or not. And yes, in the future, it could be voted on by the league on a year to year basis - so for all intents and purposes, it's a one time deal. I guess I wouldn't mind if it was a "Have it until you use it" kind of thing, but I'd prefer it being "Now or Never" - "Use it or lose it".

7. I don't mind it being a blind waiver system or open - I just want to make sure I get as fair a shot as the next guy at acquiring FAs without being handcuffed by cap rules, or penalties for "not being successful enough". The waiver system really won't matter to me if I can't ever go out and get another decent FA to match with D Will, simply because my team sucks right now. AND it won't mean beans to me if I can't manage to re-sign some of the guys on my squad, because some other GM who's 15M under the soft cap can bid one dollar more than the max I can offer and steal him from me! Yeah, I still have issues with Kal's old reasoning, and I'm glad we're addressing that here in discussions. But it's still my biggest fear - that when all is said and done, I'm still going to get screwed in the process. And if THAT'S going to be the case, I might as well fold it up also. But at this point, it's not. :-°

I'll have to read some more into all this, but that's pretty much it from me for the moment.
Image
So-Tex
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 1051
(Past Year: 181)
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: South Texas, USA

Re: New Rules Summary Thread

Postby DVauthrin » Tue Nov 29, 2011 8:35 pm

I prefer the huge roster of 16 or more players to any other proposal listed. 9 starters, 7 bench. I don't want any part of the inactive list because policing it is a pain in the butt, but i'll go along with it if that's the league decision.

Also ESPN won't allow me to create a league with more than 4 playoff teams, so that isn't a realistic option now.
DVauthrin
Basketball Scribe
Basketball Scribe

User avatar
EditorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6347
(Past Year: 112)
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: New Rules Summary Thread

Postby RedHopeful » Tue Nov 29, 2011 9:10 pm

Yep, I'm in agreement with axing the inactive list but not for the sake of changing to weekly rosters. Until yahoo or some other provider gets a little more creative, I'm in favor of the big bench theory. :*)

Btw, will try and have a replacement for Kal in the next few days.
Image
RedHopeful
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicResponse Team LeaderFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerPick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 18252
(Past Year: 641)
Joined: 11 Jul 2007
Home Cafe: Basketball
Location: http://twitter.com/Redhopeful

Re: New Rules Summary Thread

Postby dasein » Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:12 pm

Markos wrote:dasein,

What's your opinion on simply expanding the bench slots to 16 (Internationals exempt) or 18?


whoops, missed that one. I'm ok with this. The international thing is probably a bit OTT...just make a big bench and be done with it. If you draft an international player who hasn't joined the league you should just be able to hold his rights until such time as he joins the league. If you have to cut someone to make room for him when he joins, so be it.

I'd even be ok with dropping one of the C spots to give an active roster of 8; PG,SG,G,SF,PF,C,C/F,U
8 Active spots and 8 bench spots sounds ok to me.
dasein
Assistant Coach
Assistant Coach

User avatar

Posts: 985
(Past Year: 376)
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Home Cafe: Basketball

PreviousNext

Return to FBC Salary Cap

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues



Get Ready...
The 2014 NBA season starts in 16:27 hours
(and 59 days)


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