|
Post by Generals GM (Pete) on Aug 17, 2014 10:00:48 GMT -5
just curious, how is the order for the first year player draft determined? I looked in the rules section and it doesn't state, only that it is for 5 rounds. Thanks Pete
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2014 10:06:17 GMT -5
Pretty sure it's inverse order of the league final finish -- league winner picking last.
|
|
|
Post by mlbpa on Aug 17, 2014 10:49:16 GMT -5
For the 22 teams that dont make playoffs, it will be inverse order of combined standing. The 8 playoff teams will then be seeded based upon winners/losers and season points
|
|
|
Post by Generals GM (Pete) on Aug 17, 2014 11:44:11 GMT -5
so is there any penalty for teams that sit players in order to drop in the standings to improve their draft picks? Was poking around in Fantrax, and maybe it is just sloppy managing, but it seems some teams are benching stars and the pessimist in me wonders why. Just asking.
|
|
|
Post by Rawhide GM (Jimmy-LM) on Aug 17, 2014 12:14:05 GMT -5
if its intentional, there will be a discussion between the TRP what kind of penalty will take place. If people are starting to bench players now, its probably too little to late as the mass amount of stats accumulated by now should prevent any major slides in the order. It will be something that I will check over the next week, and I will look back and see if teams aren't managing themselves properly.
That said, there are a few ownerless teams that probably have not seen a roster change in a while. This is a tough time of the year to fill these types of leagues so I may wait til October to do so.
|
|
|
Post by PawSox (GazW) on Aug 18, 2014 7:31:21 GMT -5
Apologies, I was one of these. Not really been checking fantrax much since the trade deadline. Corrected it now.
|
|
|
Post by BlueSox GM(Matt P) on Aug 18, 2014 14:39:27 GMT -5
Outside of releasing viable players to clear cap space for prospects, I believe my roster has been set properly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2014 10:11:50 GMT -5
While I agree that teams sitting real producers should be looked at and in some cases punished, at the same time the tanking is just as "intentional" when teams sell off all their productive players and have nothing for some or all of their slots (not that I disagree with that, I'd do the same thing in their position!). So at some level, it could make more sense to just have some sort of lotto system rather than what is in effect punishment for not selling. It would be nice if the "worst" teams got the best picks, but as it is a lot of times the teams getting the high picks wont actually be the worst ones, just the ones smart enough to sell off (which might make those teams pretty valuable in many cases, some of the teams at the "bottom" now have top15 or better in the league future value), so its not like the teams needing the most help will always get the best picks as is. Plus it would save trying to enforce roster decisions.
|
|
|
Post by Generals GM (Pete) on Aug 20, 2014 7:48:04 GMT -5
I had argued the same point in another league that some of us are probably in, but I am new here, so I am fine with the reverse standings. I wasnt trying to cause a problem, just asking because I saw one team had several top line SPs on the bench with open starting roster spots. I would like to assume it was just an oversight, but I am a pessimist at heart.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2014 8:07:24 GMT -5
The two approaches are completely different.
** Trading away high-salary players or releasing them and absorbing the penalty hit is a means to acquire future talent -- a viable, long-term strategy. The club is actually trying improve, even if the approach may backfire.
** Sitting active players (pitchers or position players) who would likely contribute to move up in the draft order is tanking.
Tanking is a serious issue and effects the entire league. All GMs (most?) carefully watch who is participating and who is not, pay attention to rosters are manipulated. Admittedly, tanking can be a touchy area, but carefully monitoring teams should reveal who is looking long-term and who is tanking for profit.
A tanking penalty should be in place here -- something like loss of pick or even loss of multiple picks would work. We have that option in other leagues -- and use it. We had one GM who ran out A-Rod as a starter at 3B every day and had long retired players in his rotation, even had a guy who quit baseball to join the priesthood, as a way to ensure he would finish last. We pulled his Rd #1 and Rd #2 picks after repeatedly cautioning him. The penalty was imposed even though there was no rule in place when the season started. We added the rule during the season and warned him that he would be in jeopardy if his tanking continued.
A team in 5th should be trying to get to 4th; a team in 18th should always be trying to get improve to at least 17th. Etc. Otherwise the league lacks viability. It's called integrity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2014 8:24:47 GMT -5
I was just throwing something out there. Even if one seems more wrong, both are ways of moving up the draft order so the practical effect is the same, if you don't have major leaguers for a position then that has the same effect as sitting a guy. But probably more importantly, in reverse standings, the most needy teams aren't really getting the best picks most of the time. Because the teams that sell off the most are the often times the ones hoarding the most talent, they're just minor leaguers. So if we're trying to allocate picks to the teams that need them most, reverse standings doesn't really do that particularly well. And its also very gameable in the sense that teams can sell off or sit guys. In that sense, some sort of lotto system for teams out of the playoffs would probably allocate picks just as well, without the game ability, and perhaps encourage teams to stay in it longer before they selloff to boot. Thats all. I'm not arguing that teams should be able to sit active guys or whatever, under the current rules, they shouldn't. Or that there isn't a difference in intent between selling off and sitting guys, just that the practical effect of not having a guy for a position because you sold him is the same as sitting a guy, even if there is a difference in intent the end result is the same. Its a shame to have to go through all the policing for an allocation system that doesn't really give picks the needy teams all that well anyway.
So I just think using reverse standings creates a lot of these problems without a lot of benefits. And that last bit is prob the most impt, it doesn't really allocate picks well anyway. Presumably you do it so the most needy teams get the best picks. But that works better in real life where teams can't completely sell-off and still field their best rosters generally because they still have paying customers. While even then its still not perfect in real life, the most needy teams get the best picks much more often than they do in fantasy. In fantasy, outside of excluding the playoff teams from the top picks, reverse standings in a deep dynasty like this ends up being more about who games the system for the picks by selling off all their major leaguers for milb talent than about actually helping the least talented teams.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2014 8:31:09 GMT -5
"Game-ing" the system is what leagues are all about -- we play a game and try to win it, using strategy, and we do so within a framework of league rules.
Tanking is more akin to cheating, circumventing or ignoring the rules.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2014 8:41:33 GMT -5
i understand, and agree, under the current system there is a right way and a wrong way to game the system. i'm just saying that the system gets gamed so much already that there's not much benefit to our allocation process as is and that a lotto would be better and avoid these issues altogether.
|
|
|
Post by Javelinas GM (Scott) on Aug 20, 2014 11:11:05 GMT -5
One potential option would be to have a consolation playoffs. The 22 teams not making the playoffs could continue in roto style for the duration of the playoffs and make draft order based on order of finish for just this playoff period.
Would have the added benefit of completely eliminating any advantage to tanking. Also keeps the competive spirit and engagement of league going. It would force teams to more carefully examine whether to sell off and to what extent. It may also keep more teams like Rattlers and Marlins engaged in the trade deadline and waiver wire as they may want to try and pick up some cheap but useful pieces to improve how they do in the consolations playoff. If they have such a loaded minors that they dot want to sell some back end pieces for useful major leaguers then they probably weren't the teams that really needed the prospect draftees.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 7:30:24 GMT -5
Just a question, but why would I want to sell a potentially useful developmental piece that may be useful when my team is viable for a crappy mlb piece when it isn't?
Seems beyond retarded from a strategic standpoint. And by "seems" I mean it would be completely stupid and a waste of resources.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 9:08:24 GMT -5
Just read all you opinions and I think most of you are over reacting. First of all Lottery is a horrible idea. So team like Javelinas or Sand Gnats wins a Lotto and team like Timber gets the 20th pick. How F up will that be. Everyone will be crying that Lott is rigged and a team like Timber will get screwed big time. Even if you take bottom 5 teams and throw them in the Lotto, teams that are are in 6th, 7th ot 8th worst records will do everything it can to drop to bottom 5. This is a 30 team league and one player will not make a huge difference for drafts winners or top picks. This is not NFL or NBA dynasty where one player can make or break your team. If team forgot to set their line up few times a year that does not mean it should be punished. Its a different story if someone does not play their stars for a long periods. So what of someone decided to bench their top pitcher for few weeks because of a bad match up or that player is in a slump? How you going to police that? Listen when I stared my fire sale I was in 5th place in my division. I never did a league like this. But I realized back then that I have no chance to make the playoffs or compete in the future because of a roster I had and salary problems for 2015 and beyond. So I decided to start over. Why should a manager like me should get punished with a draft pick when I already suffered enough by not enjoying the season. In my dynasty football I did that for 2 years and now I have a very good team. Everyone builds their team differently and I don't think its right to tell others how to play. Yes I agree tanking by sitting your stars is not good for the league but rebuilding and selling your players for a better future its not a crime. I would change few things in this league to make it better. 1. Move back Trade deadline to July since our playoffs start at the end of Aug 2. Make harsher penalties for dropping a player with a high salary. (For Example: 100% cap hit 1st year, 80% 2nd year, 60% 3rd year) so that way in free agent Auction managers will think twice when over bidding for a player. 3. You can't have top 3 pick 2 years in a row 4. Top 3 teams from each division standings make the playoffs and 1 wild card from each league make the playoffs from overall standings. I don't understand why we have divisional standings in the main fantrax page if they don't mean anything. 5. Add more playoff teams so more teams will be in it and won't sell their players at the trade deadline. We can add 5th team like in baseball and have a 3 day wild card game or have 7 teams and #1 team gets a bye. 6. TRP or LM's will issue warnings to managers if they think some are tanking on purpose or not setting their line ups. So if a team gets 3 warnings then it drops in a draft order one spot and so on and on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 11:10:20 GMT -5
Just on clarification, I dont think anyone's proposing this happen for the upcoming season as its too late to make that sort of change, just future seasons.
As for some other teams getting the picks over whoever the future seasons marlins or rattlers are, I'd be totally fine with that. Imo, marlins and rattlers are two of the best placed and most valuable teams for the future, they are good examples of why a lotto would be better, not why it would be unfair, quite the opposite really. If we wanted to allocate the top picks for teams that need each would be the way down the list. Those two teams are pretty stacked. Just because a team has a poor record doesnt mean they are a crap team at all, often times quite the opposite. Fantasy is much different than real life that way. The current way is so far off allocating to the least talented teams, I dont see a lotto doing a worse job, and itd prob be better since at least its not so gameable.
|
|
|
Post by Javelinas GM (Scott) on Aug 21, 2014 12:25:27 GMT -5
Just a question, but why would I want to sell a potentially useful developmental piece that may be useful when my team is viable for a crappy mlb piece when it isn't? Seems beyond retarded from a strategic standpoint. And by "seems" I mean it would be completely stupid and a waste of resources. One of my pet peeves is when people, during a civil discussion, either lack the intellect required to debate or further the discussion OR are just simply too lazy to properly lay out reasoning for why or why not. Rebuttal: 1) As Tim points out, nobody would be advocating change occur this year. 2) Please explain how you plan to start 55 players on 18 positions. 3) No one would require you to trade your "useful development piece". The decision would be yours and yours alone. If drafting 21st and keeping your prospects is a better strategy than keeping enough useful ML to compete in the consolation playoffs and get a better draft pick, then by all means. Some feel not having a complete roster is tanking. I offered one possible solution. Many leagues have a minimum requirement of 18 active ML players just for this very reason. Personally, I'm not opposed to keeping things the way they are. I'd just prefer discussions be more thoughtful.
|
|
|
Post by Generals GM (Pete) on Aug 21, 2014 13:48:44 GMT -5
Again, didnt mean to stir the pot. This subject was debated heavily in another league, Gopher Ball, and the decision was made not to change to reverse standings. That league is different in that there is no draft, you are just tied to your real life team and can take as many draft players each year as you like. Not advocating going that way at all.
I personally dont like the order tied to reverse standings because as mentioned it rewards teams for either tanking (which is hard to police) or taking a rebuilding approach. Rebuidling or stacking your team with minors is fine and a great strategy, but why should that reward you with a higher draft pick then some who is playing to win. It is not that you dont have the capacity to try to win, because you could trade for major leaguers and compete, it is that you have made it your choice.
This is not real life with ticket sales or a money league where you are penalized. A lot of dynasty players just like to focus on minor leaguers, again, great strategy but why should you get a higher pick?
Not sure of the best suggestion, but what about just a snake draft? And if it were me, I would have the first round, first pick, start with the first place team and go down from there. Since this is not a money league, why not reward the winners? And by snaking it through an even number of rounds it evens out in theory.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2014 13:52:27 GMT -5
For sure, we aren't trying to build the worse possible team. heh heh
Quite the opposite, we are building the best team we can through wise trade and judicious FA spending, while hoping simultaneously to get the best draft pick available whenever we draft (early or late).
Takes more than a draft pick, though, to build a solid team. We would hope three or four years down the road we won't be drafting early picks, unless rules changes include trading picks. heh
Bottom lone, we are in favor of keeping things as they are currently, as it is easier to plan this way than relying on a lottery system to determine the pick order.
And, for certain, rewarding the winners with the first picks is probably the last way to make the league solid. Bottom teams would be more or less doomed to perpetual second division. If you are looking for a balanced league, pretty much best way is to support the bottom dwellers ability to improve.
|
|