Self Editor

Forum: foot
Page 5343
Subject: RIFC 2010: Getting started

Posted by: Guru - [330592710] Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 13:47

I am pleased to announce the 14 managers for the 2010 RIFC:
IAC
Bonka
Fugazi
letterj
Youngroman
Smith32
Electro
Building 7
twilson
Frick
Slizz
Promize
Motley Crue
Guru

This list includes the top-6 seeds from last year's RIFC, 3 teams from each AAA league, the (playoff) winner of the AA league, and me. For each AAA league, I selected the playoff winner plus the top two seeds for the playoffs. In the instance that the playoff winner was one of the top two seeds, then the third seed was selected.

Although it is still early, there are several things that we can start on:
1. Sign-ups for qualifying leagues. I will start a separate thread for this.
2. Discussion of possible rules changes. (We can use this thread for that.)
3. Discussion of any other issues that should be resolved before the start of the draft – including selection of drafting site.

I plan to have the RIFC and all qualifying leagues hosted at myfantasyleague.com this year. The RIFC and one AAA league used that site last year, and the experience was excellent. This opens the possibility to use the draft software at the mfl site, which offers some queueing capabilities that are not (yet) present at kafenatid.net. I have spoken to Fred at kafenatid, and while he plans to implement a host of enhancements to his "On The Clock" site, those will not be ready until next baseball season. I would welcome feedback from others who have experience using the mfl site for drafting.

Last year, the RIFC draft began on August 20, and was completed in less than 2 weeks. I expect the timing this year will be similar.

For some preliminary discussion on possible rules changes, see the 2009 RIFC Recap thread

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 14:00

Among the possible rules changes:

1. How should ties be broken for playoff seeding? Should head-to-head records be used, or should we only use total points?

2. In the past, we have severely restricted teams' abilities to make roster moves once the playoffs start. Should this be continued? MFL allows us to set up multiple playoff brackets (i.e., consolation brackets, 3/4 playoffs, etc.), and disallowing roster moves during the playoffs does hamper those teams.

3. Assuming stat corrections should be automatically applied during the regular season (and MFL can do this), should that also apply during the postseason? This issue is that these corrections are not usually available until Thursday, and playoff waivers are processed on Wednesday, while the opening games typically are played on Thursday night. Creates the potential for some a rather sudden playoff schedule reversal.

4. We can reconsider whether team defenses should still be included. This has been discussed before, but it never hurts to re-raise the issue.

The following is copied from post 4 of last year's recap thread (posted by Bonka):

Something else to consider for next year would be to:
A. lower the number of bench slots
B. cap the number of players rosterable at a position
C. require a certain number of IDP bench (which would have to be enforced manually)

I'm not sure how other people feel, but I think the bench is a little too deep while the free agent list is too thin. It's possible to just hoard RBs right now since there's really no reason to carry extra IDP on your bench while the free agent list is bare of anyone worth grabbing after the first few weeks(I did this since I ended up with no real 3rd RB). Right now, unless you were pretty lucky with the way things turned out, one injury can really crush your team and shortening the bench somehow would free up a few players to float around as free agents.

This kind of boils down to personal preference though. I'm sure some would prefer it to stay as is and if you don't have a really good draft or get hot waiver pickups, you could be at a huge disadvantage when a stud misses even a few weeks. But since trading almost never happens in RIFC, I'd rather see there be a little more talent available each week in free agency so that teams aren't crippled by injuries in a re-draft and hopefully keep it more fun all around.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 14:07

The following rules are copied from a prior year's thread. I hope they are complete - but please review to see if anything might have been revised in the meantime.

Changes & clarifications from prior rules are shown in italics

Roster
1 QB
2 RB
2 WR
1 WR/TE
1 TE
1 K
1 Team def
1 DL
1 LB
1 DB
3 additional IDP (flex)
9 bench
24 Total

Decimal scoring is applied for all categories.

Offense Category Points
(apply only to QB, RB, WR, TE, and K unless otherwise noted)
Passing TD 4
Other TD 6 (all TDs, whether on offense, defense, or special teams)
Passing-2pt conv 1
Other-2pt conv 2
Passing yard 1/25 (i.e., .04 per yard)
Rushing yard 1/10 (i.e., .10 per yard)
Receiving yard 1/10
Punt return yard 1/10 (also applies to IDP)
Kick return yard 1/25 (also applies to IDP)
Kick return 0 (no deduction)
Int, fumbles lost -2

Kicking Points
(apply only to QB, RB, WR, TE, and K)
Extra point made 1
Extra point missed -1
FG under 40 yards 3
FG 40-49 yards 4
FG 50+ yards 5
Missed FG <30 -1
Missed FG 30+ 0

Team Defense Points
(the following points apply only to team defenses)
Sack 1
Interception 2
Fumble recovered 2
TD 6 (excludes TDs on kick or punt returns)
Safety 3
Blocked kick 2
Shutout 10
1-6 defensive points allowed 7
7-13 defensive points allowed 4
14-20 defensive points allowed 1
21-27 defensive points allowed 0
28-34 defensive points allowed -1
35+ defensive points allowed -4
Defensive points allowed exclude TDs scored by the opposing special teams or the opposing defense (i.e., TDs on turnovers, kick/punt returns, or blocked kicks).

Points are assigned for yardage allowed according to the following table:
500+ yards allowed: 0 points
400-499 yards allowed: 1 point
300-399: 2
275-299: 3
250-274: 4
225-249: 5
200-224: 6
175-199: 7
150-174: 8
125-149: 9
under 125: 10

Indiv Defensive Players Points
(the following points apply only to DL, LB, and DB)
Solo Tackle 1
Asst Tackle 0.5
Pass defensed 1
Sack 3 (half sack=1.5)
Interception 3
Fumble forced 2
Fumble recovery 1
TD 6 (all TDs, whether on offense, defense, or special teams)
Safety 3

Unlisted players
During the draft, any player may be drafted, regardless of whether or not the player is listed at the hosting game site. Once the draft is completed, unlisted players may not be added to any roster. This applies for any post-draft waiver processing as well.

In the event that a drafted player is not listed after the draft has completed, a placeholder player will be assigned to the drafting team, to be replaced by the drafted player as soon as he is available.

Priority Claiming
All free agents (any players not on a current roster) are subject to a weekly claiming process at noon on Wednesday. Following the first 6 weeks of the season, the priorities will reset weekly based on the reverse of W/L percentage. After that, priorities will not be reset. Throughout the season, when a player is claimed (either via "free agent priority claim" or a waiver claim), the claiming team moves to the end of the claiming priority list. Following the final regular season game, priorities will be reset based on playoff seed, with the top seed getting the top priority. Thereafter, throughout the playoffs, priorities will again adjust only when a claim is awarded.

Starting at 1:00pm on Wednesday, all free agents may be picked up by any team "first come, first served" without any change in priority status.

(Immediately following the draft, undrafted players will be subject to a priority claiming process, with priorities equal to the reverse of the first round draft order.)

When a player is dropped from a roster, the player will go on waivers for 48 hours. At the end of the 48 hour period, if any team has placed a claim on the player, the team with the highest claiming priority will receive the player. If no claims are submitted, the player becomes a free agent at that time. If a player is dropped within 48 hours of his game freeze, he may not be claimed until the following weeks free agent claiming process.

Starting five minutes prior to the scheduled start of each NFL game, no player in that game may be dropped, regardless of whether the player is an active or bench player.

Schedule
13 week round robin
Doubleheaders all weeks 1-13 (play each team twice)
Single elimination playoffs, weeks 14-16

Trades and trade deadline
During the draft, trades may include draft picks. Trades will normally be approved immediately by the Commissioner, assuming they are reasonably balanced. If league managers believe an announced trade is unbalanced, they should protest the trade ASAP.

After the draft, trades will be subject to a review period. For the first 24 hours following a trade, managers may protest a trade by posting a message at the RotoGuru forum, or by sending an email to the Commissioner. If at least 3 managers protest a trade within 24 hours of its announcement, then all managers will be polled within the next 24 hours. If seven or more managers vote to veto a trade, then it will not be approved. If a proposed trade is announced less than 24 hours before the earliest freeze for any player involved, then the entire trade will not be processed until the following week.

If a trade does not receive at least 3 protests, then it will be effective 24 hours after it is announced. If a trade receives at least 3 protests but the protests are not upheld in a full league vote, then the trade will be processed 48 hours after it is announced.

The trade deadline is 11:30pm EST on November 9.

Playoffs
8 teams
Top 6 W/L records are seeded 1-6
Top remaining total points are seeded 7-8
Teams with equivalent W/L records are seeded based on head-to-head first, then total points
Bracket is fixed (no reseeding after each round)

Players at the primary skill positions (QB, RB, WR) and team defenses may not be added for any reason during the playoffs. Free agents at these positions will be locked out after the final regular season game. You may drop a player at one of these positions, but once dropped, that player cannot be added later.

Players at the other positions (TE, PK, IDP) may be added or dropped according to normal regular season guidelines, subject to playoff claiming priorities, if applicable.

If a playoff game ends in a tie score, the team with the better seed shall advance.

Team which are not still active in the Championship playoffs may not make any transactions - adds or drops - even if they are still competing in the Consolation bracket.
';

I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 101918
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 14:25

One potential rule change I'd like to maybe think about... is how about extending the playoffs into week 17? Have 10 teams qualify, and the top 6 get a week 14 bye. Just a thought.

judy
ID: 5321213
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 14:43

Week 17 has the danger of clinched teams sitting/resting players we depend upon for
points. (cf. INDY) If a stud only plays half a game because his team is winning, then his
owner loses out -- in the championship game no less.

I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 101918
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 14:47

Hey Judy... yes, I'm aware of the "Indy" factor... I created a short post earlier this off-season about proposed changes that are being implemented this year however:

Thread

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 15:18

I'm in favor of discussing:

- the removal of team defenses since we have IDP
- my points you reposted regarding bench size
- .5 or 1 PPR? I'm sure this was brought up in the past, not sure what people think
- dropping the serpentine draft in favor of either a 3rd round reversal, or 3rd round flip. these are both more 'fair' than a serpentine draft

To expand on the draft types, this is copied from another website:

# Third Round Reversal - Often abbreviated "3RR", this alternative draft method has gained popularity in recent years, mostly because two national contests (NFFC and Rotobowl) have adopted this format. Third Round Reversal looks exactly like a snake draft except that the first two rounds are reversed. The person who drafts first in Round 1 goes last in Round 2 AND Round 3, meaning that the person going last in Round 1 goes first in Round 2 and Round 3 - hence the "flip". After that change in Round 3, it continues to snake down the draft board, just like before, so the twist occurs between Rounds 2 and 3.

# Third Round Serpentine or "Banzai" - "Banzai" is an alternative draft method has gained popularity in recent years. This style is often confused with Third Round Reversal (See #2), but it is actually a much simpler draft format. Only Round 3 is reversed from the original "snake" draft order, so the person going last in Round 1 gets to go first in Rounds 2, 3 and 4. The owner who has the first overall pick doesn't start a round again until Round 5.

So starting with the "Snake" version, we see that there is a bias at the early part of the draft towards the team that picks first, and it is pretty big (10% value difference). At every breakpoint, Team #1 is always the first in value and Team #14 is dead last.

The next best solution for a 14 team draft is the Double Snake format, which has a 7% difference at the onset but tapers down to a 5% difference by the end of Round 8 for a brief time, then regresses to 6% for the rest of the draft. The interesting part about this method is not that the #1 Team has the highest value, but which team has the lowest value. For each and every breakpoint in the Double Snake, Team #12 (not the last team, Teams #13 and #14 are better) is last.

An even better distribution comes from the Third Round Reversal method, which has a 7% difference at the onset but tapers down to a 5% difference by the end of Round 8 and stays there for the rest of the draft. The interesting part about this method is not that the #1 Team has the highest value, but which team has the lowest value. For the first eight rounds it is Team #12, then after 10 rounds it is Team #11, and then for 12 rounds and beyond it is Team #10 that has the biggest disadvantage.

Finally, the clear winner is Third Round Flip, or "Banzai" style of drafting. Right at the start after four rounds, the variation is just 3% in point values and it even gets smaller at times (sometimes just 2%) as the draft progresses. The best team is still #1, but the worst team is now Team #8 for the first eight rounds. After both 10 and 12 rounds have passed, Team #8 and Team #9 are both tied for worst, but ultimately Team #9 finished last after 14 rounds.

After all this number-crunching, it seems rather safe to say that the Third Round Flip is the fairest approach to drafting for 14 teams.

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 15:49

Wasn't there a "study" done on RIXC draft slot and final winners. Might have been just for basaball. Anyways the top draft slots were not the most frequent winners as one might expect.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 16:06

There's too much that goes in to a fantasy season to base best draft slots off of who wins. I don't know how accurate their numbers are that they assign every single draft pick, but all of this is based on those values. I just figured I'd bring it up since I'm sure these other draft types are actually more balanced than a regular serpentine and people might be interested in swapping it up. This is probably one of those things where it will be a lot more common in a couple years (like IDPs are pretty common now, and auctions instead of drafts are becoming more popular).

While this isn't a big deal to me, I would be fine with using one of these new types. I'm mostly interested to see what others think.

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 17:00

Here is the thread discussed in #7. It was just for the RIBC.

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 18:09

Something I would to see changed, would be the points for the kickers. 40 yrd FG's are quite common, yet it is worth the same as a TD pass. And a 50 yrd worth more. 3 points no matter what length.

Slowhand
SuperDude
ID: 056744223
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 18:42

I really like Bonka's idea of the smaller bench size I've had a couple of seasons jump the tracks with star player injuries and no FA with even limited PT available. I'd still like to keep team def,and prefer the serpentine draft (except in keeper leagues).

judy
ID: 5321213
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 19:16

Just some early thoughts:
1) For the IOP (individual offensive player), a team can have no more than 5 RB, 6 WR or 3 TE at a time
on the roster.
2) I LIKE team def/DST!
3) A follow up on #2. I think the values for DST yardage and TPA are too "tight" and almost
unattainable at the lower values. How many teams score only 6 points or have less than 125 total
yards? The NFL has become so high scoring that I would move all the points down a category:
1 - 6 points allowed = 10 points
under 149 (or maybe 139) yards allowed = 10 points
4) I agree that FG are worth too much. Maybe 3 for 40+ and 4 for 50+ (5 for 60+). This gives some
value to drafting a PK... and for a team like the Iggles who do not often score within the 20, Akers can
give his owner some help...

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 19:18

If you want to lower kicker scoring, why even use them at all? They're already afterthoughts with the current scoring. Also, I'd imagine there's less 40+ yard field goals than passing tds, and definitely less 50+ yarders, so I don't see the big deal there.

judy
ID: 5321213
Mon, Jul 19, 2010, 23:07

PK IS an important part of the NFL game. And for some of us, it can represent an 8 -15
point advantage. Quite often a PK scores more points than an IDP. I don't think it
should be left out of the equation. If you are going to have IDP, you need to have a PK.

Nerfherders
ID: 347242717
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 14:13

I'd like to see a small change to tie-breaking rules.

Currently, if three or more teams finish the regular season tied, H2H records are thrown out and it goes to overall points as the tiebreaker.( I don't think this has even been spelled out anywhere.)

I would like to see the tiebreaker be overall H2H record against the teams that are tied, and then overall points. My reasoning is that if H2H is first tiebreak between two teams, it should be first tiebreak between three or more teams as well.

wiggs
ID: 136282015
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 16:28

Nerf- That isnt right- I was actually moved from like the 4 seed to the 7 seed because of tie breakers being head to head. It was a problem last season because it wasnt clearly written out anywhere.

Guru- I am asking to be the 1st alternate if someone can not do this league since I was bumped way down due to tie breaker rules. I am not sure if you remember, but it is in the 2009 thread.

Thanks
wiggs

youngroman
Donor
ID: 02934823
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 16:43

some thoughts of mine:

roster limits:
i looked up my RIFC-style drafts the past 6 years and how many teams drafted more than 5 RBs/6 WRs/2 TEs:
2004: 0/0/0 teams (61/71/17 total)
2005: 4/1/0 teams (67/73/17 total)
2006: 3/1/0 teams (73/73/16 total)
2007: 2/0/0 teams (67/75/20 total) - added WR/TE flex
2008: 3/0/1 teams (69/72/24 total)
2009: 3/0/0 teams (70/76/22 total)

interesting is that my team drafted at least 6 RBs the last 5 years. I guess this is because waivers are really thin all year. so if we reduce the maximum it has to be 5 or even less. 5 may add 2 to 4 players to the pool, but these players may get drafted anyway because they might be the #5 on someone others team. only in 2006 3 additional RBs would be definitely available on waivers.

I don't think that limiting WRs to 6 or TEs to 3 would change the draft and the game, because there are not many occasions where a team drafted 7 WRs or 3 TEs.

opposing to the "lower the number of bench slots" idea I would rather add a 7th IDP slot to have
7 offense (QB, 2RB, 2WR, WR/TE, TE)
7 defense (DL, 2LB, 2DB, 2flex)
2 special team (K, DST)
8 bench

playoff seeding:
I know that there was a debate last year how to seed the playoff participants. turned out that Guru seeded me 5th in a 3-way tie. I think based on points differential because we all had a 2-2 record against each other. might need to look up last years thread to remember his decision making process.

point changes:
K: the best offense players can put up 30+ points in a given week. why not a kicker too? yes he is not as predictable as a QB/RB and you can throw a dart every week because you never know if a kicker gets 6 PATs or 4 FGs. a kickers performance relies too much on the offense.

Defense: I wouldn't raise the points you get for low yardage/points allowed. maybe reduce the other factors like defense TDs. if you score a defense TD you get 2 points for the initial event (INT, FF) too, resulting in a defense TD worth 8 points. maybe reduce the points for defense TD to 4, so that a TD is worth a total of 6 points.

PR/KR: I would not change their scoring, the good ones are already worth enough to be played every week even without a role on offense/defense.

draft style:
I am fine with everything. I don't think that a league deep as ours relies too much on draft position.

playoffs:
I was never a fan of playing the final in week 17 or having a bye week in week 14.
I am also not a fan of roster moves during the playoffs. not even for the secondary positions (K, D, IDP). I would like to assemble a roster by week 14 that I need to stick with for the playoffs. by this time you pretty much know which guys are banged up, may get rested or play against an above average offense/defense.
I may be alone with that opinion.

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 17:38

The bench is pretty big. 15 starters, 9 bench. Except during bye weeks, when the bench is needed to replace 3 or 4 guys sitting out. I don't know if reducing it will result in a lot of good RB's being available on waivers.

If you're concerned with a shortage of running backs, you could replace one of the RB positions with RB/WR/TE. Or RB/QB would be interesting. This way you can use a WR or TE, if someone is hogging all the running backs.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 17:59

To comment on some things youngroman said:

I don't think you can put too much emphasis on the number at each position drafted...check who was rostered at the end of the season and look at what's left on the WW. RBs are going to be picked up off waivers throughout the year and they don't really get dropped back in. It's usually TE, K, IDP, DEF reserves that get dropped. I think forcing some of the bench slots to go towards IDP would help better than any position limits. Adding an extra IDP starter and keeping the bench the same would also help a bit, and I like that idea.

This league isn't actually that deep compared to many others, although it's not small either. But regardless, all that draft position stuff is mostly concerning the first couple rounds where all the high value players are drafted.

I also don't think DEF needs to have their scoring increased. They already score high (24 in the top 100, 10 in the top 50) and are pretty volatile, putting out some of the highest weekly scores, and hard to predict. Look at the Saints, they were 5th DEF, 24th overall, put up I think 40+ in one week, and they were taken dead last by someone who thought they got points for Reggie Bush doing returns. This is also why I hate DEF, they're not drafted high enough to warrant the ridiculous scoring output they provide. Only one team was drafted before the 9th round.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 18:38

[16] Wiggs - you were my first alternate, but everyone invited to the RIFC has agreed to play, so unless there is a late withdrawal, them's the breaks.

As I recall - and my memory is not foolproof on this - my intent from the beginning was that H2H would be applied as the first tiebreaker regardless of the number of teams. We discovered at one point that Fanball would only apply H2H for 2-way ties. But other systems (including MFL, I think) do not have that limitation.

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 20:49

1. For playoff seeding tie-breaking, go with the head-to-head first and then points. It's a head-to-head league. Winning percentage determines position, so we should place the greatest importance on that when we can.

2. I'm for the current system of free agency during playoffs.

3. Stat corrections should be applied up until kickoff of all games. Managers should be alert and should always set provisional lineups in case they are awarded a victory due to stat corrections. It may seem harsh, but the game is based on an imperfect sport. We should try to get things as close to accurate as possible.

4. This is also why I hate DEF, they're not drafted high enough to warrant the ridiculous scoring output they provide. Only one team was drafted before the 9th round. --Bonka, 20

The reason they aren't drafted high has nothing to do with the total amount of points they score. You only start one and there are 32 of them, so there's not a lot of scarcity. Even if everyone has 2 there are always a few on the wire to look at for matchups. And because they are unpredictable they rarely get drafted early. People have finally begun to realize TM DEF is too inconsistent to draft early, when you need to focus on surer things. Incidentally, the Saints defense ran away with the TM DEF scoring last season until about Week 13. They crashed to earth with single digit scores all throughout the fantasy playoffs.

Bottom line on the Team Defenses: if you curve up the scoring for the position, it's not going to change anything because of the volatility in performance at that position. And I don't mind that. It's a small part of the game.

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 22:08

DEF used to be VERY important... but I feel we've scaled it's scoring down enough when we made the changes a few years back. I'm happy with it's points system the way it is.

slizz
ID: 43133920
Tue, Jul 20, 2010, 23:40

Among the possible rules changes:

#1 - Total Points. Makes playoffs more interesting

#2 - I love the way G24 has it set up with respect to playoff teams’ transactions. We allow the teams in the playoffs to make their moves and the teams that didn’t make the playoffs/in the consolation to “work with what they got.” That’s how it should be here.

#3 - I’m for the majority. No preference here

#4 - I’ve always been against Team Defense in leagues that feature a deep IDP roster, such as this. We already track the individual statistics for the majority of IDP’s that would also be scored (& duplicated) for Team Defense: Tackles, Sacks, Passes Defended, Interceptions, KR/PR Yardage, & FG’s…

I wouldn’t mind keeping the Team Defense if we just limited it to “Points Scored Against” and “Yardage Allowed” as we don’t track those stats for IDP so that we satisfy the fantasy football purists.

Also, if we are to keep Team Defense, we should at least consider a Team Offense with “Points Scored” and “Yardage Gained”. Than we’d account for just about everything fantasy football related.

#5 – Draft style – no preference…but impressive write-up in post #6 Bonka. I would be willing to try the 3RR style to see how it shakes down for drafts in other leagues.

Nerfherders
ID: 347242717
Wed, Jul 21, 2010, 11:44

RE 20

Guru, I asked this because it was not spelled out, when we had a 3-way tie for second in AAA #2 (Fantrax), and you said, and applied, points instead of H2H. I'd just like it spelled out and applied consistently one way or the other.

I wasn't aware that playoff seedings could not be forced/changed/set that way in some formats, though I am not sure that was the reason in Fantrax.

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Sat, Jul 24, 2010, 11:19

FYI - I think 3 guys have yet to log into MFL:

letter_j
youngroman
smith32

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Sat, Jul 24, 2010, 18:06

Is there any interest in PPR? I haven't seen anyone mention it other than myself.

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Sat, Jul 24, 2010, 18:51

Yes... PPR does interest me. Because I do feel that the QB's have been somewhat "limited" with the rankings we give them... thus, for those teams that depend on dump-offs so much... we should at least be able to help out those kindly RB's & WR's that open themselves up so often for hits from the LBs.

My
.02

IAC

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 11:59

With regard to post [6] discussing the alternative draft styles: I'm fine with any of those options. I don't think they'll make much difference deciding who is successful in this league. However, if we can create more parity at the outset by using a "fairer" draft type, then no one should feel slighted strictly because of the draft. The appearance of fairness is important.

The chart Bonka posted indicates the Banzai draft type is the fairest. Before I jump on board with that, I'd like more explanation as to what the other columns (high, low, and %dif) are actually measuring. Are those highs and lows based on accumulated points of players drafted in those rounds? Can anyone give me a breakdown?

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 12:09

Post [26]: I prefer not using PPR. I don't understand why it's any better than non-PPR. It seems like a simple preference issue: sure it gives WR's more value during the draft, but that just means managers will adjust their draft rankings accordingly. It doesn't change the game once we start playing. The same types of decisions will need to be made during in-season management.

If there is a logical and compelling reason for utilizing PPR, it ought to be easily explained by its supporters. If it's merely an issue of preference, then it's similar to the issue of utilizing TM DEF. Given that we're all playing under the same set of restrictions, it won't make much difference to the game if we make these sorts of changes. And frankly I'd rather not spend time on adjusting my rankings at this point based on scoring system changes.

promize@phoenix
ID: 326341921
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 14:17

#1- I like Head-to-Head first and then if that needs to be broken then total points

#2- Second Slizz's thinking

#3 - I think they should continue during post-season, although either way is fine with me. But it is tough on both sides knowing if your only .2 pts ahead or behind and change could be made on Friday that would change the outcome. Adds a little excitement for the week. Also agree that it makes people set a lineup "just in case".

#4 - Really not much of a fan of team defenses if there is IDPs also. Can scrap it if you like.

slizz-blackberry
ID: 556452613
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 14:45

How else would Reggie Bush ever have value in fantasy football other than a PPR? Lol. Avg game for him was 8-10 carries, 30-40 yards 6-8 receptions 40-60 yards = 10 pts min guaranteed! Lol

Crue - eliminating the DST isn't gonna screw anybody's boards up...let's be serious now. :)

I was being sarcastic regarding my "team offense" comment just to prove a point.
The D/ST was designed so owners didn't have to account for such a deep draft on the defensive side...given that we start 5 or 6 idp's where tackles supplant yardage allowed. I see it as a total waste for our non-keeper format.

I'm against it in G24 but recognize that we will always have it due to the realities that a DST can make or break a team in a league that deep and there will always be owners clinging to a keeper defense like Baltimore...

mjd
Leader
ID: 501381415
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 15:02

Bush has value as a return guy. I've had him in this format where he
scored 20+ points on several occasions.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 15:39

The numbers on that chart are the total values of draft picks through the given rounds. Each pick is assigned a value, with the 1st obviously having the highest. So the high would be the highest total value of picks for one draft slot for rounds 1-x (x is first 4 through 12, as seen on the left hand side) while the low is the lowest. Difference is the difference between those two.

I'll just link the page I pulled it from, there's more info there I left out.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/08pasquino_3rr14.php

In regards to PPR, it's going to bump up WR/TE value a bit in comparison to RBs, who mostly dominate in value. I would also lower QB value somewhat, which isn't real high despite their high scoring, due to only starting 14 across the league. Basically it'd be nice to get values across positions closer (even IDPs could use a slight bump up). Adding .5 PPR to RB, 1 to WR and 1.5 to TE really pulls them together more. QBs would need a small change with the current lineups such as .05 or .06 per yard to not drop off too much. Then there's IDP where you can bump up points for tackles or other stats to catch DL up to the LBs.

Basically it comes down to whether you want all positions to be viable rather than being forced for the most part to grab certain positions at different points in the draft. Imagine a scoring system where 1 or 2 IDPs are in the top 10, they could actually go in the 1st round as a viable strategy. I think things like that make a league a lot more interesting and would allow for more strategy since it's extremely different from the norm.

Most of that scopes beyond PPR and would involve pretty drastic changes, but is something people may be interested in and worth discussing.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 15:41

Just to clarify, where it says "I would also lower QB value" it's supposed to be "It." I'm not suggesting to lower QB value.

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 17:35

Bonka, thanks for the link to the draft style discussion. Guru, I would vote for the Banzai draft style if the option is available.

slizz
ID: 43133920
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 19:30

RE: Reggie Bush - Every league I was in I HAD to have him...especially in the PPR's. He's always been my boy...but I've come to live with the fact that he's just an "Average" NFL player with the occasional highlight reel play. Basically, he's a really hyped up Dave Meggett.

I read a great analogy for Reggie Bush the other day: "Say you bought an in-ground pool four years ago. It cost more than you wanted to spend, and it came with hidden expenses and extra headaches: repairs, chemicals, a privacy fence. Worse yet, the pool didn’t really fit your lifestyle, so you didn’t get as much use out of the pool as you thought you would. The pool sits under a cover in your backyard for much of the summer, and you are still paying it off on your credit card. Still, about three times per year, everything falls into place. The neighbors come over, you throw a highlight-of-the-summer party, and the memories remain with you forever. If you are wise, you stop resenting the money and the labor, and you learn to accept the pool for the fleeting thrills it provides. You make peace with your mistake and make the absolute most of the situation.

That’s where the Saints are with Bush. They’ve accepted the fact that they overpaid, and they have moved on. They live for the brilliant moments: five postseason touchdowns (two in a game-changing performance against the Cardinals), occasional highlight-reel runs and punt returns, and surprising usefulness in the red zone (Drew Brees likes to hit Bush on the shallow cross so Bush can outrun linebackers to the pylon). Many sportswriters work overtime to brand Bush as an all-time bust, a backlash to his “next Barry Sanders” billing before the 2005 draft. He’s not an all-time bust; he’s more of a luxury, one that a Super Bowl team can afford. He’s become so overrated that he’s underrated, and while he’ll have some two-carry performances and run backwards after a few punts this season, it’s OK to dive in and enjoy the highlights when they come."

On a more serious note, RE: Proposal #4: What if we supplanted the DST with an IDP roster spot?

That way, we'd have 7 offense, 7 defense plus Kicker. I think its worth a shot and that RIFC is progressive enough to make that change. Worst-case scenario...its a one-season trial-run(like the new NFL OT rule).

Frick
ID: 36662619
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 20:06

How were the values of the draft picks determined? I'm curious how much the variations fluctuate if the value of the picks are changed?

Not sure about the PPR, it would give a bump to WR, TE and a few RBs. I don't see it having a huge impact on drafts and I agree that it seems to be more of a preference.

I'm fine with H2H for a 2-team tie. With more than 2 teams, points is probably simplest since I believe we play a balanced schedule.

Team D helps provide some depth for league, but it also provides some random results as weather and lucky match-ups can lead to a waiver wire D, looking very attractive. i.e. A blizzard or hurricane is likely to lead to a low scoring.

I have no problem with the waiver wire being off for non play-off teams. I've been in leagues that require play-off pick-ups to be started to prevent a team with a higher WW priority from taking a player that an opponent could use due to injury, job loss, etc.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 20:55

Just want to mention that any scoring or lineup setting in a league is all just based on preference. Obviously people are going to rank and draft based off of those settings. I'm not sure what people are expecting when they say that things seem to just be more of a preference, when in reality, that's what almost every single rule is in the end.

If there was a scaled PPR put in place, with TEs getting 1.5 and such as I mentioned, it definitely would affect the draft quite a bit. WRs jump over some RB and TEs jump up a lot. If you have something where you can see overall rankings based off projections + a scoring system you enter, and mess around with the settings you'd be able to see just how much of a difference a few scoring changes can make with raising the value of different positions that will really affect a draft.

I know there's a lot of people out there that like PPR and just as many that don't. I think it mostly comes down to whether you'd like to see all positions valued more closely so there's more room for variation in draft strategy, and then implementing scoring changes to produce those values. I'll wager that most would like to keep things relatively the same, since changes like that are probably better off suited for a brand new league.

dpr
ID: 552411820
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 21:44

I am not in the RIFC(I am in AAA) so if my questions are unwarranted I apologize, but I always think about a few things when non-traditional categories are implemented. How do people figure out how these changes impact the draft? How does adding a few points change a players value? (I think these points are more valid in non-football sports where there is not a direct translation to points and it is all about deviation from averages, but still is valuable in this case).

My main instinct is that just leads to a lot of guesswork. Now there are a few ways around this. Do players here come up with there own projections and form there own rankings from them? I would think that most of us do not go through this for all the players in the league, meaning that we really are just using others projections and maybe small tweaks or averages. Now, with these projections being tailored for the standard leagues it is hard to know how to alter them. One solution is to tell the website, or several, your new settings and have it give you a new list. Now this can usaully only be done on pay websites so the people who can best adjsut to the new changes are the people who use these services instead of taking tons of times to research.

Now my issues here could be do to a lack of understanding of how people prepare for a draft. For me, this means reading tons of material, articles, message boards, and deciding which opinions of players I agree with and deciding which players I am high on, and which I am low on, and then applying that to normal draft orders. I never really produce a ranking past the first few rounds. Now, I don't think that this is a lazy approach, but it tailors poorly to adding categories. How do I have my baseline values for this when the settings are so different then all the lists out there?

Maybe this is a problem more of my methods, than of the idea of translating to odd scoring systems, but is always my fear when I see some extreme scoring systems implemented (PPR not being the best example but say a 10x10 baseball league).

If I am unclear, or misinterpreted people's draft preperation, then again I apologize.

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 23:02

"How do people figure out how these changes impact the draft?"

I think every potential change does indeed need to be addressed... although in general I do believe a change like PPR generally will add only "minimal" extra value to certain players. If PPR's where set at 5, this would of course create a ridiculous variance, but one set at .5, or 1 would add a little extra value to 3 down RB's. The Bryan Westbrooke/Reggie Bush types would thrive, whereas it would diminish the value of the Jamal Lewis's of the league.

I say follow your heart and stay up to date on injury updates/positional changes... this is what sets apart one team from another... not so much the "quality of the draft".

Fugazi
ID: 20202323
Mon, Jul 26, 2010, 23:47

I don't like the idea of dropping team defense. I would draft punters if there was a scoring system for it. I don't have any problems with the scoring either. I feel like the RIFC is always so competitive because of all the different draft strategies one can chose. Things seem perfect to me.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 00:02

dpr - There are programs, excel spreadsheets, and some websites where you get a set of predictions, either from a website or can do your own, and enter your scoring and lineup settings and they'll spit out rankings to draft from. You can tell how a draft is going to change when say you go from no PPR to 1.5 for TEs and see the top TEs jump from roughly 50th+ overall in to the 20s. You know then that TEs will go earlier, probably in the 2nd round because they'll perform equally to RBs and WRs that normally go there. It gives people more viable options throughout the draft to pick players at somewhat non standard positions (some leagues have extremely high IDP scoring and you'll see Willis go in the first 2 rounds) and probably have a bit more fun doing so since it's different. This is all something that differs from person to person though, obviously.

dpr
ID: 552411820
Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 00:22

I guess that is what I mean. You take what you have in your spreadsheet and it pretty much says, all those websites that that are so readily available, they are wrong because they apply to different scoring. It is this list that is correct. Now in terms of getting that list, I am sure there are many sites that can give it to you but it doesnt seem to really be any higher level analysis involved, just excel skills.

Now if getting they spreadsheet means a owner goes CJ 1800 yards 10, AD 1500 12, etc then they put in the time and they deserve rewards for their work. I just don't see people doing that.

Also, drafting isn't just about taking the highest rated guy. Its about taking a guy relative to his value. You can't really evaluate a guys value when it is so much harder to find other peoples ranks.

Now for football or a change like PPR the results are easy enough to see, and since RIBC already does non-traditional scoring with return points for some players the points are less valid.

Frick
ID: 0654277
Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 08:54

Most sites have the ability to enter your scoring rules and the projections will be updated for your specific league. Now, if your league has a really different rule, it might not accomodate the rule, but it at least gives you a starting point.

Kyle
Sustainer
ID: 052753312
Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 11:53

Sorry to butt in from the AAA side of things but RE:18 The idea of RB/QB spot to take over the 2nd RB and add some depth to the waiver RBs just made my mind go "Wow, I want that". I'm not one to make a huge post with historical data, so if someone wants to do that and prove how terrible it'd turn out, please do that because I love reading them. But my gut tells me that it'd make things REALLY interesting.

Also IMO Team D's are so devalued in this format that we might as well eliminate them, but there are still those weeks where the Ravens D will score 30 points and you'll run away with the win.

Just my $0.02, carry on! ;)

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Tue, Jul 27, 2010, 20:05

When I talk about preference issues, I'm contrasting them with issues of parity. Parity issues include the discussion about draft order and scheduling (whether to use a balanced schedule or not). I agree that scoring rules in a non-keeper league are all issues of preference.

At this point I'm not inclined to scoring changes in this league for selfish reasons. My rankings don't easily lend themselves to scoring changes (a product of using the same scoring system for years). But I'll play no matter what is decided. I'm looking forward to the challenge.

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 13:56

The only change I would propose is a minor one. If we do not change from a snake draft, I would change the waiver order after week one to be the inverse of the draft. Instead of W-L record. This would provide some compensation for picking last in the draft. Weeks 2-6 waivers would remain the same.

judy
Leader
ID: 7771722
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 15:06

B7 -- I think the WW is set up that way at the start.

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 15:14

It says after week one, waivers will go by worst W-L record.

judy
Leader
ID: 7771722
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 15:50

oh, you want it to roll from the reverse order rather than being reset at week 2?

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 15:59

[48] We do use reverse standings for the first 6 weeks. The hosting site is still set up for the playoffs, which gave the advantage to the top seeds. There may be a few other remnants of playoff rules that will need to be reset to regular season standards.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 16:01

Got back from vacation today. Although I have been peeking in on some of the threads, I have not paid much attention to this one over the past week. Give me a chance to digest everything and then I'll decide how to proceed with any possible rules changes.

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 16:39

Under priority claiming, I propose to change this:

Following the first 6 weeks of the season, the priorities will reset weekly based on the reverse of W/L percentage.

To this:

Following weeks 2-6 of the season, the priorities will reset weekly based on the reverse of W/L percentage.

So, after the draft, the waivers will be set to the reverse of the draft order. And it will remain that way until after week 2. After weeks 2-6 , it will go by worst W-L record.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 18:38

The language in the priority rule seems to be botched. I guess I'd better redraft that.

Here is what we have done:
Prior to week 1: no priority claiming. MFL does not support it. (FCFS only)

Weeks 1-6: reset each week based on the reverse of W/L percentage.

For the balance of the season, there is no weekly reset. So if you place a claim in week 7, you go to the bottom of the list and only move up as other claims are awarded.

I think the original language would be OK if we replace "Following..." with "For..."

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 19:50

You can set up a waiver period for any point throughout the year. Go to waiver rules calendar setup and add in what you'd like.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Wed, Jul 28, 2010, 19:51

Also, if people feel waivers are an issue, there's always the option of implementing blind bidding and people can spend their blind bid dollars however they'd like throughout the year.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 14:58

Finally waded through the discussion above.

First, some philosophy. In general, I’m in favor of year-to-year stability. However, it’s fine to tinker with rules related to scoring or roster configuration if that seems like a sensible way to offset some experienced problem. And we have done that from time to time.

Based on the previous discussions, I’m inclined to make some decisions without putting all matters to a vote. Some of these have been voted on in previous years, and some simply seem to be a matter of personal preference without solving any demonstrated problem.

1. Team defense will continue to be used. We have voted on this in the past. It’s possible that one year, we would get a collection of 14 managers of whom 8 would prefer to eliminate it. But I can think of no compelling reason to eliminate it. It’s one idiosyncrasy of the RIFC that I like, and I’m going to decide to keep it by Guru fiat.

That said, there was a scoring idiosyncrasy last season. As I recall, extra points were charged against the defense, regardless of how the related TD was scored. Thus, for a game where the defense essentially pitched a shutout but the opposing defense scored a TD, the team defense was charged with 1 point allowed. And the formula had a different point allocation for 0 points allowed vs. 1. This year, I’m going to amend the points against to provide 10 for 0-2 points allowed, and 7 points for 3-6. (I don't recall if this was strictly a MFL or Fantrax issue - but it seems to make sense, regardless.)

2. Tiebreakers – HTH will apply as the first tiebreaker, regardless of the number of teams involved. If two or more teams have the same HTH record, then the tie among those teams will be broken by total points.

3. Stat corrections. These will be automatically applied. This typically happens on Thursday morning. In the playoffs, this can lead to an issue if a team is suddenly “back in the game”, but that team was unable to make roster moves the prior day. I can’t think of how to fix that. If a stat correction changes a playoff matchup at the last minute, then any impacted team will be given the opportunity to make a last minute roster move, if needed. We’ll just need to stay on top of this if a potential situation arises.

During the playoffs, once the first game of the week has started, no stat corrections will be allowed thereafter.

4. We will continue with the same limitations on roster moves during the playoffs. I heard no compelling arguments against this, and the issue has been vetted several times over the years.

5. Waiver priority: Following the draft, we will have a limited waiver period for all undrafted players based on the reverse order of round #1. Following each of the first 6 weeks of the season, waivers will be reset based on the reverse of the current standings. After that, there will be no weekly reset until the playoffs. At the beginning of the playoffs, the order will be set in order of seeding – and will not be reset again.

This is essentially the same as we used last year, I think.

6. Do not extend playoffs to week 17: This is an interesting concept, but I’d rather see how it would work out this year before making that change. My guess is that playing time for the final weekend would still be screwy enough that it is best that we avoid it.

6. No PPR: This has been discussed in prior years, but never got much traction. Let’s stick with the status quo.

7. Kicker points will remain the same. I see no compelling reason to fiddle with this.

There are two issues that I think are worthy of considering a change.

One is the general question of RB scarcity/hoarding – with a variety of possible approaches, including position limits for bench slots, reducing the number of bench slots, or changing the second RB slot to some form of flex

The other is the choice draft sequence (snake, banzai, etc.)

I'll address those two issues in a separate post. Are there other issues I have not addressed?

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 15:12

Everything sounds good to me so far. :)

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 15:38

I think that I would favor the shorter bench as opposed to the flex option.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 17:08

I want to mention I'm pretty sure that PATs are tied to the type of TD they come after on MFL. So the PAT from a TD scored off an interception return does not count against the defense. Although with the change you're implementing, it won't really matter since there's no way to score 1 or 2 points against a defense outside of PATs.

I'd be fine with a draft type change.

As far as the RB/bench situation goes, I'd like to see something done but it's hard to say what would be best. I don't think cutting bench slots would help much to be honest. All that will do is add more WR/TE/IDP to free agency rather than RBs for the most part. I think IDP should be tied in to this somehow, either adding another IDP slot in the lineup and removing a bench slot or just requiring a certain number of bench slots to be used for IDP. Changing a RB slot to QB/RB would be extremely interesting though.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 17:30

Adding a RB/QB flex would be interesting, but might just result in squeezing the QB position instead.

Based on a very quick analysis, it looks like a second QB would be expected to produce about the same points (on average) as a second RB.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 17:45

Yeah it would gobble up the QBs, but it should free up some RBs and gives people more flexibility for setting starting lineups.

Looking at projected values with the QB/RB slot rather than 2nd RB slot is definitely interesting. The RBs get devalued quite a bit while QBs get bumped up. It actually looks like overall it sets QBs RBs and WRs pretty equal. This might fix the RB problem while introducing another, but based on what I'm looking at I don't think there'd be a huge issue. I think it would be pretty exciting regardless.

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 21:06

Post [58]: One [issue] is the general question of RB scarcity/hoarding – with a variety of possible approaches

The approach I prefer is to be one of the hoarders. I don't understand why there's a desire to create an incentive to value all positions equally in the draft. If all positions are close in draft value, that eliminates one factor that a manager needs to consider when drafting, which makes drafting strategy more uniform and (in my opinion) boring.

As far as in-season hoarding, it's a strategy. Position-hoarding managers make sacrifices in other areas. It's not some kind of unadulterated advantage. What reason is there for eliminating it?

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 21:40

Suppose that the two questions (for a league vote) were worded as follows:

Question #1, related to RB scarcity
A. Limit teams to no more than 5 RBs on a roster
B. Change the second RB slot to QB/RB
C. Change the second RB slot to QB/RB/WR
D. Change the second RB slot to RB/WR
E. No change from last year

Question #2, related to the order of the draft
A. Standard snake draft (same as prior years)
B. Third Round Reversal
C. Banzai
D. Double snake

For each question, I would ask people to rank their 1st and 2nd choices.

I am not yet asking people to vote. I'm only asking if this is a reasonable way to offer choices. Are there other options that should be considered? Should some choices be amended or eliminated?

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 21:54

There's not much of a sacrifice is the problem. Honestly, what do you give up to stash a ton of RBs? An extra WR/TE you might start once, maybe a 2nd defense to play matchups, IDPs which hardly anyone puts on the bench because they're so readily available on the waiver wire.

Looking at my roster from the end of last season, I had 6 RBs and still had 2 QB, 5 WR, 2 TE, while only having 1 bench IDP.

I'm starting to like the idea of a QB/RB flex since RBs are far and away the most valuable position and it'd be nice to have at least the 3 main positions all roughly the same. Multiple positions giving equal value rather than 1 being clearly above the others doesn't take away anything from strategy. I'd say it adds more since you can't count on RBs flying off the board as always.

Judy
ID: 54203110
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 22:00

For Q#2:

Can MFL handle each of those drafts easily?

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 22:03

For question 1, I don't think a RB/WR flex would help at all since the quality of WRs that would be getting put in that slot is worse than the RBs and won't actually help at all. I'm not sure if it should be removed as an option or not, it's easy to just not vote for it.

I think I might be the only one here that considers adding required IDP bench slots to be a more subtle solution. I have this in another league I am in, where we require 2 bench slots be IDP players so hoarding offensive players doesn't happen. I think 2 required here would help a bit as well while not altering things greatly.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 22:09

I just checked MFL and one of the default options is:

The first round is as set up above, and then it's a "3rd Round Reverse Serpentine" draft (1-N, N-1, N-1, 1-N, N-1, serpentine for the remainder of the draft).

Anything else you would have to set up manually, but the 'Banzai' style is only flipping round 3 from a normal snake draft, so it's extremely easy to set up.

judy
ID: 5321213
Thu, Jul 29, 2010, 23:44

That draft option really confuses the choice for draft slot unless you pick one of the middle
ones. Hard to really know how to plan who you would get with all those changes...

I'd like it as simple as possible...for predicting future picks -- by me and others.

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 09:06

Question #2, I might phrase it as snake draft vs. alternate draft. Then if alternate draft wins, vote again on B,C, or D. Otherwise, the consensus could be alternate draft, but the votes are split up among the three choices. And snake draft sneaks in.

Ditto with B,C, and D in question #1. Combine them into one RB/flex. Then if that wins, vote again on B,C, or D.

This may drag it out a little longer, but I don't think we're in any big hurry yet.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 09:54

[67-68] Looks like any of the first 3 options would be easy to accommodate. The double snake would take a bit more finagling - probably still reasonably do-able, but maybe it's better not to offer that as an option.

[68] Does MFL even allow an option to require two bench IDPs? It looks to me like their limits are based on individual positions (DL, LB, DB), rather than IDP collectively.

I suspect that most teams typically carry no more than one bench IDP. Forcing 2 bench IDPs would certainly have an impact. Almost tantamount to eliminating a bench slot altogether.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 09:59

I must confess I am warming to the idea of a RB/QB flex. I'm not sure it would really have much impact on QB depth, as most teams already carry two QBs, but can only play one per week. This would provide more value to having a backup QB that was decent.

I'm not sure, however, that it would provide much relief on RB scarcity. I think that hoarding RBs is mostly for the purpose of warehousing someone who might suddenly have value due to another RB injury on the team.

That said, I'm also not totally convinced that RB scarcity is necessarily a problem that needs to be fixed.

Judy
ID: 54203110
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 10:21

Having a flex QB/RB option would really change the draft
strategy. Can you see starting Rodgers and Brees (or two
other stud QB's) each week? You could draft early for that...
You could also see folks carrying 3 QB! The issue as I see it
is that so many NFL teams are now RBBC that it would be
safer to start 2 QB instead to be assured of points rather than
trying to guess which RB is going to get the most carries.
(most obvious ex is The patriots -- you never know who is
going to play the most in the games!

It creates a whole new dynamic for both playing and drafting.

Frick
ID: 57639309
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 10:40

I've been in leagues that used 2 starting QBs and QB values skyrocket since it is tough to have two starting QBs during bye weeks. But, being able to flex a RB/QB is different and opens up more strategies for the draft and season.

I am liking the idea of flexing a QB spot. Can people still horde RBs, sure. But it now comes with the additional risk/benefit of possibly being left without a QB as people will draft more QBs later in the draft, thus leaving some of the marginal RBs on the waiver wire.

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 12:42

Just a question regarding the voting if it comes up. Would it be a 50% + 1 thing, or would you want a clear majority? If the vote was close, before implementing the changes into RIFC, would you want to set up a league as a case study, so to say, to see trends and if you like it? Just a suggestion, just reading comments, I am not sure if people are worried, or excited of possibly changing the dynamic of these leagues.

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 13:07

We just have to enforce the 2 bench IDP rule manually, but there usually isn't a problem. There would just have to be some sort of -points each week you go without 2 bench IDP if it were put in.

Also, as mentioned, the QB/RB flex wouldn't do much to QB availability as almost all the starters are rostered to begin with. RBs could still be hoarded, but it's not as big a deal since you should have at least 1 extra QB you can use to fill in when needed.

Toral
ID: 526301920
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 13:25

A QB/RB flex strikes me as a kind of freak show thing. Granted, it'll stir things up with a huge change to draft strategy, but are things so unsatisfactory that we want a huge shakeup to a successful enterprise?

Of course I'm an inveterate RB-hoarder so maybe it's just my self-interest speaking.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 13:33

[77] Consider the vote to be a "straw poll" that I will use in making a decision. It's possible that an 8-6 vote to change would be overturned if I decide (based on evidence or reasoning presented during the voting) that the change risks more than it resolves.

In other words, I get to make the final call, regardless of the vote outcome.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 13:38

...and with that said, let's take the "poll," using the following revised questions.

Question #1, related to bench/position limits
A. Limit teams to no more than 5 RBs on a roster
B. Reduce overall bench by one slot
C. Require 2 bench slots for IDPs
D. No change

Question #2, related to flexing the second RB position
A. Change the second RB slot to QB/RB
B. Change the second RB slot to QB/RB/WR
C. Change the second RB slot to RB/WR
D. No change

Question #3, related to the order of the draft
A. Standard snake draft (same as prior years)
B. Third Round Reversal
C. Banzai

For each question, please indicate your first and second choices.

This formal poll is for the 14 managers in the RIFC only. However, managers in the QLs are still invited to express opinions.

slizz-blackberry
ID: 516523012
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 13:52

1) D
2) C
3) C

Where's the eliminate DEF vote!?!? :)

Judy
ID: 54203110
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 14:18

Projected draft start date?????

Letter_J
ID: 346433013
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 14:43

Q1. D)
Q2. D)
Q3. A)

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:07

1)D. 2nd choice B.
2)D. 2nd choice B.
3)C. 2nd choice A.

youngroman
Donor
ID: 02934823
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:13

1A, 1D
2D, 2B (=2A)
3A, 3B

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:23

1. B then C
2. A then D
3. C then B

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:34

Dug up explanations of the draft choices so people know what they are voting for.

A.Normal Serpentine ("Snake") Draft Order - This is the one that everyone has seen and is the most common draft style. The even rounds are the reverse order of the odd, meaning that if you pick first overall you go last in Round 2 and then first again in Round 3. That order continues back and forth as the draft "snakes" down the draft board, hence the name.

B.Third Round Reversal - Often abbreviated "3RR", this alternative draft method has gained popularity in recent years, mostly because two national contests (NFFC and Rotobowl) have adopted this format. Third Round Reversal looks exactly like a snake draft except that the first two rounds are reversed. The person who drafts first in Round 1 goes last in Round 2 AND Round 3, meaning that the person going last in Round 1 goes first in Round 2 and Round 3 - hence the "flip". After that change in Round 3, it continues to snake down the draft board, just like before, so the twist occurs between Rounds 2 and 3.

C.Third Round Serpentine or "Banzai" - "Banzai" is an alternative draft method has gained popularity in recent years. This style is often confused with Third Round Reversal (See #2), but it is actually a much simpler draft format. Only Round 3 is reversed from the original "snake" draft order, so the person going last in Round 1 gets to go first in Rounds 2, 3 and 4. The owner who has the first overall pick doesn't start a round again until Round 5.

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:35

RE 83: From post #0:

"Last year, the RIFC draft began on August 20, and was completed in less than 2 weeks. I expect the timing this year will be similar."

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:38

I picked "Banzai" just because it sounds kewl. ;)

BANZZZAAIIIIIIII!!!

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:38

To expand on those explanations with something easy to look at quickly:

Snake: 1-N, N-1, continue snaking
3RR: 1-N, N-1, N-1, 1-N, continue snaking
Banzai: 1-N, N-1, N-1, N-1, 1-N, continue snaking

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:40

Q1:B then C
Q2:D then B
Q3:C then B

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:41

Ben, where you easily lured by candy as a Kid??? ;)

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 15:44

If you mean packs of baseball cards that had a single stick of gum in each one... then YES!

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 16:49

1. B, then D
2. B, then A
3. C, then B

#2 ... I would prefer the superflex position of QB,RB,WR,TE,K,DEF,D.

Frick
ID: 57639309
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 18:19

Q1) D, B

I don't care for the idea of restrictions on bench slots. Would they have to be manually administered?

Q2) A, D

Q3) B, C

I didn't have much interest in this at first, but after running some mock drafts with various flex positions, the total estimated points for all of the teams was slightly tighter using a modified draft.

judy
Leader
ID: 7771722
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 18:30

Thanks E'man for the explanation. If we go Banzai, then I am guessing that the best slot would be the last??? I am
not at all sure of the strategy for this draft sequence...?? Anyone willing to share??

For banzai, the N guy would also get the #1 pick of the 6th round as he would double up at the turn back up??

so it would really be Banzai: 1-N, N-1, N-1, N-1, 1-N, continue snaking which is N-1, 1- N

the bonzai N guys gets 4 top picks through the first 6 rounds??? seems a bit much for one team

yes??? no???

if so, why bother as the #1 in snake get rounds 1,3,and 5 already??

help me understand the strategy/reasoning of this method.

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 18:47

1) D then A
2) D then C
3) C then B

Slowhand
SuperDude
ID: 056744223
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 18:55

I'm with judy and am having a hard time understanding the advantages/stratagies of 3RR or banzai style of draft.

Although I'm in AAA my opinion on the poll is :

1:D then B (although this makes less difference in my mind if any of the changes in #2 take place)

2:B then A ( Building 7's superflex position sounds great)

3:A then C (pending a better understanding of the options)

100

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 19:17

In short, each pick is assigned a numerical value. The sum of those values for each draft slot is different. The different draft types try to close the gap between the best draft slot, in terms of total value, and the worst draft slot.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/08pasquino_3rr14.php

It's all laid out there for you to look at.

101

Toral
ID: 526301920
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 19:42

I'm not in the big league so my vote doesn't count. But I will tell you how I would vote anyway:

1) D, then A
2) D, then C
3) B, then A

Note: the full Banzai relies on calculations of draft position worth (i.e., worth of picks) that are highly contestable and haven't even been scrutinized here. If we want to try a change, there is wisdom in starting with a gradual one.

Toral

102

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 19:46

Ahhh? Not that it's a big deal, but please don't post votes if your not in the league; it's just going to make tabulation more confusing.

103

Toral
ID: 526301920
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 19:51

Sorry, I_Am_C.

Though I doubt the posting of recommendations by non-RIFCers will confuse Guru in his tabulations.

Typical of a kind of type common among my fellow Canadians: if they fluke into a position of power, their first impulse is to shut everyone else up.

104

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 19:57

They're all based on the same numbers, it's not like the Banzai is calculated differently. Obviously there's no 100% way to assign values, but don't you think they'd be at least close enough for something like this? They're pulled from a trade calculator, which you can find and enter pick trades and see if the values are roughly what you think they are.

This is one of those things where you just kind of have to trust the people who came up with it. Look at all the metrics they're using in baseball now to grade players on offense and defense. I don't think you can say the stuff they use can be verified as 100% accurate, yet teams still take them in to account.

105

Toral
ID: 526301920
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 21:10

I haven't looked at the calculation of metrics for the alternative draft scenarios -- but, with all respect Bonka, the above is a terrible argument:

They're pulled from a trade calculator, which you can find and enter pick trades and see if the values are roughly what you think they are.

I don't trust any "trade calculator" I have ever seen. Garbage in, garbage out. I have no hesitation in saying that anyone using any "trade calculator" I've ever seen would finish last, if he accepted its values at face.

Look at all the metrics they're using in baseball now to grade players on offense and defense. I don't think you can say the stuff they use can be verified as 100% accurate, yet teams still take them in to account.

The word "metric" or "sabrmetric" is not a magic charm. At least half of these 'metrics' are stupid. Sure, teams "take them into account"; they analyze them and accept the good ones and ignore the stupid ones.

Actually no one with any brains accepts a new "metric" unles he or someone he trusts has verified it by showing its correlation to something else.

What about the trade calculations that led to these alternative draft systems makes you believe they are sensible?

Toral

106

Judy
ID: 54203110
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 21:29

Re [100]
so basically the best slot is the middle one.
I've decided it is way more complicated than it needs to be.

I don't have the time or energy to do all that draft slot value
metrics nonsense -- I'll use my time to research the players...

107

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 21:30

Toral, I understand your point and agree with you on the problem with the trade calculator. However, I voted for the banzai draft style based on another non-scientific factor. Namely, I believe picking at the top of rounds 1 and 3 is a great advantage, and picking at the top of rounds 1 and 4 is not enough of a dilution of that advantage to even things out. I think 1-N, N-1, N-1, N-1, 1-N works to really even out that top pick.

But Toral is correct: there's no good reason to blindly trust the scoring assigned to those draft positions by the website Bonka cited.

108

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 21:56

One thing you can do is plug in the actual point values from last year. Here are the first two rounds:

1. 343
28. 216
total 559

7. 279
22. 227
total 506

14. 246
15. 245
total 491

The short answer is picks 1&28 are greater than 7&22 or 14&15. And that difference is never made up in a snake draft.

109

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 21:59

Well the only way to analyze the value of draft slots is by assigning picks values. The values obviously weren't just randomly assigned and you have to assume there was some sort of research put in to it. These guys do a lot of statistical analysis and are the leaders in their industry.

Yeah, the values are most likely not perfect and would also vary a bit between league setups. But if you're trying to say the values are so far off that the analysis done with them isn't useful, I don't buy it.

This isn't really worth debating. If people don't like it, they don't have to vote for it. If you also feel you can come up with more accurate values for draft picks that can be used for various types of analysis, then feel free to. There's a lot of people out there willing to pay money for fantasy football help :D

110

Toral
ID: 526301920
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 22:00

OK. MC, I respect your judgment on the matter a lot more than the findings of any "trade calculator". And your judgment is by objective standards assumedly better than mine.

I prefer the middle option; perhaps because I am of conservative temperament and a gradualist.

I will say that under Banzai, picking the last draft pick (in the 1st round) becomes mandatory, especially if the innovative flex options are adopted. Get pick #1 and choose Larry Johnson or Ladainian in the wrong years and your season is over, picking last in the next 4 rounds.

And that's all I will say on the subject.

Toral

111

Frick
ID: 57639309
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 22:00

I ran a few mock drafts and the metric I looked at was total points scored by each team was closer in total points in the modified drafts. I didn't compare the results to the link posted previously, but they seemed comparable.

It isn't a huge difference, but it does remove some of the advantage of picking first. I personally think the majority of that advantage can be overcome by using different draft strategies at the back of the draft.

112

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 22:19

I will say that under Banzai, picking the last draft pick (in the 1st round) becomes mandatory, especially if the innovative flex options are adopted. Get pick #1 and choose Larry Johnson or Ladainian in the wrong years and your season is over, picking last in the next 4 rounds.

That is why I like this option, you can't just blindly decide to pick first, you really have to put thought into it and see if the player that goes first is worth the value of lower picks in other rounds. The competition of these leagues has been quite high, and this adds another dynamic that tests you as a manager, which sounds like fun to me.

113

judy
Leader
ID: 7771722
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 23:01

I am clueless...

114

judy
Leader
ID: 7771722
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 23:17

What am I missing here?

I see that choosing the N slot gets you the top pick in rounds, 2,3,4 and 6.

copied from above (italics added): 1-N, N-1, N-1, N-1, 1-N, continue snaking which is N-1, 1- N

Round #1: 1-N,
Round #2: N-1,
Round #3: N-1,
Round #4: N-1,
Round #5: 1-N,
Round #6: continue snaking which is N-1,
Round #7: 1- N,
Round #8: N -1, etc

What does the math say for bonsaii rounds 1 through 6?

The regular snake gives the #1 pick in round, 1,3,5 and 7 vs Bonsaii round 2,3,4,6

B7 --What do the math guru points work out for that comparison?

Isn't this way too confusing for just a fantasy draft?

also what point values from last year??? huh? who made those up?

115

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 23:22

RE 103: "Typical of a kind of type common among my fellow Canadians: if they fluke into a position of power, their first impulse is to shut everyone else up."

I'm in no position of power. I do not even get the implication that I'm trying to shut you up. I just think it's courtesy to not go and mess with other peoples threads during certain times (like picking of rules, or while drafting), cause frankly it's our business playing in this league, and not that of anyone else.

FYI - I can count at least 3 Canadians playing in the RIFC this year... maybe their is more?

116

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 23:32

RE 114:

FBG came up with that information. And they may not even be THE most technical information site out there, but they do have quite a few different writers working for them, who each have their specialty, so they get to find fun things to analyze and discus. Is it always right? No. But you can always pick and chose certain nuggets of wisdom.

117

Toral
ID: 526301920
Fri, Jul 30, 2010, 23:55

I_A_C: I believe it has been long recognized, for as long as these Guru leagues have existed, that managers in the RIxC minor leagues may speak on these questions even if they are not in the top league this year. The vote and decision is by the managers in the main league this year of course. Cause the rules adopted here will perforce be adopted by the minor leagues as well. (And some of us in the minor leagues may be in the top league in the future.)

That is, I believe your statement:

I just think it's courtesy to not go and mess with other peoples threads during certain times (like picking of rules, or while drafting), cause frankly it's our business playing in this league, and not that of anyone else.

is demonstrably wrong, and I believe that I can prove that if necessary by Guru's comments over many years.

118

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 07:50

What does the math say for bonsaii rounds 1 through 6? The first pick has about a 3% advantage...1274 points to 1236 vs. the last pick.

also what point values from last year??? huh? who made those up?

AAA MFL stats 2009

They are the actual values from last year's league. #1 C. Johnson had 343, #28 F Jackson had 216., etc.
...........................
I am not Canadian.

119

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 08:59

RE 117: I got no issues with people speaking their mind in this thread (Thus why I've never said anything over the years). My issue is, why upset the balance of a vote in progress? If we end up having the 42 managers from the "sub" leagues entering their vote, YES, I do believe that Guru would have a hard time tabulating.

120

Judy
ID: 54203110
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 09:40

Aha!! the light bulb goes on!
BUT, and I feel it is a big BUT, where do the rookies fit into
this calculation and these are stats for people who can be
somewhat inconsistent from year to year as well as injured
and lose stats (Using Eagles as examples, McNabb lost 2
stat games last year, Kolb's 2009 stats will not be significant
although he is the starter this year, Bradley never played LB)

So really the points are based on just the 2009 stats and do
not account for any rookies. Right? I know the stats have to
come from somewhere

121

Judy
ID: 54203110
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 09:43

Sorry - lost the iPad insertion...

Also people often draft from likes rather than skills.

While bonsai looks cool and weird, it is really just a kinda
reverse with a twist of the good old snake!

122

Judy
ID: 54203110
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 09:45

[119]
I am keeping running tab of the votes as it will affect the AAA
folks. Not hard to do at all -- pencil and paper all that is
needed -- no fancy spreadsheet either...

123

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 10:23

You may note that at the end of post 81 (setting forth the three questions), I invited managers in QLs to express their opinions as well, even thought the official vote/poll was only for RIFC managers.

I don't care if those managers want to express their opinions via narrative or by simply posting their voting preferences. I'm perfectly capable of tallying votes.

Judy (and others wondering about draft orders) - There is a presumption that in a standard snake draft, picking first is an advantage. I don't know that the actual RIFC final standings have borne this out (I suspect they might not have), but we have a very limited sample of seasons, and final standings are subject to a lot of factors other than draft order (injuries, management skill, etc). I certainly know that every year, when given the choice of selecting draft position, the top several positions are the first to be selected.

The Banzai attempts to compensate by simply reversing the 3rd round. Every other round is simply a normal snake. Apparently, there is some thought (and FBG has applied some quantitative analysis) that suggests this is a reasonable tradeoff.

So, for example, if you have the first pick in a traditional snake, your first four picks are 1, 28, 29, and 56. In a Banzai style, your first four picks are 1, 28, 42, and 56. Only the third pick is changed, delayed from #29 to #42. Every other pick in the entire draft is the same for both methods.

Not all that complicated. The analysis done by FBG suggests that in a standard snake, picking first is the most favorable. Interestingly, the FBG analysis still finds that picking first is the most favorable, but the margin is much slimmer.

124

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 10:26

I believe we are waiting for five RIFC managers to weigh in: Fugazi, Smith32, twilson, Promize, and me.

Thus far, there is a modest predisposition toward no change in the first two questions, and a fairly strong bias toward Banzai in the third.

125

dpr
ID: 552411820
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 10:31

118

So because a player, who didnt even go first last year had a historic year and ran away with the scoring title, the number 1 pick is over rated. That kind of analysis definitely is too simplistic. The first pick may have the best chance to get the best player, but how much greater is there chance really?

For the values which are much more valid I would worry a bit that it is just choosing numbers to prove your argument.

126

Frick
ID: 57639309
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 11:09

We don't know who is going to do well this year. But, you can either take last year's stats and remove rookies or use estimates for this year and run some mock drafts. Look at each of the teams and see which draft results in the most evenly distributed points.

As I said above, the limitation is a manager can use a different strategy with a later spot.

127

promize@phoenix
ID: 326341921
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 12:39

Sorry about that, doing a little surgery recovery.

#1 - C
#2 - C
#3 - C

Thanks.

128

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 13:03

By the way, with the exception of requiring 2 bench spots for IDP, I believe all of these changes could be administered automatically.

129

dpr
ID: 552411820
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 13:21

126,

The post pretty much said that because the player who went 8th(or wherever) last year had a really good season, the 1st pick is overrated. Though really any data which just includes 2 data points is going to be very easily swayed. None of that applies to the numbers being given by the people promoting the Bonzai or other drafts.

130

Smith32
ID: 406443112
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 13:44

1 - D
2 - D
3 - A

131

Slowhand
SuperDude
ID: 056744223
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 14:33

Thanks to all the folks explaining the draft styles think I got it.
I have to agree with Guru in post 123, I'm not sure draft position is that important; I've drafted for over 30 yrs up to 4 or 5 leagues in 3 sports and while my record keeping and memory is spotty I definatley have won draftng late and lost drafting early.As Guru stated so much depends on injuries management and,in my mind success on the WW,that it's pretty hard to predict success on draft position alone.

132

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Sat, Jul 31, 2010, 15:35

Kinda stinks if no changes from 1 or 2 go in since the bench just seems too big currently.

On another note it seems like people are confusing the post where someone used last year's points results for the pick value with what FBG did to determine them. While actual points scored probably did come in to the equation at some point, it would have been an average over a number of years, not just one where the top guy ran for 2k+ yards.

Also, obviously you can win your league from any draft position. We can't reliably predict the entire course of a season, so bad early picks and amazing late picks happen, and you can't just draft a team and let it sit all year. BUT, when you're going to try analyzing the value of the draft picks to compare draft slot values, you have to assume the #1 pick gets the top guy and this continues all the way down the line. Yeah, it's not going to happen, but each person has a 100% chance of drafting the 'to be ranked Nth' (or higher) player where N is their overall draft pick number, while the people drafting after them do not.

In the end if you understand it all, you can see why tweaks have been made to those draft types and how it pulls all the draft slots in terms of potential value together. Keep in mind that the difference in a snake between best and worst is 10% and the Banzai lowers that the most to 2-3%, so it's not a huge difference in the first place. It won't throw the balance of a league off...bad managing/draft decisions/injuries will, but there's nothing we can do to even them out.

133

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sun, Aug 01, 2010, 20:32

MC raised a new thought. Copied from an email he just sent me:

In the past we have limited offensive players to receiving points only for offensive categories, and IDP’s to receiving points for only defensive categories with the exception of TD’s. It appears MFL will allow points to be awarded to any player for any statistical category. Have you considered implementing full scoring for both offensive players and IDP’s? This would mostly affect offensive players who play special teams, because they would receive points for the ST tackles and turnovers they make. Of course it would benefit hybrid players that play both ways, too. I’ve always wanted to do this, but Fanball didn’t allow for it, so we never really discussed it. I think players should get points for everything they do in their games; I think awarding points to KR/PR players evidences a commitment to this.

Examples:
A defensive player (eg., Mike Vrabel) catches a TD pass. In the past, we would credit 6 for the TD, but nothing for the yardage.

An offensive player makes a tackle after an interception.

It would also have implications for those weird plays with double turnovers.

Obviously, this would not make much difference in total scoring over the course of a season, but if the system can award all points for all players, is there a reason not to?

Any thoughts?

134

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Sun, Aug 01, 2010, 20:50

Interesting, I have had the same thought over many seasons. Just a question, are ST tackles an official stat?

135

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Aug 01, 2010, 20:57

Special Teams tackles are tallied and counted toward the total number of tackles a player receives in the NFL Gamebooks. I am nearly certain that our fantasy scoring websites (MFL, Fanball) recognize these tackles the same as normal tackles when tabulating stats for fantasy scoring purposes.

But to this point, only IDP's have been receiving credit for that kind of tackle.

136

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sun, Aug 01, 2010, 21:01

I think ST tackles are included in "Tackles", which is an official stat. We have included all tackles for IDPs (not just defensive tackles), but have not included them for offensive players.

137

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Sun, Aug 01, 2010, 21:24

Doesn't matter to me, as it won't really make a difference in the end outside of maybe 1 or 2 bizarre circumstances all year. It's easy enough to set up in the scoring.

138

Nerfherders
ID: 347242717
Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 12:29

I'd like to see all points accounted for. Makes things more interesting.

I remember several instances over the years where that would have been the difference between a win and a loss.

I'd like to try the Banzai draft as well. Though with my luck I will get the first draftslot option this year. ;)

139

judy
Leader
ID: 7771722
Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 13:43

Since tackles (etc) can be applied to any position in MFL, I say let's go for it!!

140

youngroman
Donor
ID: 02934823
Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 14:51

I have no problem with defensive stats for offensive positions and vice versa. is Troy Brown still playing? I guess he is be the only player in the last 10 years that would be really worth more with this rule. Mike Vrabel won't get much additional points for his 2yd TDs.

141

Frick
ID: 34756213
Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 14:56

This biggest gainers will be the special team guys who will get some occasional tackles, but I agree that the total impact is pretty minimal.

142

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 20:15

I was looking at game stats last year from the first game of the year, and Jeff Reed was credited with 3 tackles. Would kickers be included too?

143

Pancho Villa
ID: 29118157
Mon, Aug 02, 2010, 23:11

Could help a guy like Jay Cutler if he can tackle those players that just intercepted him.

144

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 09:58

[142] yes

145

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 10:00

I'm going to set up our league scoring to allow all points for all players. This will let us see how the points for last season would have been calculated. I'll post comparative links once the points have been recalculated.

146

twilson
ID: 221142214
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 10:03

Sorry for not responding sooner, I ran into some trouble while moving that limited internet access.

1) D
I see RB hoarding as a strategy rather than a problem. I also like deep benches.
2) D
This really just comes down to personal preference for me, as any of the changes would simply shift scarcity concerns.
3) B
I found the FBG column lacking in justification for the points breakdown used to conduct the analysis. With that said, anecdotal experience does support the concept of earlier draft choices being somewhat more valuable in a snake, so I am fine with either trying out one of the new systems or sticking with the traditional format.

147

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 10:31

We have not yet heard from Fugazi. I have also not posted my own preferences. However, the results are lopsided enough that I can make the decision.

For Question #1 (bench position limits), 7 of 12 have voted for no change, and those who did want to change have shown a variety of preferences. Some of that latter group have said that "no change" is their second choice, as well.

Ditto for Question #2, related to flexing the second RB slot.

So in both cases, we will not make changes to those rules.

For question #3, regarding draft sequence, there is a strong preference for Banzai (that is my preference as well), and only 3 have voted for no change as all. So we'll try the Banzai order this year, and see how that goes.

148

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 11:38

Here are some comparative points, using actual 2009 stats:

Current rule (off stats for off players, def stats for def players)

All stats for all players

You can see the weekly totals, and drill down to see the underlying point calculation for each basis. For example, Chris Johnson picks up 3.5 points, as he had a tackle in weeks 3, 4, & 17, and an assist in week 16.

149

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 11:49

What are the rules for remaining in the RIFC next year. It says the top 6 seeds are selected. How are these determined? regular season or playoffs or what?

150

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 11:52

I use the top 6 seeds at the end of the regular season. However, if the playoff champ comes from the 7th or 8th seed, that team would bump the #6 seed.

151

Fugazi
ID: 20202323
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 18:41

I would just like things to stay the same. It would be nice to be able to compare stats from year to year. But I'm pretty easy going so whatever the majority wants I'm cool with that.

152

Smith32
ID: 406443112
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 21:30

I know Banzai has already been selected, but I went back and looked at last year's draft order selection process. The #13 / #14 slots were selected before the #2 slot. If there is an advantage to picking early rather than late in the odd rounds of a snake draft, why did this happen?

153

Judy
ID: 54203110
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 22:40

Any helpful hints on where a good draft position is for the
bonsai method?

154

Frick
ID: 25746321
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 22:52

Draft strategy most likely, did the managers post their draft spot selection rationale?

155

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 03, 2010, 23:10

[152] Personal preference, mostly.

RIFC 2009 rationales (see posts 1-14)

156

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 10:23

Just a heads up - I'm doing some experimentation with the MFL draft setup. If you get any notices that you are one the clock, or that changes in the draft have been made, please ignore them.

157

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 10:54

Judy, supposedly all the draft positions are within 3% of each other. So, theoretically, it shouldn't matter too much. In your case, you will want to see where Eagle players are likely to go, and pick your spot accordingly.

158

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 11:47

I attempted to update and clarify the rules as discussed above. Note that, based on the lack of any dissenting feedback, I have also decided that all players will be eligible for all scoring categories. Please review the following rules and let me know if anything is still unclear or incorrect.

Changes are highlighted in italics.

Roster
1 QB
2 RB
2 WR
1 WR/TE
1 TE
1 K
1 Team def
1 DL
1 LB
1 DB
3 additional IDP (flex)
9 bench
24 Total

Decimal scoring is applied for all categories.

Offense Category Points
(apply to all players, including IDP)
Passing TD 4
Other TD 6 (all TDs, whether on offense, defense, or special teams)
Passing-2pt conv 1
Other-2pt conv 2
Passing yard 1/25 (i.e., .04 per yard)
Rushing yard 1/10 (i.e., .10 per yard)
Receiving yard 1/10
Punt return yard 1/10 (also applies to IDP)
Kick return yard 1/25 (also applies to IDP)
Kick return 0 (no deduction)
Int, fumbles lost -2

Kicking Points
(apply to all players, including IDP)
Extra point made 1
Extra point missed -1
FG under 40 yards 3
FG 40-49 yards 4
FG 50+ yards 5
Missed FG <30 -1
Missed FG 30+ 0

Team Defense Points
(the following points apply only to team defenses)
Sack 1
Interception 2
Fumble recovered 2
TD 6 (excludes TDs on kick or punt returns)
Safety 3
Blocked kick 2
0-2 defensive points allowed 10
3-6 defensive points allowed 7
7-13 defensive points allowed 4
14-20 defensive points allowed 1
21-27 defensive points allowed 0
28-34 defensive points allowed -1
35+ defensive points allowed -4
Defensive points allowed exclude TDs scored by the opposing special teams or the opposing defense (i.e., TDs on turnovers, kick/punt returns, or blocked kicks).

Points are assigned for yardage allowed according to the following table:
500+ yards allowed: 0 points
400-499 yards allowed: 1 point
300-399: 2
275-299: 3
250-274: 4
225-249: 5
200-224: 6
175-199: 7
150-174: 8
125-149: 9
under 125: 10

Indiv Defensive Player Points
(apply to all players, including offensive players and kickers)
Solo Tackle 1
Asst Tackle 0.5
Pass defensed 1
Sack 3 (half sack=1.5)
Interception 3
Fumble forced 2
Fumble recovery 1
TD 6 (all TDs, whether on offense, defense, or special teams)
Safety 3

Unlisted players
During the draft, any player may be drafted, regardless of whether or not the player is listed at the hosting game site. Once the draft is completed, unlisted players may not be added to any roster. This applies for any post-draft waiver processing as well.

In the event that a drafted player is not listed after the draft has completed, a placeholder player will be assigned to the drafting team, to be replaced by the drafted player as soon as he is available.

Priority Claiming
All free agents (any players not on a current roster) are subject to a weekly claiming process at noon on Wednesday. Following each of the first 6 weeks of the season, the priorities will reset weekly based on the reverse of W/L percentage. After that, priorities will not be reset during the regular season. Throughout the season, when a player is claimed, the claiming team moves to the end of the claiming priority list. Following the final regular season game, priorities will be reset based on playoff seed, with the top seed getting the top priority. Thereafter, throughout the playoffs, priorities will again adjust only when a claim is awarded.

Starting at 3:00pm on Wednesday, all free agents may be picked up by any team "first come, first served" without any change in priority status. Players who were just dropped in conjunction with a waiver claim will be treated the same as other free agents (i.e., not subject to s separate waiver period).

(Immediately following the draft, undrafted players will be subject to a priority claiming process, with priorities equal to the reverse of the first round draft order.)

Starting five minutes prior to the scheduled start of each NFL game, no player in that game may be dropped, regardless of whether the player is an active or bench player.

Schedule
13 week round robin
Doubleheaders all weeks 1-13 (play each team twice)
Single elimination playoffs, weeks 14-16

Trades and trade deadline
During the draft, trades may include draft picks. Trades will normally be approved immediately by the Commissioner, assuming they are reasonably balanced. If league managers believe an announced trade is unbalanced, they should protest the trade ASAP.

After the draft, trades will be subject to a review period. For the first 24 hours following a trade, managers may protest a trade by posting a message at the RotoGuru forum, or by sending an email to the Commissioner. If at least 3 managers protest a trade within 24 hours of its announcement, then all managers will be polled within the next 24 hours. If seven or more managers vote to veto a trade, then it will not be approved. If a proposed trade is announced less than 24 hours before the earliest freeze for any player involved, then the entire trade will not be processed until the following week.

If a trade does not receive at least 3 protests, then it will be effective 24 hours after it is announced. If a trade receives at least 3 protests but the protests are not upheld in a full league vote, then the trade will be processed 48 hours after it is announced.

The trade deadline is 11:30pm EST on November 11.

Stat corrections
These will be automatically applied. This typically happens on Thursday morning. In the playoffs, this can lead to an issue if a team is suddenly “back in the game”, but that team was unable to make roster moves the prior day. If a stat correction changes a playoff matchup at the last minute, then any impacted team will be given the opportunity to make a last minute roster move, if needed. The Commissioner will attempt to ensure that this provision is enabled as fairly as possible under the circumstances.

During the playoffs, once the first game of the week has started, no stat corrections will be allowed thereafter.

Playoffs
8 teams
Top 6 W/L records are seeded 1-6
Top remaining total points are seeded 7-8
Teams with equivalent W/L records are seeded based on head-to-head first (regardless of the number of teams), then total points.
Bracket is fixed (no reseeding after each round)

Players at the primary skill positions (QB, RB, WR) and team defenses may not be added for any reason during the playoffs. Free agents at these positions will be locked out after the final regular season game. You may drop a player at one of these positions, but once dropped, that player cannot be added later.

Players at the other positions (TE, PK, IDP) may be added or dropped according to normal regular season guidelines, subject to playoff claiming priorities, if applicable.

If a playoff game ends in a tie score, the team with the better seed shall advance.

Team which are not still active in the Championship playoffs may not make any transactions - adds or drops - even if they are still competing in the Consolation bracket.

159

Nerfherders
ID: 347242717
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 12:11

I do have a couple of questions if we allow all points for all players.

Would a non-turnover FR count for points? Like if the RB fumbles the ball and the QB falls on it.

How is a double-turnover play scored? Like the QB throws an INT, tackles the Defensive player, forces a fumble, and recovers it.

I assume the former does not score points, but the latter would score 4. (Well, 2 because of the INT.)

160

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 12:47

Other issues with all players scoring points include offensive players tackling or recovering fumbles and FF after an INT for instance. Defensive players FL after an INT/FR.

161

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 13:19

Non-turnover FR would not count.

In a double turnover play, I think both turnovers would count.

162

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 13:20

BTW, if there are any specific plays you remember from last season that might be unusual in this regard, you can check the revised scoring link in post 148 to see how it would have been scored under the new rule.

163

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 13:52

I want to mention that whenever we do the draft pick selection, you can just use the MFL site to randomly generate a draft order that it will email to everyone as it's created rather than do the whole 2 lists from different people thing. Then just enter the final draft order once the slots are chosen.

164

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 14:17

I'm not seeing the option to randomly generate draft order at MFL.

In any event, I have an automated random number generator that I planned to use for this purpose anyway, so it's not big deal.

165

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 16:52

Well just for reference then, it's under Draft Order Setup - All Rounds, then select one of the 'the first round is randomly selected then...' options and make sure the option to send the email is checked yes.

166

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 04, 2010, 18:48

Thanks - I see it now.

That probably is easier.

167

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 11:24

The next step is to select our draft order.

Here is my plan.

I'll use MFL to select a random ordering of the 14 managers. This will happen shortly. You should each receive an email from MFL that will say that this is the draft order, but that's not quite true - it will only be the order for the draft position selection round.

We will start that selection process next Monday. This gives everyone a few days to think about it, given their selection sequence. We'll use this thread for that process. Remember that our draft is using the Banzai style.

After we complete our draft selection round, I"ll recode the draft order in MFL to conform to our selections.

I'm still planning to begin the draft on August 20. When we used kafenatid, RIFC drafts typically consume about 2 weeks. Some have suggested that an MFL draft will go faster - we'll have to see if that is true - but there is no reason to expect it to go more slowly, other than our unfamiliarity - which should work itself out after a few rounds. I'll rely on Bonka to provide some helpful hints as we get near the draft date.

Sound like a plan? This timing would complete the draft almost a week in advance of the opening game.

168

Frick
ID: 4773157
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 11:32

Just want to clarify. Only the 3rd round is flipped, so spot 14 will pick last in round 1, and then pick first in rounds 2 and 3, last in round 4. From that point last in the odd number rounds and first in the even number rounds.

169

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 11:56

Not quite.

Only the 3rd round is flipped, so spot 14 will pick last in round 1, and then pick first in rounds 2 and 3 and 4. From that point last in the odd number rounds and first in the even number rounds.

170

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 12:10

1. 29-42
2. 30-41
3. 31-40
4. 32-39
5. 33-38
6. 34-37
7. 35-36
8. 36-35
9. 37-34
10. 38-33
11. 39-32
12. 40-31
13. 41-30
14. 42-29

Here are the changes in draft picks for a Bonzai draft. The first column is your draft slot. The next number is your 3rd round pick in a regular snake draft. And the last number is your 3rd round pick in a Bonzai draft. All other picks remain the same. Draft slots 7 & 8 have hardly no change. Thus, the first draft slot will have the 42nd pick in the Bonzai draft vs. the 29th pick in a snake draft.

171

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 14:04

By the way, if you are using a yahoo email for MFL, I suggest creating an account elsewhere (like gmail) and using that instead. Recently Yahoo has been delaying MFL emails for quite a while. I'm pretty sure they contacted Yahoo to try to get something worked out but nothing has been fixed yet.

Easiest thing to do is make a gmail account and just have it forward emails to your Yahoo account. If you do nothing, you'll be receiving emails anywhere from a couple hours to a day or two late.

172

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 14:06

Also, if the draft order was generated, could you let me know here? I forgot to change my email for the RIFC league until just now so I won't receive an email until who knows when if it was.

173

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 14:30

I just generalted the draft order. Here is a copy of the email that was sent out:

Your league commissioner has generated the draft order for your league - you can view the entire order on your Reports > League > Draft page.

Round 1 Draft Order:

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Electro Eagles
6. Promize
7. Fugazi
8. Frick
9. Smith32
10. youngroman's Luschen
11. twilson's Milchian Magicians
12. Mötley Crüe
13. Short Bus - letterj
14. IAC

This draft order was randomly generated by the MyFantasyLeague.com site, ensuring no commissioner bias when determining your draft order.

174

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 14:31

Remember, the order in post 173 is the order that we will use next week when selecting our draft position. Building 7 will get the first choice. IAC will be stuck with whatever is left over.

175

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 14:48

I want to change my vote to the snake draft. lq

176

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Aug 05, 2010, 17:27

Drafting on MFL is pretty simple. Just go to For Owners - Draft. From there you can set a queue for any round you want, or make your selection if you're currently up. Just add players from the lists then move them up and down if needed. Make sure you save your queue before changing between ADP and Alpha lists, as it will reset any work you've done. Near the bottom of the page you can select other rounds (or individual picks if you've made trades) to bring up and can set your queue for them.

As soon as it's your turn to pick, if you have anyone left in queue for that round, the system will automatically take your top player from the queue. It also won't pull from queues for other rounds. So if your 1st round queue runs out but there's players from the 2nd round queue, it will sit on your first round pick until you make a selection yourself.

That's all there really is to it, assuming the draft room isn't enabled, which I suggest it's not since emails aren't sent out when picks are made from there. I really hope people make good use of queues. They'll speed things up since ~2 weeks for a 24x14 draft is rather slow. I completed a 40x14 draft earlier this year in 10 days.

If you have questions just leave them here and I'll see if I can answer them. But like I said, it's pretty simple and there shouldn't be any problems.

177

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Aug 06, 2010, 10:07

Just did some more analysis of the impact of including all stats for all players.

Using last year's stats, looking at the top 200 point producers:
1. Joe Cribbs gets the biggest boost, +8.5 points. His largest weekly gain was 2 points (2 tackles), week 10.
2. Only 40 players would have gained more than 2 points total over the course of the season.
3. Another 63 players would have gained 1-2 points.

Most of the point pickups are for tackles. Beyond those, here are a few of the more interesting plays:

- Randy Moss had an interception on a "Hail Mary" pass at the end of the first half in game 5.

- Kevin Smith got credit for a safety in week 8. Detroit threw an interception into the end zone. Instead of downing the ball, the defender ran it out of the end zone, and then Kevin Smith chased him back into the end zone and tackled him.

- Robert Meachem (week 13) - Brees threw an interception against the Redskins. On the interception return, Meachem stripped the ball from the returner and ran it in for a TD. He was credited with a forced fumble and a fumble recovery on the play.

178

Nerfherders
ID: 310111515
Fri, Aug 06, 2010, 12:42

Interesting stuff. Thanks Guru!

179

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Aug 07, 2010, 10:52

For those who may have access issues at work (either for this site or for mfl), I have developed a routine that will access the draft in progress, going through an alternate domain:

List view: http://66.221.169.118/cgi-bin/mfldraft.pl?league=20248

Grid view: http://66.221.169.118/cgi-bin/mfldraftgrid.pl?league=20248

Note that this will also allow you to keep tabs on other RIFC drafts as well.

Note also that this is strictly a viewing mechanism. I will not allow you to actually enter a draft pick, or set up a queue. For that, you will still need to log directly into the mfl site - or else email the commish to do it.

180

Judy
ID: 54203110
Sat, Aug 07, 2010, 13:05

WOW -- that is SWEET

Thanks Guru!

181

slizz
ID: 43133920
Sat, Aug 07, 2010, 22:22

awesome guru...just awesome! hopefully it works at my office b/c they block rotoguru there as well...crappy BNY Mellon. lol

182

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Aug 07, 2010, 22:35

BTW, if those URLs in post 179 are blocked for anyone, there are several other possible domains I could place them in. Just let me know.

183

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 10:18

[173] OK - lets start picking our draft sequence. Building seven gets the first selection. Please post here, and if you can, notify the next picker by email. Manager email addresses are listed at the mfl site. From the very top menu bar, select:
Reports =>Franchise => Franchise information

There is no time limit for this selection round - within reason. (I'll be the arbiter of "reason")

184

Building 7
Leader
ID: 171572711
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 10:29

1. Building 7
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

185

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 10:55

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

Mostly because I never had an elite RB before.

186

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 12:54

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

Had a few slots I was looking at, and you guys didn't take any of them to help me decide.

187

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 13:27

Slizz picked slot 4 via email since he can't get on the site from work.

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

188

Frick
ID: 44748912
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 13:48

Nice to see the Banzai draft is working as intended.

189

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 13:57

Electro emailed me as well.

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5.
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

190

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 13:59

The Banzai draft is supposed to make every pick about equal, so I don't see what your point is. People are going to take a slot where they can grab the player(s) they want.

191

I_AM_CANADIAN
Donor
ID: 01361448
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 14:18

I'm not complaining... that's for sure. ;)

192

Frick
ID: 44748912
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 14:46

Just pointing out that while there was some debate about how valuable or not the top selections were, the top 4 slots were still the first ones taken. I'm glad we moved to Banzai approach as it does appear to help smooth out the value of draft slots.

193

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 14:55

I contemplated taking lower picks, including 14, but I decided I'd rather take one of the top backs and deal with picking late the next 3 rounds than wondering what I'm going to end up with using my first 2 picks since the end of round 1 isn't very predictable.

But yes, hopefully this new draft order does even things out so nobody is 'stuck' with a draft slot, even though you may not love your 1st round selection.

194

slizz-blackberry
ID: 32745617
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 15:10

Getting an elite back outweighs anything else.

after #5 there is a dropoff in guaranteed quality at running back

195

Electroman
ID: 565182111
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 15:30

So in other words, you're saying I'm an idiot;)

196

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Mon, Aug 09, 2010, 15:42

I actually like 7 for the most part, so we can be idiots together :D

197

Promize@Missouri
ID: 21723105
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 06:23

Sorry gang, still on vacation till next week..

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

198

Fugazi
ID: 20202323
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 15:32

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14. Fugazi

199

Frick
ID: 1076109
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 16:46

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13. Frick
14. Fugazi

200

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 16:49

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. Smith32
13. Frick
14. Fugazi

(from emailed instructions)

202

youngroman
Donor
ID: 02934823
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 16:54

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9.
10.
11. youngroman
12. Smith32
13. Frick
14. Fugazi

203

twilson
ID: 221142214
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 17:55

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9.
10. twilson
11. youngroman
12. Smith32
13. Frick
14. Fugazi

204

Mötley Crüe
Dude
ID: 439372011
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 19:45

OK, so I guess I'll go with the 9th slot in round 1.

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6.
7. Electro Eagles
8.
9. Mötley Crüe
10. twilson
11. youngroman
12. Smith32
13. Frick
14. Fugazi

205

slizz-blackberry
ID: 32745617
Tue, Aug 10, 2010, 21:57

Electro. No. Not in the very least. You get aBetter secondary player and I didn't want to take that chance on the mendenhalls of the world. I actually have mendenhall above everyone else but his risk is much much higher than a ray rice or Jones drew.

Either way. I'm interested to see how this banzai draft turns out

206

Letter_J
ID: 21740118
Wed, Aug 11, 2010, 09:41

I'll take the 6th slot...

207

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 11, 2010, 10:59

Final Draft order

1. Building 7
2. Guru
3. Bonka
4. Slizz
5. Promize
6. Letter_J
7. Electro Eagles
8. IAC
9. Mötley Crüe
10. twilson
11. youngroman
12. Smith32
13. Frick
14. Fugazi

I'll enter this in MFL shortly.

208

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 11, 2010, 14:12

[58] item 1:

It looks like MFL associated the extra point with the TD for assigning defensive points allowed, so the formula change probably has no meaning. It must have been Fantrax that scored the XP against defense, regardless of the TD.

In any event, I'll leave the scoring formula change in, just to be safe. But if MFL's scoring approach is used, then there is no way to have a total of just 1 or 2 points charged against a defense.

209

judy
Leader
ID: 7771722
Wed, Aug 11, 2010, 14:57

FYI The order of draft spots picked for AAA#2 went this way:

6-10-14-2-3-13-8-7-1-9-12-4-11-5

I have NO IDEA what that means, but I find it really odd that 4 and 5 went so late!!
Certainly not what we would have seen last season...

210

The Beezer
Dude
ID: 191202817
Wed, Aug 11, 2010, 22:19

AAA #1 draft picks fell out as follows:

3, 14, 1, 13, 2, 4, 8, 9, 7, 12, 10, 6, 11, 5

So here's when each draft slot was picked (RIFC - AAA1 - AAA2 - Average):

1: 1 - 3 - 9 - 4.3
2: 2 - 5 - 4 - 3.7
3: 3 - 1 - 5 - 3.0
4: 4 - 6 - 12 - 7.3
5: 6 - 14 - 14 - 11.3
6: 13 - 12 - 1 - 8.7
7: 5 - 9 - 8 - 7.3
8: 14 - 7 - 7 - 9.3
9: 12 - 8 - 10 - 10.0
10: 11 - 11 - 2 - 8.0
11: 10 - 13 - 13 - 12.0
12: 9 - 10 - 11 - 11.0
13: 8 - 4 - 6 - 6.0
14: 7 - 2 - 3 - 4.0

211

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Aug 12, 2010, 15:38

Just looking at the mechanics of the draft. Bonka posted some instructions back in [176], but I'm going to elaborate a bit - as there are some key differences vs. Kafenatid's approach.

1. "My Draft List" - Under the "For Owners" menu (at the top), there is an item called My Draft List. You can think of this as your personal pre-ranking of players if you wish, although it has one important operational impact. If your 6-hour clock expires, then your pick will be automatically selected as the top name on your "My Draft List". Only if that list is empty will your pick be skipped. (More on this in a moment.)

2. "Pre-Draft Pick" list - These are the equivalent of the kafenatid "queue", with several important distinctions:

There is a separate list/queue for each round, and they do not carry over,
If there is a name in your queue, that player will be immediately selected when it is your turn to draft. The only way to turn off a round-specific queue is to empty it.

Therefore, it is important to keep your queues empty unless you are sure that they should be used. If you expect to want to load & unload your queue frequently (similar to turning it on or off), then you should probably keep a list of players in "My Draft list", as you can quickly pull up that short list to add players to any queue.

Of course, if you have players in "My Draft List", then you are also subject to having those players selected if you should time-out. Typically, that shouldn't be a problem, as timing-out should be a rare occurrence.

If you want to keep players loaded in "My Draft List" and you don't want the top name selected automatically upon timeout, then I suggest putting a "placeholder" player at the top of your list. For example, Chris Henry (WR - Cin) seems to be available in MFL, even though he is dead. There are undoubtedly other player names that we can come up with for additional placeholder options. If you time-out and a placeholder player is automatically selected for you, then you can have the commish replace that player with a real pick when you are available.

I'll probably start the draft untimed for at least the first round, just to ensure everyone has had a chance to familiarize themselves with the setup.

Bonka - Does this all sound accurate to you? Are there other approaches that could be used to effectively turn a queue off/on?

212

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Thu, Aug 12, 2010, 16:05

Everything you posted looks right. I've never actually used the My Draft List before, so I don't really have anything to add on it. Regarding the turning on and off of a queue, there's no way to do it outside of emptying the queue, unless you set the draft as live and let people mark themselves as away in the live draft room. This then automatically drafts from their My Draft List and then ADP list if the first runs out (I think?) until they unmark themselves as away.

The only problem with this is if you mark yourself away and never turn it off, the system will just keep picking each time you're up based on ADP, assuming your My Draft List ran out. This is meant for live drafts mostly, since it's only available when you have the live draft enabled.

People just setting queues for each round works fine and is what they should do.

Checking out the draft options and seeing that it's set to pick from your My Draft List if you time out on a pick is actually interesting as I didn't realize this before. This should let people set an 'emergency queue' if they decide they'd like to try checking in and make the pick manually but aren't 100% sure they'll make it in time.

213

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Aug 13, 2010, 12:09

Note that if you are setting queues for your next two picks, you'll need to set up two separate round-based queues. This applies even if your pick is on the turn and you get two consecutive picks.

For example, assume that Building 7 needs to set a queue for his 4.14 and 5.01 picks, which are consecutive. He'll need to set a 4th round queue for the first pick, and a 5th round queue for his second pick.

Question: (for Bonka or anyone else who might know.) What happens if you have two picks in a given round, due to a trade? For example, suppose I have pick 5.02 and also 5.12. If I set a queue for my 5th round, will it still be used when pick 5.12 is due? Will I have an opportunity to set two separate queues? How will that work?

214

Bonka
Sustainer
ID: 019742310
Fri, Aug 13, 2010, 14:50

In the drop down list near the bottom where you select the other rounds to set a queue you'll see something like 5.12. It won't use your 5th round queue for it. Easiest way to check what picks you have queued up is to go to the draft report and it marks every single pick someone has pre-drafted as well.

215

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 18, 2010, 13:52

Now that we are approaching the draft, all league discussion should move to the draft discussion thread.

Forum: footPage 5343Subject: RIFC 2010: Getting started

Forum: foot
Page 5343
Subject: RIFC 2010: Getting started