Self Editor

Forum: hoop
Page 10625
Subject: RIHC Season #2 - 2004/05

Posted by: Guru - [330592710] Mon, Apr 26, 2004, 10:47

Here is the current situation regarding next year's RIHC membership.

We will continue with 12 teams. The top 6 finishers in this year's league get an automatic berth. Those are Dave R, Doug, Swish/Edgar, Rand, HoopsKlyce, and blackjackis21. I have extended a special "Commissioner's invitation" to Coldwater Coyotes, based on his strong stretch drive. I am inviting the winners of the two official qualifying leagues: Mike D and Slackjawed Yokel. While SY is already a member of the RIBC, I believe that duplicate membership is OK if you earn your way in by winning a qualifying league. I am also extending an invitation to APerfect10 for his win in the Gurupie20 League. And, of course, I am returning.

So, the list so far is:
Dave R
Doug
Swish/Edgar
Rand
HoopsKlyce
blackjackis21
Coldwater Coyotes
Mike D
Slackjawed Yokel
APerfect10
Guru

That makes eleven spots. Unfortunately, I haven't come up with a solid method to fill the last opening. The 2nd and 3rd place finishers in each of the qualifying leagues are already in the RIBC, so I don't think I should offer any of them an "at large" berth, at least now.

So, rather than making a decision now, I'm going to hold that last slot open until the fall.

If any of the eleven of you listed above decide not to participate next year, please let me know.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Mon, Apr 26, 2004, 11:48

Thanks Guru. It will be an honor and a privilege to trade....er, I mean play...in this league. ;)

smartone @work
Donor
ID: 29452720
Tue, Apr 27, 2004, 13:21

I would suggest that the 4 teams who didn't make it to next year's RIHC, as well as the teams ranked 2-5 in the Qualifying league will form the RIHC-AAA -- who's winners will have a better shot at joining the 3rd year of the RIHC (perhaps the top 4-6 teams will move up to the Majors, while the bottom 4-6 of the RIHC will be dropped to the AAA league). I may as well suggest to form an RIHC-AA league by inviting the teams ranked in the 6-11 places at both Qualifying leagues, whereas the top 4-6 teams of the AA league will join the AAA league and vice versa each and every year.

From Farn league's, the 2-5 ranked teams are:

Peter N.: 68
Macabee Tel-Aviv: 67.5
Donkey Hunters: 63
Da Bombers: 62
Dilligad: 61 (close runner-up)

KnicksFan
Donor
ID: 30815418
Wed, Apr 28, 2004, 03:44

I like that idea, smartone.

The 2-5 in Stuck's league are:

bmd 69.5
Tosh 65
KnicksFan 63.5
skineej 51

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Apr 28, 2004, 11:41

Sounds like a good idea, smartone.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 12:29

I have filled the final spot in the upcoming RIHC:

RecycledSpinalFluid

Although he did not participate in a qualifying league last year, he has a strong track record, he is a Dude-level GuruPatron, and he has consistently provided top-notch software and advice at the Forum. A very worthy addition to the league.

So our 12 managers are now set for the coming season. We will tentatively plan to start the draft on Octover 11, although that date is not yet firm. Meanwhile, we need to settle on any rule changes for the second year. Prior to discussions, please review the retrospective thread from last year. (For a recap of last year's rules, see post 19.)

The most prevalent ideas seemed to be:
1. Expand the bench
2. Add another DL slot

I think these were both getting at the same issue, and we may not want to do both.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 12:34

I like the idea for a AAA qualifying league as proposed in post 2, and hope that someone will step up to organize it. I'd prefer not to have to get involved in the management of that league, but if it is consistuted as proposed, the top finishers in that league would have first dibs on open slots in next year's RIHC.

Non-returning RIHC members include ukula, lionprideguy, rockafellerskank, and philflyboy, and they would presumably be eligible to join that league, along with the top finishers from the two qualifying leagues mentioned above.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 12:45

A few other logistic items:

I see no reason not to continue to use Yahoo as the hosting site. Does anyone object (or have a better idea)?

Also, I propose that we use the On The Clock draft software from Kafenatid.net. We used it very successfully for the recent RIFC draft. I'll work with KKB to get it set up when the time approaches.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 12:52

Wow, that's some impressive software. Never used it, but fine by me. Yahoo is also fine by me. I'll read up on those other threads and get some thoughts together (which is not an easy thing, mind you). ;)

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 09:45

Just to get a proposal on the table, let me suggest the following:

Rules will be the same as last year, except that one additional DL slot will be added. This means we'll have 12 active slots, 3 bench slots, and 2 DL slots.

Yahoo allows any player to go in an DL slot if they are formally placed on the NBA's DL. However, in order to prevent the usage of DL slots to pick up and warehouse players who are already injured when they are added, I suggest we apply the following ground rules:

1. Any player drafted may immediately be placed in a DL slot if they are Yahoo-eligible to be put there.

2. Any DL-eligible player may immediately be placed in a DL slot if they have appeared in an NBA game since the time they were added to the roster.

3. Any other player on the DL may only be placed in a DL slot after they have been on the roster for a minimum for 10 days.

Examples:
1. Someone drafts Jamal Mashburn, who is on the NBA disabled list to open the season. He may be put in a DL slot at the beginning of the season.

2. Someone adds John Doe to his roster on Nov. 11. On Nov. 12, John Doe plays 20 minutes in an NBA game, and then sprains his ankle. He is placed on the NBA DL the following day. He may also be placed in a DL slot at that time.

3. No one drafts Jamal Mashburn, who opens the year on the DL. A manager decides that he thinks Mashburn may be available to play later in the season, and has a DL slot currently available. If he adds Mashburn, he must first leave Mash in one of the 15 non-DL slots (either active or bench) for 10 days before he can be placed in a DL slot.

These guidelines will need to be manually enforced.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 10:00

These would be the Yahoo League settings:

League Name: RotoGuru Inv. Hoops Challenge

Draft Type: Offline Draft

Max Teams: 12

Scoring Type: Rotisserie

Max Moves: No maximum

Max Trades: No maximum

Trade Reject Time: 2

Trade End Date: March 3, 2005

Waiver Time: 2 days

Can't Cut List Provider: None

Trade Review: Commissioner

Post Draft Players: Follow Waiver Rules

Max Games Played: 82

Weekly Deadline: Daily - Tomorrow

Start Scoring on: Tuesday, Nov 2

Roster Positions: G, G, G, G, F, F, F, F, C, C, Util, Util, BN, BN, BN, DL, DL

Stat Categories: FG%, FT%, 3PTM, PTS, REB, AST, ST, BLK

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 10:11

I set the trade review to Commisioner so that we could establish our own guidelines.

I'd suggest that after a trade is announced, managers have 24 hours to register an objection. If at least 3 objections are received (either posted at this forum, or emailed to me), then all managers will be surveyed for a vote. 6 negative votes within the next 24 hours would be required to overturn a trade.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 10:22

Just wondering why the manual DL issues would need to be enforced. If someone tries to warehouse a player on the DL, who then is taken off the real-life NBA DL, the GM cannot make any roster moves until such time as that DL player is taken off DL (and subsequently someone else is dropped). That's a Yahoo thing.

In essence, the GM is locked into their roster when warehousing someone. I've never seen anyone be able to do that for any great length of time. I'll admit I did it in a league last year, but after roughly 10 days I changed it so I could make other roster changes (adds/drops).

I have some other thoughts too, unrelated to DL, that I'll hold for the moment (unless so prompted) so as to keep things consistent.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 10:24

Finally, regarding draft order. The process I have used for the baseball and football leagues worked pretty well, and generates some interesting discussion. We will have a one round draft to pick our draft order.

I will start with the list of teams in the sequence listed in the opening post, and with RecycledSpinalFluid listed 12th. I will then accept 2 sets of the integers 1-12, randomly ordered. The first set will be used to resequence the manager names, and the second set will be used to assign draft order to the resequenced list.

The team with the first pick will get to select its draft order (1-12). Then the next team gets to select, etc. The player draft will snake, so the team drafting first in round 1 will go last in round 2.

In recent leagues, I've allowed myself to have whatever pick is left over in the draft-draft. But this time, I'm going to participate the same as anyone else. (I'm tired of automatically picking near the end of the first round.)

The first two sets of numbers that are emailed to me by league managers will be used. Do not post the numbers here. After I receive then, I'll post the numbers and the order for the draft².

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 10:28

Mike D[12] - The Yahoo rules you cite relate to getting a player out of a DL slot. The rules that I cite relate to putting him there.

I realize that the normal Yahoo restrictions do limit the ability to warehouse disabled players once they have returned to activity. But I simply want to ensure that a team with a vacant DL slot cannot use that extra slot to jump the gun in picking up a disabled player before he returns to activity. If you pick up a disabled player, you must initially use one of the 15 active slots to hold him.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 10:33

If you want to ensure that, that's fine. I certainly don't have a problem with it. Picking up a player already on DL still causes you to drop someone, and is a calculated roster move. Then after placing him on DL you certainly have an open spot again. But it's all part of the strategy, IMHO. No biggee though.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 12:04

Here is a link to an Excel spreadsheet with all listed NBA players on Yahoo as of October 1. Position eligibility is included.

http://rotoguru1.com/hoop/YahooPlayers.xls

RecycledSpinalFluid
Dude
ID: 204401122
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 13:41

Excellent. I was just getting ready to script pulling that. Thanks!

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 15:12

Since there isn't any chatter going on.....

Guru, I'm fine with the league settings. If indeed anything is open for discussion though, I like the idea of the specific positions better because it is another thing to consider and analyze, it can affect player value depending on eligibility, and it opens up player movement between teams and via free agency.

I also like to push the trade date back 2 more weeks to 3/17 because trading is fun (lol) and the deadline inevitably comes up quickly. The post-trading period is never as fun because the possibility of a deal, and the discussions back and forth, are gone. It's all intra-squad or working the free agents/waivers at that point.

I also like to increase the number of games per position slightly (90). Regarding the number of games, players are more likely to be locked in with 82 games than with 90 games. With 90 games, you can plug people in, move them around, etc, with a little more freedom. I find it more fun than locking and watching.

Swish City
Dude
ID: 0931275
Fri, Oct 01, 2004, 20:10

First of all, im all for a another DL slot. Another bench slot would drain the FA list too much, but another DL slot with the monitored restrictions sounds good. Especially considering the extreme circumstances of pfb's squad last year. That would have helped a lot in retrospect. I think this also helps to compensate a little for the 90 games instead of 82 that Mike D is suggesting.

I'm a big no-no on specific positions. I aired my views here and won't go on about it, but i think that it's important to have some flex with injuries or a change of strategies to meet needs as the season is closing out.

Pushing back the last trade date would be agreeable to me. The period before the last potential trade is frantic and exciting, and i'd want to extend that period to as close to season end as is reasonably possible. I'm not a Yahoo roto expert on this subject though, so if there's a limit on last trade date, thats cool. Mike D - fellow tradeaholic in your midst :)

Again, just expressing views because no one else has. And since the potential draft start date is a mere 10 days away, it can't do any harm.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Oct 02, 2004, 10:49

I just sent out an email with info on registration at kafenatid.net for the draft.

I still need 2 sets of random sequences of the integers 1-12. (from two distinct managers, of course - no collusion, please!)

And please provide feedback on the ideas proposed by Mike D in post 18, specifically:
1. Use of specific positions (i.e., PG & SG rather than simply G)
2. Pushing back the trade deadline (March 3 is simply the Yahoo default, so there is no magic there)
3. Increase the GP limits to 90 per position.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Oct 02, 2004, 11:11

My thoughts on Mike D's ideas:

1. I'm somewhat ambivalent on the specific position issue. I do think it potentially limits strategic flexibility - but perhaps not to a material degree. It may engender a greater need for trading, if a specific position need cannot be effectively filled via free agency. But it might also restrict trading, if it reduces the ability of specific players to fill generic needs.

2. Deferring the trade deadline to March 17 seems OK to me.

3. Increasing to 90 GP per position certainly increases the need for roster manipulation, but I thought that was already important last year, with only 82 games per position. With the inevitable injury shortages that every team will have, effectively using up all 82 GP per position can be a challenge.

An increase to 90 means you would need to have 13.2 players active for a full 82 games. Last year, though, the top 144 players averaged about 72 GP. So, to consume 90 GP per position, you would to fully use all 15 slots. (15 x 72=1080, and 1080/12=90). On that basis, I don't think our rosters are large enough to support a 90 GP limit. Or, perhaps the point is that 90 games would be almost tantamount to no limit, and could even more severely punish teams with above average injury problems..

Again, assuming that players average about 72 GP per season, the current rule effectively requires us to have 13.7 players fully active throughout the season to reach the current limit of 82 games. That already seems to require fairly active usage of bench players.

If a larger limit is desired, I'd suggest it be no greater than 84-85. A limit of 84 would require 14 players to each contribute an average of 72 games.

Rand
Donor
ID: 083231216
Sat, Oct 02, 2004, 16:57

I kinda like the idea of having some specific positions filled, maybe we could set it up like...

PG, SG, G, G
PF, SF, F, F
C, C, UTIL, UTIL
BN, BN, BN, DL, DL,

There is still a lot of flexibility there.

I'm for a later trade deadline fer sure.

The game limits seemed to work pretty fine last year, but I wouldn't be totally against adding a couple more.

I just wanted to say hail and well met to Mike D, Slackjawed Yokel, APerfect 10, and RSF,
and also a welcome back to all the great returning managers from last season. Good Luck!

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sat, Oct 02, 2004, 17:22

Would Rand's suggested position configuration accomplish anything? I suspect just about any lineup of 4 Guards would typically have at least 1 PG and 1 SG.

It would impose a separate GP limit on each of the position slots, however. Instead of having a 4x82 limit on guards, you would have an 82 game limit on each or PG and SG and a 164 game limit on the generic G slots.

I'm not suggesting that this is good or bad - but I want to make sure everyone understands the game limit implications of this type of change.

Mike D: Were you contemplating a roster requirement of PG,PG,SG,SG,SF,SF,PF,PF,C,C,U,U - or something more flexible?

Guru
ID: 330592710
Sun, Oct 03, 2004, 17:57

I finally got 2 sets of random numbers.
blackjackis21 submitted 4 3 12 10 5 8 6 1 2 9 7 11
Dave R submitted 9 5 2 6 12 1 10 7 11 8 4 3

So, starting with the teams sequenced as in post 1 (adding RSF to the bottom), I used the first set to reorder the names, and the second set to assign draft order. Here is the resulting order:

1 Coldwater Coyotes
2 Doug
3 Swish/Edgar
4 RSF
5 Slackjawed Yokel
6 Dave R
7 blackjackis21
8 Rand
9 Mike D
10 Guru
11 APerfect10
12 HoopsKlyce

This does not mean that Coldwater Coyotes has the 1st pick in the player draft. This means that CC gets to decide what pick number he wants. (Didn't he have the first pick last year?) Then Doug gets to choose his draft position, etc. Hoopsklyce gets whatever is left over.

We can begin the draft order draft (a.k.a. draft² ) immediately. Coldwater, your decision.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 09:08

Now that I'm at work and have access again......

My ideal configuration is tailored toward:

PG, SG, G, SF, PF, F, C, C, Util, Util, Util, BN, BN, BN, DL, DL

That's actually copied from the settings of our Elimination Chamber league. We added the 3rd UTIL spot last year as a way to get more bench players in action. And the 2nd DL spot is being added this year.

I've also played with the settings proposed for this league----obviously in last year's Qualifier League, and others in years prior. It just seemed kinda easy top manage internally. Not that it's bad to have it that way. I just like another area to have to think about, as I mentioned earlier. Waiting for positional updates is almost wiped out in the current format, with the exception being the standard G-F or F-C. In sports like baseball I don't like the specific positions (LF? RF? Nah!), but in Hoops, different positions usually equal different stat bases, which affects planning, results, etc..

For instance----generally speaking----PGs will get more assists than SGs. But if you have a PG/SG player, you can plus him in at SG (or at G) and have an advantage in assists, whereas someone else runs with one pure assist man. As standings change throughout the year, adjustments (i.e. trades) become necessary. Not that this doesn't happen in the proposed format. Maybe it's crazy to want to worry about whether KG can play both forward positions or not.....I remember when he was only listed at SF and it drove me nuts, because he performed more like a PF, and cost me my SF slot........Also, when limiting by specific position, the importance of players can change. Some positions are simply not as deep.

All good discussion. I'm just happy that the proposed format is so solid and that no one appears to have strong opposition to any of it (including me).

coldwater coyotes
ID: 14523714
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 17:02

Is the draft order on a snake basis?

Doug
ID: 57352917
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 17:03

I dislike the detailed-position-specific requirements (PG, SG, SF, PF) and prefer the more general G and F requirements we used last year. It's not a huge deal, just something I find limits strategery a bit in this format. Not a huge deal, just my .02

Deferring the trade deadline is fine with me... either way works.

I'm always a proponent of depth, so I'm for adding the DL slot as well as increasing GPs a slight amount (such as to 90)... let's put those bench players to work! =-)

I just got back from a 3 week trip so I'm just getting into the swing of things again... forgive me if I'm a bit delayed in responsiveness as I'm obviously swamped at work, etc. in light of my recent absence. I need to find time to do my player rankings soon, but I'll manage. =-) Looking forward to another year! I'll keep checking in to see when CC picks his draft slot (I assume we're handling that part of it via message board, then the actual draft via the application?)

Doug
ID: 57352917
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 17:04

I'm 99% sure it's same as last year... snake every round. Wouldn't be fair otherwise.

coldwater coyotes
ID: 14523714
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 17:04

Ignore...it is covered above.

Doug
ID: 57352917
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 17:05

BTW, I don't think we need to add BOTH a util slot AND increase the GPs per position... I think one or the other would suffice.

coldwater coyotes
ID: 14523714
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 17:12

I an honored to accept the first pick.

Doug
ID: 57352917
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 18:49

And I shall pick quite happily at #2.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 20:59

We know that last year's rules worked pretty well, so if we change, let's move incrementally. I'll put the following two choices up for a vote.

1. Roster configuration:
a. 4G, 4F, 2C, 2U, 3 bench, 2 DL (same as last year, but with one extra D
b. 2 of the guard spots are restricted to PG and SG, and 2 of the forward sports are restricted to PF and SF (as proposed by Rand in [22])

2. Games played limit:
a. 82 games per active slot
b. 84 games per active slot

Remember that Yahoo aggregates positions for game limit purposes. Therefore, if we use option A for roster configuration, all 4 guard slots are aggregated for purposes of the game limit. If we have separate PG and SG slots, those are individually limited.

There seems to be no objection to pushing back the trade deadline, so I won't bother voting on that.

Dave R
ID: 99518
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 21:07

I didn't get a chance to chime in but I'll vote as follows:

1) Roster Configuration: A ( same as last year )

2) Maximum games: 84

Doug
Sustainer
ID: 2730280
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 01:01

1-A
2-B

blackjackis21
Leader
ID: 34837521
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 01:15

1-B
2-B

Swish City
Dude
ID: 0931275
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 07:33

1-A
2-B

Edgar
Leader
ID: 00458944
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 07:48

1a2b

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 08:40

1-B
2-B

Tough call for me on 1 since it differs slightly from what I proposed and therefore confuses me thoroughly (lol).

Rand
Donor
ID: 083231216
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 09:57

1-B
2-B

I did find last season's generic G and F slots easy to manage, but I think it could be more interesting and challenging to have to meet positional requirements. But, as always, I'm malleable.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 10:06

Swish/Edgar - you guys need to select your draft position. See post 24.

So far, CC is picking first, and Doug second. You can choose to select anywhere 3rd-12th.

Swish City
Dude
ID: 0931275
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 12:19

Edgar and I shall have pick #9 (that is #9, not a typo)

Rand, you're up next...

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 12:20

Hey, I was all set for that spot. ;)

Swish City
Dude
ID: 0931275
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 12:25

So sorry, not Rand next, its RSF. Looking at the wrong post.

Yeah Mike, only another 5 picks like that and you get #3 ;)

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 12:25

Should I hold my breath? (Don't answer!)

RecycledSpinalFluid
Dude
ID: 204401122
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 12:30

1-B
2-A

Pick 6

And Slackjawed Yokel is on the clock.

coldwater coyotes
ID: 535441512
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 13:58

1.B
2.B

Slackjawed Yokel
Leader
ID: 052347519
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 22:22

sorry for the delay. I'll pick 3rd.

1-b
2-b

Dave R is next

Dave R
Dude
ID: 3010361110
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 23:18

What the heck, I'll pick 4th

Guru
ID: 330592710
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 23:22

blackjackis21 is up.

Picks 1-4, 6, and 9 have been taken.
Picks 5, 7, 8, 10-12 are available.

blackjackis21
Leader
ID: 34837521
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 23:32

5 for me.

Doug
Sustainer
ID: 2730280
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 00:06

1 Coldwater Coyotes
2 Doug
3 Slackjawed Yokel
4 Dave R
5 blackjackis21
6 RSF
7
8
9 Swish/Edgar
10
11
12

Current choice: Rand
On deck: Mike D
Followed by: Guru, APerfect10, and HoopsKlyce

Doug
Sustainer
ID: 2730280
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 08:08

By my count I get the following... I'm not certain whether Swish/Edgar get 1 vote or two, so I put their second vote in parens...

1A - 3 (+1?)
1B - 5

2A - 1
2B - 7 (+1?)

Still to vote: Guru, APerfect10, HoopsKlyce

Looks like we're moving to an 84 game limit (2B) regardless of those final 3 votes, though question #1 remains in the balance.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 08:28

Thought I was up, have deleted my post after realizing I'm only on deck. This lack of evening access has me befuddled.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 08:30

Doug, you still need to sign up for the draft at kafenatid.net. Everyone else has done so. I sent you the particulars last week. Let me know if you need them again.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 08:35

Swish & Edgar get only one vote.

Currently the vote tallies are:
1. A-3, B-6
2. A-1, B-8

We'll be using an 84 game limit. The position issue is still up in the air. I have yet to vote, but I'd like to hear first from AP10 and HoopsKlyce.

Dave R
Dude
ID: 3010361110
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 08:38

Hey Mike D, I thought you were befuddled to begin with :)

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 08:54

Regarding draft timing.

1. When should we start? Last month, I said that we would not start before Oct 11th. Do you want to begin then, or should we wait?

Based on past Invitational leagues, we should be able to complete an average of about one round per day, maybe slightly better. With 15 rounds to draft, we shouldn't require more than 2 weeks, as long as everyone is diligent. The regular season starts 3 weeks from next Tuesday.

I doubt that we will learn much between the beginning and end of next week, but if you need more time to prepare, I'd be willing to wait until later in the week to begin. Or should we simply get started on Monday. Any requests?

Also, we need to establish some time limits. The draft software allows me to set a time limit per pick, with the possibility of a night time moratorium (i.e., the clock is suspended during the moratorium, but picks may still be made). To start, I propose we set an 8 hour time limit, with a moratorium from midnight-7am eastern time.

I realize that we span 3 time zones in the US, and we also have a European team which is 5 hours ahead of us, so the moratorium timing is not sensible for everyone. However, with an 8 hour limit, as long as people check at the end of their day or first thing in the morning, no one should be in trouble. Also, the software allows you to submit a queue to me or to anyone else in the league. If you make use of that feature (selecting someone to pick for you who is not positioned to take advantage of your queue), we can keep it moving along as well.

Sound like a plan? If we don't average a round per day, I'll have to shorten the time frames, of course.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 09:15

Totally flexible on it Guru. Haven't researched or prepared much yet, but oftentimes my first draft forces that, and sometimes it is concurrent with the draft itself. Whenever we start, most of us will be in the same boat, I would think.

Oh, and bullseye Dave.

Dave R
Dude
ID: 3010361110
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 09:16

Either is fine with me, I can't imagine that waiting will have much if any impact on the first few rounds at least.

If you wanted to start the draft as planned on Monday but not impose a time limit until later that might work also. I would guess the first few rounds would move along smoothly anyway

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 09:19

I'm sure that the first few rounds are unlikely to be influenced by any preseason results, other than injuries.

Rand
Donor
ID: 083231216
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 09:34

I'll take 7.

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 09:58

I'll take # 8.

APerfect10
ID: 369168
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:01

1. b
2. a

Edgar
Leader
ID: 00458944
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:33

Mike D, we were expecting a trade proposal from you already! Or do you need some start up time? (ie like a coffee in the mourning).

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:41

I had an offer drawn up to offer you my # 8 draft choice, in exchange for your # 9, but felt it wasn't in my best interest. I figured by now you were regretting your # 9 selection, and wishing you had chosen # 8, making you a prime trading partner. ;)

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:43

I'll pick #11.

AP10, you can pick either 10th or 12th, and HoopsKlyce gets whatever is left over.

Edgar
Leader
ID: 00458944
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:47

Mike, Swish and me figured that KG will drop to 9th. So please do not take him at no. 8. Else we will probably still be in time to land Boumtje Boumtje in 9th. That would outsmart Guru who would have probably expected to land Ruben BB at no. 11.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:47

BTW, we now have a 3-7 vote for question #1, so we will use the following position configuration:
PG, SG, G, G
PF, SF, F, F
C, C
U, U
3 bench
2 DL

Each position will be limited to 84 games per slot. Therefore, each of the PG, PF, SG, and SF slots will have an 84 game limit. Each of the other positions will have an aggregate limit of 168 games for the 2 combined slots at those positions.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:52

For purposes of the draft software, we'll simply specify G, F, or C. You can work out the specific position issues once the rosters are loaded into Yahoo. If a player is listed at more than one position (such as FC), simply pick the one that you think you will be most likely to use.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 10:53

[actually, I was expecting Ruben B-B to slide until my second round pick at #14]

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 11:18

I had heard that these leagues were high-level, and to prepare that way. ;)

APerfect10
ID: 369168
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 11:43

I'll pick 10th...

Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 12:33

Here is our draft order. Even numbered rounds go in reverse.

1 Coldwater Coyotes
2 Doug
3 Slackjawed Yokel
4 Dave R
5 blackjackis21
6 RSF
7 Rand
8 Mike D
9 Swish/Edgar
10 APerfect10
11 Guru
12 HoopsKlyce

Swish City
Dude
ID: 0931275
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 13:25

Edgar, quit giving away our strategy! How many times have i told you? Now everyone knows about our main man RBB ;)

Monday still sounds good to me, we should be able to skate through a few rounds at least without any preseason numbers. Don't mind though, whatever the bretheren decide is fine with me.

On the draft clock, 8 hours sounds fine to me. The moratorium Guru suggests expires at 12:00 for me and 13:00 (if i have my zones right) for Edgar which gives us some time in the morning to compensate for say a bunch of picks being made whilst we're asleep. Edgar, i assume this is fair enough with you also?

hoopsklyce
Leader
ID: 59923214
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 14:15

1 A
2 B

blackjackis21
Leader
ID: 034837521
Wed, Oct 06, 2004, 14:18

I believe there was only one of us who actually ended the season last year with RBB on his roster - too bad this isn't a keeper league.

Eugene
ID: 48792812
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 00:27

Guru i need to e mail you Whats your address

Edgar
ID: 1792634
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 03:52

Swish the draft thing is fine with me. No problem there.

BJ as I remember the pick of RRB proved to be an excellent strategy with Ruben completely exploding in the last game!

BTW the email of guru is: davehall@rotoguru2.com

Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 14:50

Here's the plan.

I will activate the draft software late Sunday or early Monday. The draft can begin as soon as it's activated, and I will post a notice here.

The first round of the draft will not be timed. This will ensure that everyone is fully equipped and on board before we start the clock for round two. After that, the guidelines I posted above [post 60] will apply.

Once the draft begins, I'll start a new thread for draft messages. You can use it to alert others about your schedule, to request volunteers to accept a queue, to raise questions about draft rules or mechanics, to announce trades, etc. Please refrain from mentioning the names of any NBA players until after they have been picked.

I will post a link in the draft thread which brings up a draft summary page. League managers will also be able to see this info directly at the kafenatid.net site, but it will allow outsiders to view the draft in progress as well. Here is a sample link from the RIFC (football) draft.

Dave R
Dude
ID: 3010361110
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 16:39

Sounds good by me.

Let the fun begin!

Swish City
Dude
ID: 0931275
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 17:15

Look at Dave R, he's just pumped about getting his hands on RBB. Get used to it BJ, we picked beside him last year and i think he pinched the player we wanted every 2nd round. So i would say your chances of nabbing RBB in round 1 are pretty much gone ;) OT: Could RBB not have a stellar wrestling career with initials like that?

blackjackis21
Leader
ID: 34837521
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 19:52

At least I get the pleasure of taking Uwe Blob right from under his nose in the second...

Doug
ID: 422281412
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 12:47

I'd like to move up a few picks in the second round from 2.11 in exchange for moving down a few picks in the third from 3.2 (i.e., swap our second and third round picks). Let me know if you'd be interested in a swap. I might even be willing to add a swap for you in an odd numbered round later on in the draft, but it really depends on the specific draft slot you have.

hoopsklyce
ID: 579471010
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 12:48

Regarding the time limit for picks, 8 hours seems kind of tight for me. I would prefer 10 hours as a min or 12 as I think we used last year. It is my preference to not have to email my picks to a competing manager if I anticipate being asleep or away when my pick comes up. What I might do is email to a friend of mine who I know will be available.

If the league does decide on 8 hours I would ask that as the manager who always has two consecutive picks, to have 8 hours for the first pick and then 4 hours for the second before it moves on. I am more vulnerable to that rule for moving on.

David

hoopsklyce
ID: 579471010
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 12:49

I just re-read that Guru indicated a moratorium from midnight-7 am. I can live with the 8 hr rule then with that!

hoopsklyce
ID: 45940114
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 06:40

anybody know where to find preseason game box scores?

Edgar
Leader
ID: 00458944
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 07:53

ESPN has them available.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 10:37

Unfortunately, when I activated the draft software this morning, it went haywire. I had set it up for no time limit for the initial round, but as soon as I started it, picks became "due" immidiately, and the software failed to even stop at the end of 15 rounds. By the time I was able to figure out what was happening and how to stop it, 368 rounds had passed, and unfortunately, you now have 368 email alerts to access and delete.

Sorry about that. I don't think I set up anything improperly. Sounds like a system bug. KKB added a few timing features since the last time I used it, and evidently, something was not fully debugged, and it went on a rampage.

I'm confident he'll get it fixed and we can still use the software, which many of us have used successfully before. Meanwhile, we are officially on pause.

I just wanted you to know that, once you've cleared out 368 emails from kafenatid.net, they should stop coming!

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 10:38

Wow, I can't wait to get home and see those!

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 10:41

Both ESPN and NBA.com generally carry preseason boxscores. However, there will most likely be some games that are AWOL, particularly those played at non-NBA venues.

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 10:44

re: the emails

If you have a web-based program to access your email, I'd suggest you use it to flush them. Perhaps you can avoid downloading 368 emails that way.

If not, at least they are all short emails!

Doug
ID: 57352917
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 13:19

Re: post #86... I've heard no response... I suppose it's worth mentioning that I could even consider swapping first round picks (I have #2) in the right scenario...

coldwater coyotes
SuperDude
ID: 229272412
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 13:29

Should I be making the first pick?

hoopsklyce
Leader
ID: 59923214
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 13:35

guru

I guess you can ignore that email i just sent saying wassup? Now I see why I had so many emails

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 13:53

I just got an email from KKB that he has found the problem and should have it fixed shortly. At that point, I will restart the draft - for round 1, hopefully!

Mike D
Sustainer
ID: 41831612
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 14:48

Doug, I came very close to making an offer in line with your initial post (86). I have #8 (and thus 17, 32, etc). Ultimately it didn't seem like it was too worth it for me, so I backed off.

100

hoopsklyce
Leader
ID: 59923214
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 15:09

any thoughts on letting me have 8 hrs for my first pick and then 4 for the second before moving on during the draft - I will always pick back to back.
David

101

hoopsklyce
Leader
ID: 59923214
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 15:11

note that I would plan on making both picks at the same time - I would anticipate that I would always be within 8 hrs but want to hvae some safety against having two picks bypassed

102

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 15:16

I thought you said that wasn't necessary [post 88], given the overnight moratorium. I don't see why extra time should be needed? The purpose of the time limit is to give you a chance to recognize that it is your turn, not to give you 8 hours to think about each pick.

Having said that, since I'm the one who picks after you, I'll try to make sure that you have ample chance to get your picks in before I jump the gun. From my past dealings with you, I suspect this would never become an issue anyway. You always seem to be reasonably alert.

103

Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 15:18

Let's put further draft discussion in the draft thread, so that we don't end up with separate conversations going in 2 different threads.

104

blackjackis21
Leader
ID: 034837521
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 15:20

It doesn't matter to me how long we have between picks (assuming we can finish the draft, of course) as long as we have some idea of when people aren't going to be avail. for extended periods of time. Just to avoid checking in unnecessarily.

Forum: hoopPage 10625Subject: RIHC Season #2 - 2004/05

Forum: hoop
Page 10625
Subject: RIHC Season #2 - 2004/05