New draft system that prevents tanking (1 Viewer)

[ffguru56]

My dynasty league right now is set up so that the pre-playoff standings determine your draft order for the following year, which is common. The last place team will have the first overall pick and the first pick in each subsequent round.

But you can't tell me that a team that has been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, or even is fighting against all odds to be, doesn't shift gears and start thinking about next year's draft and their high pick they'll get. The hope isn't to make the playoffs but to get the first overall pick. Now what makes the problem is whether these teams tank the rest of the year to get it. In clear cut cases, like not having a complete starting lineup or playing Max Hall over Peyton Manning, this isn't a concern because it's obvious and would need to be dealt with. However, what about a team that puts in a questionable lineup. Did they really think their best bet was to go with this lineup in order to win and "take the chance", or is that a smokescreen for putting in a lineup that you can argue in favor for but with full intentions of (hopefully) losing?

Everyone has a different perspective about who the best player is to play and it also depends on your situation. I played Forte over Bowe this past week because I had hoped for one of Forte's 50 points nights to offset the fact I can't play a TE (I have Gates and Finley) and that I was playing the best team in the league, but realistically believed Bowe will have the better night. The chance was there for larger points and I felt I needed that strategy for this week. So sometimes people will play the lesser of two players with good intentions.

How do you solve the problem entirely? Here's what I propose:

1. Team A (best team).......................10th pick

2. Team B.........................................9th pick

3. Team C.........................................8th pick

4. Team D.........................................7th pick

5. Team E..........................................6th pick

6. Team F..........................................5th pick

---non playoff teams below---

7. Team G.........................................1st pick

8. Team H.........................................2nd pick

9. Team I..........................................3rd pick

10. Team J (worst team).......................4th pick

This way it doesn't pay to be the worst team in the league. Team G won't put in a sketchy lineup with aspirations of dropping to the last position to obtain the 1st overall pick. Rather, it will be pushing for playoffs/1st overall. Team J, I, and H will be doing all that's in their power to win so they have a better pick in the draft.

Thoughts?

 

[hadji]

We just have the non-playoff teams play in their own playoff bracket to determine draft order. Each team is forced to strategize and play the season out if they want to get a high draft pick and it keeps it fun for them because their season isn't over. We also have a cash payout for the weekly high score so owners have extra incentive to not only just set their lineups but continuously make moves to put their best team out there on a week-by-week basis.

 

[Light Blue Jesus]

Highly specific to your own league's 10 man roster and 6 playoff team setup. Transfer it to a 12 team, 6 playoff and you have the worst team getting the 6th pick? Often, your worst team is in need of the most help - which could be provided through the power or outcome of the 1.1.

Potential Points in MFL has always been our preferred way.

 

[ffguru56]

Highly specific to your own league's 10 man roster and 6 playoff team setup. Transfer it to a 12 team, 6 playoff and you have the worst team getting the 6th pick? Often, your worst team is in need of the most help - which could be provided through the power or outcome of the 1.1. Potential Points in MFL has always been our preferred way.

I do understand it may not work for all leagues but proposed the idea solely under my conditions. But adapting the idea to fit another system can be done.

 

[Choke]

I play in bigger leagues (14/16) and we have a weighted lottery system. So your picks are not guaranteed as to your finish.

And in all cases... if you finish in the bottom 2, you must be voted upon by the other owners to remain in the league. Which is about 30 minutes of pure ridicule at best, and exiled at worst.

 

[ffguru56]

I play in bigger leagues (14/16) and we have a weighted lottery system. So your picks are not guaranteed as to your finish.And in all cases... if you finish in the bottom 2, you must be voted upon by the other owners to remain in the league. Which is about 30 minutes of pure ridicule at best, and exiled at worst.

How do you determine your weighted lottery system?

 

[Choke]

I play in bigger leagues (14/16) and we have a weighted lottery system. So your picks are not guaranteed as to your finish.And in all cases... if you finish in the bottom 2, you must be voted upon by the other owners to remain in the league. Which is about 30 minutes of pure ridicule at best, and exiled at worst.

How do you determine your weighted lottery system?

1 chip per final standing for the eight teams. So the worst team has 8 chips. 8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1. 36 total chips. We have had the guy with 1 chip even get the first pick. So dumping your team doesnt guarantee better picks.But it does pretty much guarantee that you will have your spot in the league up for discussion and vote.

 

[ffguru56]

I play in bigger leagues (14/16) and we have a weighted lottery system. So your picks are not guaranteed as to your finish.And in all cases... if you finish in the bottom 2, you must be voted upon by the other owners to remain in the league. Which is about 30 minutes of pure ridicule at best, and exiled at worst.

How do you determine your weighted lottery system?

1 chip per final standing for the eight teams. So the worst team has 8 chips. 8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1. 36 total chips. We have had the guy with 1 chip even get the first pick. So dumping your team doesnt guarantee better picks.But it does pretty much guarantee that you will have your spot in the league up for discussion and vote.

Interesting, I like the concept but wouldn't like the best team getting the best pick (if it happens). I would be tempted to only give chips to the non-playoff teams and alter, in some way, how many they get. Good idea though, thanks.

 

[netnalp]

Been doing it the way the OP suggested for 10 years in my 14 team keeper league. I want the league to switch to a loser's playoff during thleague playoffs so the teams out of the $ stay interested and are still active with waivers. Otherwise the teams out of the $ don't look at the site and the $ playoff teams are snagging up waiver guys that might make good keepers for next season.

 

[Choke]

I play in bigger leagues (14/16) and we have a weighted lottery system. So your picks are not guaranteed as to your finish.

And in all cases... if you finish in the bottom 2, you must be voted upon by the other owners to remain in the league. Which is about 30 minutes of pure ridicule at best, and exiled at worst.

How do you determine your weighted lottery system?

1 chip per final standing for the eight teams. So the worst team has 8 chips. 8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1. 36 total chips. We have had the guy with 1 chip even get the first pick. So dumping your team doesnt guarantee better picks.

But it does pretty much guarantee that you will have your spot in the league up for discussion and vote.

Interesting, I like the concept but wouldn't like the best team getting the best pick (if it happens). I would be tempted to only give chips to the non-playoff teams and alter, in some way, how many they get. Good idea though, thanks.

Thats the best non-playoff team. And his chances are 2.7%, each chip is worth that amount. So once every 50 years, according to the odds.*playoff teams get no chips in the lottery.

 

[coachbobbyfinstock]

I play in bigger leagues (14/16) and we have a weighted lottery system. So your picks are not guaranteed as to your finish.

And in all cases... if you finish in the bottom 2, you must be voted upon by the other owners to remain in the league. Which is about 30 minutes of pure ridicule at best, and exiled at worst.

How do you determine your weighted lottery system?

1 chip per final standing for the eight teams. So the worst team has 8 chips. 8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1. 36 total chips. We have had the guy with 1 chip even get the first pick. So dumping your team doesnt guarantee better picks.

But it does pretty much guarantee that you will have your spot in the league up for discussion and vote.

Interesting, I like the concept but wouldn't like the best team getting the best pick (if it happens). I would be tempted to only give chips to the non-playoff teams and alter, in some way, how many they get. Good idea though, thanks.

Thats the best non-playoff team. And his chances are 2.7%, each chip is worth that amount. So once every 50 years, according to the odds.*playoff teams get no chips in the lottery.

In my 12 team 'keeper' league all non-playoff teams go into a lottery. Haven't had a team tank yet.

 

[ponchsox]

Why not just draw names out of a hat?

 

[The_Wolfman]

My 10 team league uses a weighted lottery system, where 7th place (first non-playoff team) gets the most lottery tickets and 10th place gets the least. It's a small difference between 7th and 10th but hopefully enough to keep people interested and competitive.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

This is the easiest problem to fix in all of fantasy football. Simply stop rewarding failure. The better you finish, the better you draft. You can send the champ to the back of the line if you want, but you are rewarded for wins, not losses.

I know it's not a common system but I've played in leagues with it and nobody ever tanks. A couple of extra wins can really improve your draft position. If you lose, yes, you get punished with a worse draft pick-- but it's not so bad that you're doomed. You're not losing a pick or anything. You just draft at the back. Get better and you'll draft in a better spot.

For some reason it's just accepted that we have to reward failure. When you do that, you'll have teams tank. Fantasy football teams don't have merchandise to sell or stadiums to fill or coaches and players fighting for jobs. Real NFL teams have reasons to win games that have everything to do with money and jobs. Fantasy football teams don't have that. I don't think a token pot each week is much of an incentive. It's better than nothing, but just barely.

I play by whatever rules the leagues have, but I wish more would stop rewarding failure and stop encouraging teams to tank, or start providing better incentives to win.

Reward success instead of failure and you'll see more teams trying to be successful. They gain nothing by failing.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Why not just draw names out of a hat?

Then why should a team that's doing poorly bother with trying to win the rest of their games? Why not just abandon the team and focus on better teams in other leagues? It won't hurt your draft position. You could just make sure you start guys who aren't out (do the bare minimum as an owner) and who cares what happens? In that scenario I don't think there's enough incentive to have teams trying to garner a couple extra wins.

 

[Concept Coop]

This is the easiest problem to fix in all of fantasy football. Simply stop rewarding failure. The better you finish, the better you draft. You can send the champ to the back of the line if you want, but you are rewarded for wins, not losses.I know it's not a common system but I've played in leagues with it and nobody ever tanks. A couple of extra wins can really improve your draft position. If you lose, yes, you get punished with a worse draft pick-- but it's not so bad that you're doomed. You're not losing a pick or anything. You just draft at the back. Get better and you'll draft in a better spot. For some reason it's just accepted that we have to reward failure. When you do that, you'll have teams tank. Fantasy football teams don't have merchandise to sell or stadiums to fill or coaches and players fighting for jobs. Real NFL teams have reasons to win games that have everything to do with money and jobs. Fantasy football teams don't have that. I don't think a token pot each week is much of an incentive. It's better than nothing, but just barely. I play by whatever rules the leagues have, but I wish more would stop rewarding failure and stop encouraging teams to tank, or start providing better incentives to win. Reward success instead of failure and you'll see more teams trying to be successful. They gain nothing by failing.

What?So the best team in the league adds Mark Ingram to their roster, while the worst adds a Jake Locker? That is backwards. Could you imagine that in the NFL? The Steelers and Patriors of the world get to add the Suhs and Petersons every year, while the Browns get late 1st round talent?

 

[Spin]

We've never had an issue with tanking. We do a payout each week to high points.

That coupled with the rule that the super bowl champ gets to rename the last place team's name and icon for the next season.

The team that finished last last year, is a die hard NC state fan. His name was changed to Go Tarheels!!! With UNC blue symbol/icon. He said he would have gladly traded the 1.01 pick to be able to not have to look at that for 16 games. Needless-to-say he's in the playoff hunt this year.

It helps that we're all friends, but the name changing for last place seems a pretty big motivator.

 

[footballnerd]

This is the easiest problem to fix in all of fantasy football. Simply stop rewarding failure. The better you finish, the better you draft. You can send the champ to the back of the line if you want, but you are rewarded for wins, not losses.I know it's not a common system but I've played in leagues with it and nobody ever tanks. A couple of extra wins can really improve your draft position. If you lose, yes, you get punished with a worse draft pick-- but it's not so bad that you're doomed. You're not losing a pick or anything. You just draft at the back. Get better and you'll draft in a better spot. For some reason it's just accepted that we have to reward failure. When you do that, you'll have teams tank. Fantasy football teams don't have merchandise to sell or stadiums to fill or coaches and players fighting for jobs. Real NFL teams have reasons to win games that have everything to do with money and jobs. Fantasy football teams don't have that. I don't think a token pot each week is much of an incentive. It's better than nothing, but just barely. I play by whatever rules the leagues have, but I wish more would stop rewarding failure and stop encouraging teams to tank, or start providing better incentives to win. Reward success instead of failure and you'll see more teams trying to be successful. They gain nothing by failing.

I'm interested in the concept for my redraft 1 keeper leagues where most of the players on teams get replaced. A league where the only cash prize is the champion and the season high points scorer, this would reward the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc teams who do not receive any cash prize at all for their hard work. I would make it so the Champion gets next years last pick, and last place would get the 2nd to last place (which would eliminate those tanking for the 1st round/2nd round wrap spot). So in the end the Champion is somewhat rewarded as well. I like this idea.....or maybe combined to decide the number of draft tokens to draw from for each

 

[Instinctive]

In our yearly redraft you get one piece of paper in the hat for each loss over the past 3 years. Then when your name is drawn, you choose your slot.

Now, that's a redraft, but one that's a decade old.

In every dynasty I am in, there's no stupid rules about lotteries and non-playoff losers brackets. Worst team = first pick. Nobody tanks, because they all have integrity. Now that may just be because I play in Zealots and a couple expert leagues, but I can't really believe you have people tanking for draft position...

 

[footballnerd]

I can't really believe you have people tanking for draft position...

Actually, its not so much tanking straight out, but they trading their players away for draft picks. Love having the option to trade draft picks, but sometimes its gets out of hand in these situations. Trying to find a balance.

 

[Instinctive]

I can't really believe you have people tanking for draft position...

Actually, its not so much tanking straight out, but they trading their players away for draft picks. Love having the option to trade draft picks, but sometimes its gets out of hand in these situations. Trying to find a balance.

What's wrong with that? I can't trade LT away for a late first to a contender who needs a flex in order to improve my team?

 

[glock]

One word- "AuctionDraft."

Okay...That's two words, but the point is the same.

Edited to add- 4 keepers for non-playoff teams, 3 for playoff teams, 2 for the runner up and just 1 for the champ.

 

[footballnerd]

What's wrong with that? I can't trade LT away for a late first to a contender who needs a flex in order to improve my team?

Nothing wrong with it, I've done it in the past, but you do have teams just doing fire sales at the end giving away Wayne for a whatever they can get. It gets into this cycle of teams doing firesales to offset the league every year. I don't mind them doing it as long as they aren't just tanking it. The draft reward system mentioned earlier seems like it would bring a balance.

 

[Choke]

I can't really believe you have people tanking for draft position...

Actually, its not so much tanking straight out, but they trading their players away for draft picks. Love having the option to trade draft picks, but sometimes its gets out of hand in these situations. Trying to find a balance.

What's wrong with that? I can't trade LT away for a late first to a contender who needs a flex in order to improve my team?

You can... but people will end up having a non-viable roster in order to insure themselves more picks and a higher draft position.That can certainly have adverse effects (just as it did in the NBA) as teams are fighting for playoff spots but a team or two who are not in contention become automaic wins.

It upsets the balance. So what we do is find a couple ways that help offset it without ruining it.

We just dont want you to intentionally lose -- because the system gives you nothing but benefits from doin so. We change/tweak the system to not so heavily award a team dumping his players.

Another thing we use... is during the 3 playoff weeks we pay out double the weekly amount for high score --> to highest score above his weekly average on the year.

Thus all teams have an equal shot at snatching 40$ for each of the final 3 weeks... unless, of course, you have dumped your roster.

Its fine that your trade LT for draft pick(s).

 

[footballnerd]

Monetary rewards/penalties is def another route, and we do have an entry fee equivalent penalty to the last place team.

 

[Christo]

I just assume that all teams as the bottom are tanking.

 

[FUBAR]

One word- "AuctionDraft."Okay...That's two words, but the point is the same. Edited to add- 4 keepers for non-playoff teams, 3 for playoff teams, 2 for the runner up and just 1 for the champ.

we have a rookie auction and salary cap. Rookie dollars are based on previous finish10th place: $2009th place: $1758th place: $1507th place: $1256th place: $1005th place: $904th place: $803rd place: $70Super Bowl Runner-up: $60Super Bowl winner: $50$500 total cap, 5 taxi squad positions which don't count against the cap. My assumption (1st year) is that most teams will put their rookies they win on the TS, although I'm curious to see how expensive some rookies are. The only negative is that the rookies won could be expensive relative to the actual cap and I might see if the league wants to decrease rookie auction dollars to ensure rookies are cheaper.

 

[thebestupsman]

We pay weekly high score and we also charge for losses. The last place team buys the keg for draft day. NOBODY tanks in our league!

 

[BucFan40]

IMO, the worst team should have the best chance to improve, the key is figuring out who the worst team is. Record doesn't always prove accurate. What we've been doing is compiling each teams best starting lineup at seasons end. Adding all of their full season points (just the starters), then lowest to highest determines the order. Playoff teams are exempt, they automatically get the last spots determined by playoff results with playoff seed being the tiebreaker.

This has eliminated tanking, because you are stuck with your best players total points for the season whether you start them or not. We also keep our trade deadline rather early (week 8) to cut down on owners trading their top players for picks.

 

[FUBAR]

We pay weekly high score and we also charge for losses. The last place team buys the keg for draft day. EVERYNOBODY gets tanksed in our league!

 

[The_Wolfman]

This is the easiest problem to fix in all of fantasy football. Simply stop rewarding failure. The better you finish, the better you draft. You can send the champ to the back of the line if you want, but you are rewarded for wins, not losses.I know it's not a common system but I've played in leagues with it and nobody ever tanks. A couple of extra wins can really improve your draft position. If you lose, yes, you get punished with a worse draft pick-- but it's not so bad that you're doomed. You're not losing a pick or anything. You just draft at the back. Get better and you'll draft in a better spot. For some reason it's just accepted that we have to reward failure. When you do that, you'll have teams tank. Fantasy football teams don't have merchandise to sell or stadiums to fill or coaches and players fighting for jobs. Real NFL teams have reasons to win games that have everything to do with money and jobs. Fantasy football teams don't have that. I don't think a token pot each week is much of an incentive. It's better than nothing, but just barely. I play by whatever rules the leagues have, but I wish more would stop rewarding failure and stop encouraging teams to tank, or start providing better incentives to win. Reward success instead of failure and you'll see more teams trying to be successful. They gain nothing by failing.

Does your league have trouble with retention? I could see being really discouraged by having a bad season and then on top of that you get the last pick? That's pretty brutal. What keeps these guys coming back year after year?

 

[FUBAR]

This is the easiest problem to fix in all of fantasy football. Simply stop rewarding failure. The better you finish, the better you draft. You can send the champ to the back of the line if you want, but you are rewarded for wins, not losses.I know it's not a common system but I've played in leagues with it and nobody ever tanks. A couple of extra wins can really improve your draft position. If you lose, yes, you get punished with a worse draft pick-- but it's not so bad that you're doomed. You're not losing a pick or anything. You just draft at the back. Get better and you'll draft in a better spot. For some reason it's just accepted that we have to reward failure. When you do that, you'll have teams tank. Fantasy football teams don't have merchandise to sell or stadiums to fill or coaches and players fighting for jobs. Real NFL teams have reasons to win games that have everything to do with money and jobs. Fantasy football teams don't have that. I don't think a token pot each week is much of an incentive. It's better than nothing, but just barely. I play by whatever rules the leagues have, but I wish more would stop rewarding failure and stop encouraging teams to tank, or start providing better incentives to win. Reward success instead of failure and you'll see more teams trying to be successful. They gain nothing by failing.

Does your league have trouble with retention? I could see being really discouraged by having a bad season and then on top of that you get the last pick? That's pretty brutal. What keeps these guys coming back year after year?

I'm guessing the harder part is filling teams after someone quit. Would you take over a badly managed team in this format? Sure it's a challenge, and challenges are fun but the odds don't look good.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Thoughts?

we've been wrestling with this in our league. I think we might do a very similar version of this, but instead of 6-10(8-12 etc) deciding 1-4, you do a 'toilet bowl' playoffs (providing incentive for them to stay competitive this year) plus it would make it more fun for the teams out of it.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

This is the easiest problem to fix in all of fantasy football. Simply stop rewarding failure. The better you finish, the better you draft. You can send the champ to the back of the line if you want, but you are rewarded for wins, not losses.I know it's not a common system but I've played in leagues with it and nobody ever tanks. A couple of extra wins can really improve your draft position. If you lose, yes, you get punished with a worse draft pick-- but it's not so bad that you're doomed. You're not losing a pick or anything. You just draft at the back. Get better and you'll draft in a better spot. For some reason it's just accepted that we have to reward failure. When you do that, you'll have teams tank. Fantasy football teams don't have merchandise to sell or stadiums to fill or coaches and players fighting for jobs. Real NFL teams have reasons to win games that have everything to do with money and jobs. Fantasy football teams don't have that. I don't think a token pot each week is much of an incentive. It's better than nothing, but just barely. I play by whatever rules the leagues have, but I wish more would stop rewarding failure and stop encouraging teams to tank, or start providing better incentives to win. Reward success instead of failure and you'll see more teams trying to be successful. They gain nothing by failing.

Does your league have trouble with retention? I could see being really discouraged by having a bad season and then on top of that you get the last pick? That's pretty brutal. What keeps these guys coming back year after year?

I'm guessing the harder part is filling teams after someone quit. Would you take over a badly managed team in this format? Sure it's a challenge, and challenges are fun but the odds don't look good.

I'm not sure why people think you're torched if you draft at the back. It's not the end of the world. It's a disadvantage, but you wouldn't be taking over a team missing picks or anything. Retention hasn't been a problem in any of these leagues anyway. I'd say it's normal or better. I've just noticed that nobody tanks. They have no incentive to tank, and every incentive to win a couple of extra games. A 4-8 team has incentive to improve to 6-8. It actually matters. You won't find that in other leagues imo.Nobody likes getting the last pick, especially if you came in last. It's a disadvantage but I wouldn't call it "brutal." The way things pan out we've seen those teams improve at a decent rate, and luck always plays a role. Injuries and a bad schedule can send a decent team toward the back. This just keeps them fighting. The issue I was commenting on involved tanking, and I don't see it in those leagues. I just think if you want to avoid tanking, you have to stop rewarding it. Every other system I've seen still gives you an incentive to lose, and that's not good for a league.

 

[Anjin-san]

In the dynasties that I run, we award draft picks #1 to #6 based on reverse order of cumulative potential points for non-playoff teams after the regular season. There is no incentive to tank games in this format, as for non-playoff teams, W-L record has zero to do with draft slot. The only way to really tank with this method is to purge off productive vets or players perceived to be one-year wonders, thus reducing your potential points each week. But really, trading away current production for future production is what a rebuilding team should be doing anyways.

There is also an incentive to keep a healthy starting lineup going into the playoffs, as for the non-playoff teams we run a toilet bowl where the winner gets a bonus 1.13 rookie pick.

 

[eaglesfan7]

Getting last place and you get penalized for that? Horrible rule.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

Getting last place and you get penalized for that? Horrible rule.

Elaborate.

 

[eaglesfan7]

Getting last place and you get penalized for that? Horrible rule.

Elaborate.

If a dynasty team tanks a year, they are probably stuck as one of the worst teams for a very long time - so the likelihood is minimal that this will happy anyway.We have a team in my league that was quite old and this offseason made a ton of moves with a mindset for the future. His team is struggling as a result and sits at 0-7 right now. He should have the #1 overall spot. Any other system penalizes him more.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Getting last place and you get penalized for that? Horrible rule.

Elaborate.

If a dynasty team tanks a year, they are probably stuck as one of the worst teams for a very long time - so the likelihood is minimal that this will happy anyway.We have a team in my league that was quite old and this offseason made a ton of moves with a mindset for the future. His team is struggling as a result and sits at 0-7 right now. He should have the #1 overall spot. Any other system penalizes him more.

Why should a system reward failure? By not even trying to be competitive, the team is ruining the competitive balance of the league. I understand the long-term dynasty mindset, but throwing a year away-- while his right as an owner-- hurts the league and should not be rewarded. I'm saying that owner should pick last. I'm not saying their pick should be taken away from them. Teams should try to rebuild for the future but also remain a formidable opponent today. )-7 isn't struggling. It's forfeiting, unless he's just had a ton of bad luck. Your post makes it sound like the team deserves its record.Again, I'm not saying the owner shouldn't be allowed to run his team. I'm saying leagues shouldn't reward losing.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

In the dynasties that I run, we award draft picks #1 to #6 based on reverse order of cumulative potential points for non-playoff teams after the regular season. There is no incentive to tank games in this format, as for non-playoff teams, W-L record has zero to do with draft slot. The only way to really tank with this method is to purge off productive vets or players perceived to be one-year wonders, thus reducing your potential points each week. But really, trading away current production for future production is what a rebuilding team should be doing anyways.There is also an incentive to keep a healthy starting lineup going into the playoffs, as for the non-playoff teams we run a toilet bowl where the winner gets a bonus 1.13 rookie pick.

So the lower potential points you have, the better you pick? So a guy with Ringer and Sutton is better off? I'm not sure that discourages tanking.I do like the bonus rookie pick, though. But the allure of 1.01 might be worth more than an extra 1.13. If you don't think you're going to win that, you'd be better off just tanking-- especially if others are gunning for that extra pick. You'd have less competition for 1.01.

 

[FUBAR]

This is the easiest problem to fix in all of fantasy football. Simply stop rewarding failure. The better you finish, the better you draft. You can send the champ to the back of the line if you want, but you are rewarded for wins, not losses.I know it's not a common system but I've played in leagues with it and nobody ever tanks. A couple of extra wins can really improve your draft position. If you lose, yes, you get punished with a worse draft pick-- but it's not so bad that you're doomed. You're not losing a pick or anything. You just draft at the back. Get better and you'll draft in a better spot. For some reason it's just accepted that we have to reward failure. When you do that, you'll have teams tank. Fantasy football teams don't have merchandise to sell or stadiums to fill or coaches and players fighting for jobs. Real NFL teams have reasons to win games that have everything to do with money and jobs. Fantasy football teams don't have that. I don't think a token pot each week is much of an incentive. It's better than nothing, but just barely. I play by whatever rules the leagues have, but I wish more would stop rewarding failure and stop encouraging teams to tank, or start providing better incentives to win. Reward success instead of failure and you'll see more teams trying to be successful. They gain nothing by failing.

Does your league have trouble with retention? I could see being really discouraged by having a bad season and then on top of that you get the last pick? That's pretty brutal. What keeps these guys coming back year after year?

I'm guessing the harder part is filling teams after someone quit. Would you take over a badly managed team in this format? Sure it's a challenge, and challenges are fun but the odds don't look good.

I'm not sure why people think you're torched if you draft at the back. It's not the end of the world. It's a disadvantage, but you wouldn't be taking over a team missing picks or anything. Retention hasn't been a problem in any of these leagues anyway. I'd say it's normal or better. I've just noticed that nobody tanks. They have no incentive to tank, and every incentive to win a couple of extra games. A 4-8 team has incentive to improve to 6-8. It actually matters. You won't find that in other leagues imo.Nobody likes getting the last pick, especially if you came in last. It's a disadvantage but I wouldn't call it "brutal." The way things pan out we've seen those teams improve at a decent rate, and luck always plays a role. Injuries and a bad schedule can send a decent team toward the back. This just keeps them fighting. The issue I was commenting on involved tanking, and I don't see it in those leagues. I just think if you want to avoid tanking, you have to stop rewarding it. Every other system I've seen still gives you an incentive to lose, and that's not good for a league.

It's good to see retention is high in your league, maybe it is because of this rule or maybe you just have a good group, either way that's great.But you cannot say the difference between getting the #1 pick and #12 isn't brutal. What's the difference in value between Dez Bryant and Jermaine Gresham? It's huge and most years - although not all, are like this. I'm not even saying your system is bad, if it works for your league, awesome. I'm just saying that if a team sucks for a year unless it's just due to injuries and it has a lot of potential, it would be more difficult to get a new owner as one of the enticing things most new owners get is a high pick. I do like that your league makes you rebuild outside of the draft. How difficult is it to pry a pick from a good team?

 

[Anjin-san]

In the dynasties that I run, we award draft picks #1 to #6 based on reverse order of cumulative potential points for non-playoff teams after the regular season. There is no incentive to tank games in this format, as for non-playoff teams, W-L record has zero to do with draft slot. The only way to really tank with this method is to purge off productive vets or players perceived to be one-year wonders, thus reducing your potential points each week. But really, trading away current production for future production is what a rebuilding team should be doing anyways.There is also an incentive to keep a healthy starting lineup going into the playoffs, as for the non-playoff teams we run a toilet bowl where the winner gets a bonus 1.13 rookie pick.

So the lower potential points you have, the better you pick? So a guy with Ringer and Sutton is better off? I'm not sure that discourages tanking.I do like the bonus rookie pick, though. But the allure of 1.01 might be worth more than an extra 1.13. If you don't think you're going to win that, you'd be better off just tanking-- especially if others are gunning for that extra pick. You'd have less competition for 1.01.

What about a team that drafts all youth in the startup draft in hopes to have a dominant team in a couple of years? Is that tanking? I would argue it's not. Same thing here. Purging off players that are productive in the current season but who a losing team perceives to have more value on another roster than their own is not tanking, it's a smart rebuilding strategy. Should a losing team keep Ricky Williams on its roster in favour of a Javon Ringer just because Williams has the potential to blow up a week or two? Again, I would argue no.The method that I use removes the incentive to tank individual weekly matchups, which I think is key. Whatever roster an owner currently has, he will put out the best starting lineup from that roster. So while he may be "tanking" the season by stocking up with youth and end of the bench flier types, he will at the same time be attempting to win each week. I wouldn't even call this tanking, it's rebuilding. I think in dynasty leagues you have to accept some degree of foregoing success in the current season for success in future seasons. If you're not willing to accept any, I think that's fine as your league probably has a different competitive twist than mine. I just prefer rewarding the worst teams with the better draft picks while at the same time discouraging teams to throw individual matchups. It's not a perfect system but it's worked so far.