| 0 |
Subject: ESPN Fastbreak - featuring "floating salary cap"
Posted by: blue hen
- Dude [710321114] Fri, Oct 19, 2012, 10:59
ESPN just launched the Fastbreak Challenge game. New this year is a "floating salary cap" which is intended to work in a similar manner to the old Smallworld/TSN games. If you played those games, you might like this one. |
| 1 | paaron46
ID: 369581913
Fri, Oct 19, 2012, 14:58
|
Thanks for the heads up. The game looks pretty promising.
|
| 2 | Pacers Rule
ID: 589131312
Sat, Oct 20, 2012, 21:45
|
Yes, some similarities. Looks interesting. Trades appear unlimited. The game with the floating cap is a weekly lineup game. Player salaries change based on "player performance" instead of # of adds and drops. 2 seasons....pre-ASB and post. Free to enter and a $500 Best Buy gift card awarded to the winner.
|
| 3 | blue hen
Dude
ID: 710321114
Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 12:45
|
If either of you play this game, feel free to post your thoughts in this thread. You never know who might be reading.
|
| 4 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 13:13
|
I signed up for one to try it out... is anyone in a particular group?
|
| 5 | blue hen
Dude
ID: 710321114
Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 18:22
|
I created a public one called Rotoguru.com.
|
| 6 | Great One
ID: 512531316
Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 18:55
|
I'd like to leave my other group now that I joined Rotoguru... possible?
|
| 7 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Tue, Oct 23, 2012, 23:07
|
This sounds fun. I'll have to jump in once I get my other drafts done. I like the 'coach' (team) idea as well.
|
| 8 | Dunkenstein
Leader
ID: 039541913
Fri, Oct 26, 2012, 02:06
|
I've played ESPN's Gridiron Football for several years. What I didn't like about that game was that when a player gained in value, you lost that gain when you traded him away. In this game you get to keep the value change.
Am I correct that scoring is based on the total fantasy points a player accumulates each week? So a player who plays four games in the week has an advantage over a player who only plays three.
|
| 9 | twolves
ID: 16943011
Tue, Oct 30, 2012, 14:19
|
Put a team in. Does anyone know if prices change this first week or will second week lineup be based on initial prices?
Am I wrong to assume after lock tonight can set next week lineup. Are there any limits on trades?
|
| 10 | weykool
ID: 339121212
Tue, Oct 30, 2012, 17:03
|
Salaries will remain the same from Week 1 to Week 2, because no stats will have been generated yet. That means that you can lock in your player at his Week 1 salary for the first two weeks.
|
| 11 | Dunkenstein
Leader
ID: 039541913
Tue, Oct 30, 2012, 19:08
|
There are 18 of us in the Rotoguru.com group. Good luck to all.
|
| 12 | Pacers Rule
ID: 4391511
Tue, Oct 30, 2012, 21:39
|
apparently unlimited trades.
|
| 13 | Bean
ID: 49934911
Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 13:17
|
Figured you guys needed the one week spot, joined today.
|
| 14 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 20:43
|
I dumped Kobe b/c of the foot...and decided to go with Nash instead. Now Kobe is fine and Nash is doubtful. I should have known Kobe the Warrior was not going to sit out with a 'strain'...and that Nash is old.
|
| 15 | Species
Dude
ID: 07724916
Thu, Nov 01, 2012, 22:50
|
Same thing, PR
|
| 16 | Dave R
SuperDude
ID: 3010361110
Sat, Nov 03, 2012, 08:44
|
How many of us picked the 0-3 Lakers Coach for their 4 game week ?
|
| 17 | deejay
ID: 1395817
Sat, Nov 03, 2012, 09:43
|
I didnt take the coach, but sitting there with Nash lol
|
| 18 | skinneej
ID: 14911313
Sat, Nov 03, 2012, 12:21
|
Went Kobe, Gasol and Howard plus Miami coach. At least I got one coach win so far.
|
| 19 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Sat, Nov 03, 2012, 22:31
|
Didn't see 0-3 coming. Nash and Brown are not a good combo on my team.
|
| 20 | blue hen
Dude
ID: 710321114
Fri, Nov 16, 2012, 15:19
|
Any feedback?
|
| 21 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Fri, Nov 16, 2012, 15:43
|
I emailed this one but lets see what others thing.
I am enjoying the game. I do worry that by the new year my cap will allow me to have any player I want at all positions. IRA would be proud. So I don't know if that means players should be more expensive? Or lower cap? But I think having to dig up at least 1 or 2 lower bargain players would be beneficial to everyone.
As far as the website layout and format I think its well done.
|
| 22 | weykool
ID: 339121212
Fri, Nov 16, 2012, 17:43
|
I think the game is decent.
It isnt as time consuming as TSN so casual players can still play.
I agree with GO that the prices are a tad low.
The difference between the Heat and the Bobcats is only .4 so it comes down to 5 players.
At the current prices you can afford 3 studs and 2 tier 2 players or 4 studs and 1 tier 3 player.
The price increases/decreases seem minimal and should have very little impact in the game.
If every player worth owning goes up .3 each week then your team's salary increase wont allow you to buy better players.
|
| 23 | Bean
ID: 49934911
Mon, Nov 19, 2012, 11:45
|
Agree salaries too low. There is little difference between lineups of active players as a result.
|
| 24 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 09:52
|
Group Roster Grid is a really nice chart to see what your competition has going on roster wise.
|
| 25 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 09:54
|
We all do have really similar rosters as Bean says. It makes sense if the salaries were tweaked we'd have much more variety in lineups if you had to start a couple mid level guys at least.
|
| 26 | weykool
ID: 339121212
Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 14:41
|
Looks like most of us got suckered into going with Duncan.
Dunk had TD and TP.
I think its a little bit funny the NBA is threatening the Spurs with sanctions for sitting players on the same day they suspend Rondo for two games.
Perhaps the sanctions should be to suspend Duncan, Parker, and Gino for a couple games as well.
The Spurs could appeal and then drop their appeal just before Popovich plans to sit them again.
|
| 27 | Bean
ID: 49934911
Sun, Dec 02, 2012, 12:15
|
I think Stern is punishing the Spurs cause he had Duncan in his money Fastbreak league and they cost him by sitting him
|
| 28 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 00:28
|
Blue Hen, overall, for what it is, I give the game high marks. The website is well designed, the week in preview article does a lot of your research for you....but leaves you with some good choices which definitely appeals to the casual fantasy player but still allows for your own individual research if you want to put the time in for better results.
While some criticize roster prices leading to a lack of differentiation, and I agree with those critiques for the more serious and skilled fantasy players, I can also understand ESPN wanting to appeal to a broader audience. It's more fun to have an all-star roster than a single all-star and a bunch of players many casual fans have never heard of. Even ESPN calls this a "mini-game" so they aren't marketing it like it's a major fantasy game for serious players only. Maybe that's one reason it's free...and just intended to increase market share and fan appreciation of the ESPN brand. Also, it's weekly nature and unlimited roster changes also makes it a low committment side game to enjoy without being too serious about it.
I also have to compliment the website functionality. The ability to sort based on any one of the headings, such as avg. production per game makes it very user friendly when looking to set next week's lineup. Having the number of games played right there as well as the opponents if you want to know them is helpful as well.
I like the fact that there is a roster spot for a team/coach. Cool feature.
If I were looking to improve the game, here are some things I would consider.
I would look at either tougher cap restrictions or more salary differentiation (or probably a combination of both) to reward the player/fan with more knowledge of 2nd and 3rd tier players and those willing to devote the time for the additional research. This would also allow more roster differentiation which makes for better competition with more (forced) options.
I don't care for the current 'formula' for player salary changes. In my opinion, it should be based on per game production compared to salary as opposed to cumulative production. It makes no sense to me to increase salaries b/c players had a lot of games recently or decrease salary (or salary increase) because of a 2 game week. Also, the limit in the size of the changes serves to minimize the importance of salary cap considerations - esp. with the current player salary structure. That takes away the strategy element of differentially weighing what is more important in choosing next week's lineup- roster value increases or production. My week 2 sucked production wise b/c I played for roster value increases - only to learn it was pretty much a waste of good production as the good players with 4 game weeks coming up were generally going to increase as much as the low priced players who grossly overproduced compared to their salaries. I'd return that dilemma as a strategy element to the game with changes in cap, salary differentiation, and salary changes to put some teeth into the salary system.
As much as I like the Coach/Team element, it is merely a blip in the radar as someone else also mentioned. With a player able to earn over 100 points in a week, but a 5 game team having a maximum production of 25.....it become almost a moot point. The fact that the salaries are almost identical adds to the 'so what' factor...and no salary changes reduces the importance even further...while also again reducing the strategic element of salary changes. Salary changes for teams could be a mix of overall record, last week's record, and even something like record in the last 10 games to keep a little mystery and balance overall versus recent performance. Same could be said for player salaries as well.
I'd also change the game - or at least create a new game with the option of daily roster changes (and salary adjustments). This would make more a much more intense game for those players that want that. This would of course require something else that I feel would also greatly improve the game - which is a limit to 'trades' or changes to your team. It is ludicrous for the week in preview article to talk about being able to ride a player for multiple weeks because of his good long term schedule when you can switch players out every week with no consequence. Allowing 2 or at most 3 trades every week would introduce a whole new element of strategy into the game which would include a player's long term schedule, as well as your team's ability to respond to a random Popovich game off or a more serious injury that happens at the start of a week, for example. You could either redline your team and use up all your trades to go for maximum production, or you could keep a trade or two in reserve for an emergency situation. Every week or every few days you get another or a couple more trades to use.
I also don't care for the basic nature of the current fantasy points scoring system, b/c it tends to reward only certain types of players, which ESPN's articles readily admit. By not weighting contributions in other categories (rebounds, assists, steals, blocks), ESPN essentially removes the significance of some players' contributions to the fantasy game, esp. those who contribute in the rarest of categories, such as steals and blocks. One game I recall - possibly a TSN game - gave 2.5 points per block and steal, 2 points per assist, 1.5 per rebound, or something along these lines to give extra value for those players who do more than just score a lot with good percentages. This would contribute to roster diversity by making more types of players viable options which makes for a more fun and competitive game.
Again, these are just ways that the game would seem better to me. It's awesome for a free game and at least brings back a 'salary cap' game even if the salary portion of the game is kind of minimized.
I also like that it resets at the ASB so you can get a 'redo' on your season if you got off to a bad start....like I did in week 2. Truth be told, I actually like that it's just a weekly lineup change....it makes it more playable in the midst of my busy life.
|
| 29 | Bean
ID: 49934911
Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 12:36
|
Thorough analysis there Pacer. I too give this game high marks, just would like to see a tweak in salaries, making them generally higher (or alternately lower the cap) to give greater div ersity in lineups.
Daily changes would tend to make this game more like the old NBA stock exchange game (a la rotohog). A game I loved initially, but soon learned to hate when it forced me to be up at the crack of dawn to make the market opening. In that game you miss market open and you do poorly. I was too driven to compete not to make the wake up call and go back to bed after i made my moves. Sucked being on Mountain time.
I still dont comprehend how the salaries are modified here. All I know is my salary cap keeps climbing, but so do the salaries of the top players.
So far all I do is just take the top players for points average with 4 games each week. I have little trouble meeting salary cap doing this. Its pretty mindless really.
I started a week late, or I would be in the 99 percentile right now. If I hadnt taken Davis while he was injured one week (inattentive), I would be in the top 99.5. All this without out any real analysis. So, the game is not challenging at all as it sits.
|
| 30 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 12:56
|
I also don't understand how the salary increases work really. They go up for my guy - do I cash in that increase when I sell him? So if my guy goes up 0.5 in a week I should trade him before next week to lock that in?
|
| 31 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Mon, Dec 03, 2012, 21:38
|
It really doesn't matter, GO. If you keep him, you have him "locked in" at the salary you bought him at, even though his market value is higher. So by keeping him it's as if you have a higher cap than you technically do, b/c he only counts against your cap what he cost when you picked him up. If/when you decide to dump him, you receive the difference between his current market value and what you paid for him added to your cap at that time, which then allows you to replace him with someone else that has the same current market value.
Bean, thanks. The funny thing is that what seems mindless to me and you and others using this site is still not apparent to the vast majority of people playing this game worldwide. Look at the percentage ranks of all the teams in the Rotoguru group. Our worst teams are still at about the median of all teams. Either Gurupies are really intuitively good at this new game, or most people are really bad at it :-)
|
| 32 | weykool
ID: 339121212
Tue, Dec 04, 2012, 01:09
|
Either Gurupies are really intuitively good at this new game, or most people are really bad at it :-)
A true Gurupie wouldnt need to dignify the obvious answer.
|
| 33 | Great One
ID: 2431114
Tue, Dec 04, 2012, 09:20
|
How many teams are playing the Floating Cap game overall?
|
| 34 | weykool
ID: 339121212
Tue, Dec 04, 2012, 13:03
|
It looks like there are 50K teams or so.
How many of those are active is unknown.
I count 7 teams in our group with:
Kobe
Paul
Mello
Verajao
Howard
Most teams have 3 of 4 Kobe/Paul/Mello/Verajao with the only difference at the center position.
|
| 35 | skinneej
ID: 14911313
Tue, Dec 04, 2012, 19:49
|
Looking at the potentials for this week, I expected there to be very similar rosters with center being the one position with multiple options. You could have gone with Howard, Jefferson, Noah or a few others slightly lower hoping to differentiate. I actually considered Howard to be the one that might not get as much action since only 1 of his games last week was above average. It was big enough though to put his average for the week at 22 which was the same level as the season. Just have to hope he gets that big one every week to make up for the 12 missed FT nights.
Overall, it's a fun game and the first of this kind I've played since the SW/Swirve days. I do prefer the weekly transactions as I don't have the time I did a decade ago. I agree with most of the sentiments from this group that the price changes and starting salaries need some tweaking. I wasn't even sure the first few weeks whether price changes were based on cumulative points or averages.
I could see adding a trade cap, and two per week would be about right, but to appeal to the masses probably would have to be at least 3 per week. That way you could recycle your roster every other week as needed. Then you would almost always keep LBJ and KD unless they had a 1 or 2 game week.
As far as the coach aspect, I think you do have to consider that even with the win/lose option of gaining 5 pts or none each game, it does still have an impact. Before last night my top team was in a four way tie at 75th place and a single extra 5 pt win would mean moving up 8 spots. It could be the best way to get a leg up on the teams near you if all the roster are pretty much the same. Can you more accurately choose teams that get 3 or 4 wins each week that others? Do you choose OKC and Miami even in 3 game weeks or go for the chance at teams like the Lakers, Clippers, Spurs or Grizzlies with their four game weeks? Definitely have to look at matchups and home/away splits more so than the players.
|
| 36 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Fri, Dec 07, 2012, 00:43
|
Out of 27 teams in our division, only 6 did not have Carmelo this week. Half of those six are in the top 10 and half are in the bottom 5.
|
| 37 | GO
ID: 811442813
Wed, Jan 23, 2013, 12:03
|
Chris Paul might be an interesting issue this week for Fastbreak. I went with Kobe instead. Hopefully that pays off.
|
| 38 | Dunkenstein
Leader
ID: 039541913
Mon, Feb 11, 2013, 01:58
|
It's coming down to the wire. Skineej started week 15 in the lead, but has fallen to third after he took Westbrook and Kobe, leaving this week's top guard Harden off his roster. So with 2 games to go in all our slots, I have a mere five point lead over Species. I've got Westbrook, Monroe and the OKC coach. He's got Kobe, BLopez and the Miami coach. Wouldn't it be ironic if it all comes down to the winner of the Miami/OKC game on Thurs?
|
| 39 | Great One
ID: 120252515
Mon, Feb 11, 2013, 11:26
|
Its very frustrating that we all have the same rosters.
|
| 40 | Bean
ID: 49934911
Thu, Feb 14, 2013, 22:45
|
Do we start all over for Segment 2 or keep the same salary cap as we finished Segment 1 with?
|
| 41 | Dunkenstein
Leader
ID: 039541913
Fri, Feb 15, 2013, 14:30
|
From what I read, the game will reboot salaries, switch some position eligibilities and begin again with all teams at $50K. I also think that they will be more judicious in individual player price changes. More like they were towards the end of the season rather than raising practically all the top players $3K like they did at the beginning.
|
| 42 | GO
ID: 300542419
Sun, Feb 17, 2013, 18:00
|
So is there a Rotoguru game for second half?
|
| 43 | Species
Dude
ID: 07724916
Sun, Feb 17, 2013, 20:05
|
Damn....some people really stopped paying attention. Shocked to see me finish 2nd.
|
| 44 | GO
ID: 210411222
Sun, Feb 17, 2013, 20:10
|
The site is really lacking info on what comes next.
If they get the salaries fixed interest shouldn't wane cause we won't all have the same roster.
|
| 45 | Dunkenstein
Leader
ID: 039541913
Mon, Feb 18, 2013, 12:28
|
You can pick your Segment 2 roster now. Just go to the same team page you're used to going to. The player price changes and return to $50M rosters will make choosing a team very challenging.
|
| 46 | Bean
ID: 49934911
Mon, Feb 18, 2013, 13:52
|
Set my first week lineup for Segment 2 this morning. You start over with just $50, and I think the salaries are about what they were last week. End result is that at least for now you wont be able to pick any players you want. You are about $5-10 shy of being able to do that.
Not sure, but it appears you gotta get your lineup in today even though nobody is playing tonite.
|
| 47 | Species
ID: 91141520
Mon, Feb 18, 2013, 17:35
|
Where are the sortables? ;)
|
| 48 | Dunkenstein
Leader
ID: 039541913
Mon, Feb 18, 2013, 19:03
|
The rules state, "all Weekly rosters will lock at the tipoff of the first game of each week". Bean, why do you think you gotta get your lineup in today?
|
| 49 | Bean
Sustainer
ID: 49934911
Thu, Feb 21, 2013, 11:13
|
was just just trying to create a sense of urgency; procrastination is a killah!
|
| 50 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Sat, Feb 23, 2013, 23:04
|
With 0 points in week 1 of segment 2, I am tied with 28.7% of all teams.
Dang, on a more important topic, how about my #2 seed Pacers? Before tonight's beat down of the Pistons, they won their last three games by a combined 90 points, including the Knicks.
|
| 51 | twolves
ID: 249151216
Sun, Feb 24, 2013, 21:19
|
Congrats to Dunk on winning the 1st segment guru league.
The second segment is pretty short, so any bad picks like my center Mullens or injuries will get magnified.
The Pacers are doing well and have a great home record but not sure anyone in the East can beat Miami.
|
| 52 | Pacers Rule
Leader
ID: 910311210
Mon, Feb 25, 2013, 22:01
|
So far the Pacers are 2-0 versus Miami. And don't think Miami didn't want those games. Miami is none too pleased with Indiana and their talking trash about Miami. I know it's not the playoffs yet, and the Heat were down 1-2 before turning the series around last year and beating Indiana in 6. Still, The Pacers are 5-1 or 6-1 against Chicago, Miami, and New York combined.
I doubt they catch Miami for the one seed in the East, but I think they will finish as the two seed. I would not at all mind a Miami/Indiana Eastern Conference Finals this year.
|
| 53 | Species
ID: 4618289
Thu, Feb 28, 2013, 10:08
|
No Steph Curry.....no chance. Wow. 109 points in 2 games. LeBron-esqe
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: ESPN Fastbreak - featuring
|