Anti-Tanking idea in dynasty leagues (1 Viewer)

[Hoss_Cartwright]

One of the biggest fears as a commish is that someone will purposely start a bad lineup to better their draft position. I certainly don't want to have a playoff system for the 1st pick either. That doesn't really help the really bad teams like it should, even if it does prevent tanking.

Here is a proposal suggested by Aerial Attack in FLL3. I'm sure it's probably been suggested here at FBGs multiple times and I've been blind to it. The first 6 picks based on total pts for the entire roster. The final 6 picks based upon the playoffs just like it is today. I'm not really interested in making the entire league draft postions total points, just the non-playoff teams.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

What about teams out of the playoffs, their lineups are set by a vote in the league. Just a thought.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

What about teams out of the playoffs, their lineups are set by a vote in the league. Just a thought.

The commish of FLL3 just posted this:> This would be good for draft picks, but would deter > from the real thing we play for -- head to head. I > would hate to see (for example), Billy not have a > need to put his best lineup in because he was > playing for last place anyway, so what would it > matter. I would love it as I was playing him, but > not fair for other owners shooting for playoffs and > needing me to lose for a chance for them to make it > in.My answer to that would be:The commish would be allowed to use fantasy sharks to set a lineup if the owner starts a player on a bye or a player that is injured. All other lineup decisions should be moot and the owners will have no incentive not to start their best lineup, so they probably will. If not, then the commish can suggest that they do, because it doesn't have any bearing on the draft position.

 

[dickey moe]

Best way is to let the teams that didn't make the regular playoffs play a consolation playoffs. Winner of the Toilet Bowl gets 1.01 pick the following season.

 

[coolnerd]

need to think about with only a little time.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Best way is to let the teams that didn't make the regular playoffs play a consolation playoffs. Winner of the Toilet Bowl gets 1.01 pick the following season.

Sorry, but that is a bad idea. It doesn't really help the really bad teams get better, which is what the higher draft picks is really for. What you're saying is the 7th best non-playoff team has an advantage over the worst team in the league. Now you can weight the teams for this playoff, but I don't really like that either. The entire year body of work should decide who the worst team is, not some 3 week playoff.

 

[Game Time]

Best way is to let the teams that didn't make the regular playoffs play a consolation playoffs. Winner of the Toilet Bowl gets 1.01 pick the following season.

Personally, I hate leagues that use this idea... Usually, the team that wins the toilet bowl is a very good team that maybe had some tough luck along the way, so they are rewarded with the top pick when the are much worse teams that should get it??? Really easy, have tanking laws in place... Owners must start a qualtiy lineup each week.. not real hard to see if someone is tanking or not... Have penalties in place for tanking....

 

[WisWolvrns]

12 teams typically

top 6 usually make the playoffs

next 4 play for 1st overall the next year

the bottom 2 teams are toilet bowl participants, loser of that game gets ridicule or whatever you league does to bash them

So the first week of the 'playoffs' you have the toilet bowl game result (those teams probably don't want to bother much longer anyhow)

The second week of the 'playoffs' has the consolation bracket winner of the 1st pick overall

The final week of the 'playoffs' is the typical championship week game for winner of the league.

Teams would then be playing all year to at least be 10th overall. Since being 11th or 12th gets them nothing but a shot at ridicule with possibly losing the toilet bowl. If a team can keep in it to scrap to 10th, then they have a shot at the 1st overall the next year.

 

[fn1cn2]

I had this problem the first year of our dynasty. One guy was fighting for last place, and benched all of his starters the last week before the playoffs. We made a rule that if you don't start your best lineup, you automatically get the last pick in each round the next year. It's fairly subjective, but it at least provided some incentive not to tank. It didn't necessarily force everyone to play their best lineup, but it at least made it so that nobody blatantly tried to lose games at the end of the year. We are all friends in my league, so it has been easy to police for us, but it may not work for other leagues.

 

[Couch Potato]

Anti-tank ideas? If every commish were set up with one of these, there would be no more problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Type_79_Jyu-MAT_anti-tank_missile_front.jpg

 

[Game Time]

I use a "playoff formula" to determine draft order.... It takes the entire season into account.... Picks 11 and 12 are determined via the Super Bowl with winner getting pick 12 and the loser getting pick 11... The rest of the teams are ranked from 1-12 in total points scored and in final regular season record. (tiebreakers are broken by total points- lower wins tiebreakers) .... So if a team finished 5th in record and 7th in points they would receive 12 points (added together) .... Lowest total points of 6 non-playoff teams gets pick 1 and they follow up to 6 ...... the 4 remaining playoff teams are ranked with lowest score getting pick 7 and so on..... Works pretty well for us.....

 

[kupcho1]

We keep track of total points scored during weeks 11-14. (Keeper league; playoffs run weeks 15-17.)

The 6 teams not making the playoffs are assigned draft slots based on points scored during this 4 week period. It isn't perfect, but it does ensure that everyone is fielding as competitive a team as they can, making transactions, paying attention. It helps to make every game competitive. Nothing worse than seeing a team you may be competing with for the last playoff slot facing someone that is not longer in the game.

 

[dickey moe]

Best way is to let the teams that didn't make the regular playoffs play a consolation playoffs. Winner of the Toilet Bowl gets 1.01 pick the following season.

Personally, I hate leagues that use this idea... Usually, the team that wins the toilet bowl is a very good team that maybe had some tough luck along the way, so they are rewarded with the top pick when the are much worse teams that should get it??? Really easy, have tanking laws in place... Owners must start a qualtiy lineup each week.. not real hard to see if someone is tanking or not... Have penalties in place for tanking....

Tanking laws? How do you enforce them? How are you going to enact penalties? Best way to prevent tanking is to reward production for the teams that don't make the playoffs.

 

[dickey moe]

I had this problem the first year of our dynasty. One guy was fighting for last place, and benched all of his starters the last week before the playoffs. We made a rule that if you don't start your best lineup, you automatically get the last pick in each round the next year. It's fairly subjective, but it at least provided some incentive not to tank.

Yes, it's subjective, and like tanking, it doesn't do anything to improve league morale. Encourage the teams with the worst records (i.e., the teams that don't make the regular playoffs) to compete toward the end of the season for some type of reward (we like to reward with high draft picks the following season, or perhaps some type of monetary compensation would work).

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

We keep track of total points scored during weeks 11-14. (Keeper league; playoffs run weeks 15-17.)The 6 teams not making the playoffs are assigned draft slots based on points scored during this 4 week period. It isn't perfect, but it does ensure that everyone is fielding as competitive a team as they can, making transactions, paying attention. It helps to make every game competitive. Nothing worse than seeing a team you may be competing with for the last playoff slot facing someone that is not longer in the game.

In my opinion the entire season needs to decide who is a bad team and who is not, not just a few weeks. I think total pts for an entire roster for the first 6 picks in the draft in a 12 team, 6 teams make the playoffs league, is a good anti-tanking system as long as the commish has the power to correct lineup errors such as starting bye week players and injured players. Owners wouldn't have any incentive NOT to start their best lineup. I hate using double negatives, but it seems appropriate here.

 

[BeTheMatch]

Go by potential points. Then people can tank all they want and it doesn't matter unless they're willing to trash their whole roster.

 

[GregR]

One of the biggest fears as a commish is that someone will purposely start a bad lineup to better their draft position. I certainly don't want to have a playoff system for the 1st pick either. That doesn't really help the really bad teams like it should, even if it does prevent tanking. Here is a proposal suggested by Aerial Attack in FLL3. I'm sure it's probably been suggested here at FBGs multiple times and I've been blind to it. The first 6 picks based on total pts for the entire roster. The final 6 picks based upon the playoffs just like it is today. I'm not really interested in making the entire league draft postions total points, just the non-playoff teams.

It's probably better than just doing nothing, but there are issues with it too.Roster composition makes a big difference since positions score differently. A team that expends roster space to carry backup defense or IDP will probably score less total roster points than a team who used those extra roster spots on lesser NFL starting QBs. I can build a roster that will score more roster points but be overall a worse team in most people's eyes than another.Using potential points instead of total roster points can help deal with that, but it has a similar problem though in the opposite direction. If you carry backup kickers, defense, etc, and I don't, your potential points will be normally be higher at those positions since you are getting the best of 2 or 3 scores and I'm getting the best of 1 when we use potential points. My dynasty league we use a combination of regular season finish and consolation bracket results. It's weighted towards regular season finish. The worst regular season team can't get worse than the 4th pick... the 7th place regular season team can't get better than the 3rd pick.While I agree having some rules to discourage it is a good idea, I think overall the best way to avoid tanking is to have a league of owners who won't do it. Which means if you have owners who will, when they do you call them on it and get rid of them. You make sure your rules are clear on the point, you remind the owners of them before issues happen, and if they do, protect the integrity of the league.

 

[djmich]

We do draft lottery like NBA

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

We do draft lottery like NBA

That would be a ton of fun!

 

[GregR]

With my previous comments, I suppose if I was going to base it on points, I would do a combination of roster points and potential points. Rank the bottom 6 teams by both, add the rankings together and the team with the worst total gets the top pick, on down the line. I'd give tie break to potential points.

 

[Boone22]

One of the biggest fears as a commish is that someone will purposely start a bad lineup to better their draft position. I certainly don't want to have a playoff system for the 1st pick either. That doesn't really help the really bad teams like it should, even if it does prevent tanking.

Here is a proposal suggested by Aerial Attack in FLL3. I'm sure it's probably been suggested here at FBGs multiple times and I've been blind to it. The first 6 picks based on total pts for the entire roster. The final 6 picks based upon the playoffs just like it is today. I'm not really interested in making the entire league draft postions total points, just the non-playoff teams.

It's probably better than just doing nothing, but there are issues with it too.Roster composition makes a big difference since positions score differently. A team that expends roster space to carry backup defense or IDP will probably score less total roster points than a team who used those extra roster spots on lesser NFL starting QBs. I can build a roster that will score more roster points but be overall a worse team in most people's eyes than another.

Using potential points instead of total roster points can help deal with that, but it has a similar problem though in the opposite direction. If you carry backup kickers, defense, etc, and I don't, your potential points will be normally be higher at those positions since you are getting the best of 2 or 3 scores and I'm getting the best of 1 when we use potential points.

My dynasty league we use a combination of regular season finish and consolation bracket results. It's weighted towards regular season finish. The worst regular season team can't get worse than the 4th pick... the 7th place regular season team can't get better than the 3rd pick.

While I agree having some rules to discourage it is a good idea, I think overall the best way to avoid tanking is to have a league of owners who won't do it. Which means if you have owners who will, when they do you call them on it and get rid of them. You make sure your rules are clear on the point, you remind the owners of them before issues happen, and if they do, protect the integrity of the league.

I'm the guy who proposed the idea in FLL3. I''d like to say I came up with it but I'm sure I read it somewhere at some point. Anyway, the one difference is that this isn't Potential Points, it's Total Team Points. So while you are correct that if you carry 4 QBs and I carry 2 chances are your 4 QBs will outscore my 2 QBs but I also have 2 "other" players filling those 2 empty QB spots. So while my 2 extra RBs may not stack up against your #3 and #4 QBs, the points probably won't be far off unless you somehow end up with 4 tops 15 QBs.

So you total up each teams total points for the year (both starters and bench players). The bottom teams (not in play-offs) get ranked based on their total team points. It also gives the bottom teams incentive to start their best line-ups to knock high total point teams with average records out of the play-offs. Because then it moves the truely bad teams closer to the #1 rookie draft pick while the high point teams with bad records end up closer to pick #6 than pick #1.

 

[Boone22]

With my previous comments, I suppose if I was going to base it on points, I would do a combination of roster points and potential points. Rank the bottom 6 teams by both, add the rankings together and the team with the worst total gets the top pick, on down the line. I'd give tie break to potential points.

I must have been responding while you posted this. Yes, that's closer except I'm not using potential points at all. It's ALL on Total Team Points - total roster points, both starters and bench players. As long as a team has a "full" roster, the point totals shouldn't be extremely different unless someone has extremely bad team.

 

[ffchamp1]

we adopted a new format this year to prevent this and to keep everyone engaged through 15/16 weeks

top 8 (4 from each div) make playoffs

bottom 2 from each div square off in losers bracket

The bottom four teams play each other for the #1 pick. Yes, you have to win the losers bracket to net the #1 overall.

 

[Mister CIA]

Assuming it's a money league, the best way to prevent tanking is to keep a monetary incentive for everyone. Suppose a 12 team, $100 league. Bump it up to $125. For those of you that started drinking early today, that's an extra $300 in the prize pool. Divide the $300 into three separate $100 prizes, to be awarded to the teams with highest cumulative scores for weeks 5-7, 8-10, and 11-13.

Adjust numbers to suit league and personal preferences.

ETA: I just checked. I'd already be up $200 in FFL1 if this setting was implemented.

 

[GregR]

One of the biggest fears as a commish is that someone will purposely start a bad lineup to better their draft position. I certainly don't want to have a playoff system for the 1st pick either. That doesn't really help the really bad teams like it should, even if it does prevent tanking.

Here is a proposal suggested by Aerial Attack in FLL3. I'm sure it's probably been suggested here at FBGs multiple times and I've been blind to it. The first 6 picks based on total pts for the entire roster. The final 6 picks based upon the playoffs just like it is today. I'm not really interested in making the entire league draft postions total points, just the non-playoff teams.

It's probably better than just doing nothing, but there are issues with it too.Roster composition makes a big difference since positions score differently. A team that expends roster space to carry backup defense or IDP will probably score less total roster points than a team who used those extra roster spots on lesser NFL starting QBs. I can build a roster that will score more roster points but be overall a worse team in most people's eyes than another.

Using potential points instead of total roster points can help deal with that, but it has a similar problem though in the opposite direction. If you carry backup kickers, defense, etc, and I don't, your potential points will be normally be higher at those positions since you are getting the best of 2 or 3 scores and I'm getting the best of 1 when we use potential points.

My dynasty league we use a combination of regular season finish and consolation bracket results. It's weighted towards regular season finish. The worst regular season team can't get worse than the 4th pick... the 7th place regular season team can't get better than the 3rd pick.

While I agree having some rules to discourage it is a good idea, I think overall the best way to avoid tanking is to have a league of owners who won't do it. Which means if you have owners who will, when they do you call them on it and get rid of them. You make sure your rules are clear on the point, you remind the owners of them before issues happen, and if they do, protect the integrity of the league.

I'm the guy who proposed the idea in FLL3. I''d like to say I came up with it but I'm sure I read it somewhere at some point. Anyway, the one difference is that this isn't Potential Points, it's Total Team Points. So while you are correct that if you carry 4 QBs and I carry 2 chances are your 4 QBs will outscore my 2 QBs but I also have 2 "other" players filling those 2 empty QB spots. So while my 2 extra RBs may not stack up against your #3 and #4 QBs, the points probably won't be far off unless you somehow end up with 4 tops 15 QBs.

So you total up each teams total points for the year (both starters and bench players). The bottom teams (not in play-offs) get ranked based on their total team points. It also gives the bottom teams incentive to start their best line-ups to knock high total point teams with average records out of the play-offs. Because then it moves the truely bad teams closer to the #1 rookie draft pick while the high point teams with bad records end up closer to pick #6 than pick #1.

This is not true in most leagues. The worst NFL starting QBs, QBs 25-32, score in the 12-15 points per game range on average. That's the same as a good starting RB2, potentially even a poor RB1. You can see this fact at work in why so many people recommend using a flex position for a 2nd QB... because even the worst NFL QBs should generally start there over players at other positions, but it doesn't hamstring you on a bye week or if you get hit by injuries to your QBs.Both total roster points and potential points are biased by roster composition.

 

[kardplayer]

We use potential points.

 

[GregR]

I'm not saying total points is horrible, nor that potential points is horrible, just that each can bias things one way or another if used on its own. Here's another example of what I'm talking about.

I see that I'm in close running for the #1 pick based on total points, but I'm trailing. So I go and I cut someone like Curtis Painter, who probably doesn't have a lot of future value for me, for someone like Tyrod Taylor who probably has as much chance to play next year as Painter, probably more. Difference is doing so I remove 74 points in my league from my total points before the draft pick is awarded, and replace it with a 0 from Taylor.

However with potential points, if Painter would have contributed to your starting lineup (as he might have the two weeks he scored 20+), those scores are locked into your potential points and if you cut him or not it still counts towards what your roster was like this season.

I think if you're going to go with something like that, using both would give the best measure of who was the worst team. It would also help limit the effectiveness of dumping a player just to lower total roster points.

Edit to add: Maybe this is what you are already doing, but if your site has a separate report of bench points for each week of the year as well as points actually in the starting lineups, that would help. I'm not even sure which the bench points for MFL is reporting in that regard.

 

[Boone22]

I'm not saying total points is horrible, nor that potential points is horrible, just that each can bias things one way or another if used on its own. Here's another example of what I'm talking about.

I see that I'm in close running for the #1 pick based on total points, but I'm trailing. So I go and I cut someone like Curtis Painter, who probably doesn't have a lot of future value for me, for someone like Tyrod Taylor who probably has as much chance to play next year as Painter, probably more. Difference is doing so I remove 74 points in my league from my total points before the draft pick is awarded, and replace it with a 0 from Taylor.

However with potential points, if Painter would have contributed to your starting lineup (as he might have the two weeks he scored 20+), those scores are locked into your potential points and if you cut him or not it still counts towards what your roster was like this season.

I think if you're going to go with something like that, using both would give the best measure of who was the worst team. It would also help limit the effectiveness of dumping a player just to lower total roster points.

Edit to add: Maybe this is what you are already doing, but if your site has a separate report of bench points for each week of the year as well as points actually in the starting lineups, that would help. I'm not even sure which the bench points for MFL is reporting in that regard.

Your edit is correct. You wouldn't lose all the points for dropping someone. The points that person scored while sitting on your roster remain. MFL has this option under Standings - Power Rankings. There are columns for Points scored and bench points. You just add those up and get the total points right before the play-offs start.

 

[guderian]

Go by potential points. Then people can tank all they want and it doesn't matter unless they're willing to trash their whole roster.

This. Using Potential Points accomplishes 2 things:1. It eliminates the line-up decision from draft slotting. If you start Tavaris Jackson instead of Brady and Brady scores more, you get Brady's points that week.2. It eliminates SOS from affect draft slotting and does a better job of giving the better draft picks to the teams that are truly the worst. You can still manipulate Potential Points, but it's a lot tougher and you're likely to do permanent damage to your roster if you try it.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

One argument against this idea was posted in one of my leagues. "Personally I hate that idea. A team could have a bunch of solid players who score alright but no real difference makers and they would be hurt by this.".

On second thought this makes sense too. Someone with 3 or 4 qbs on their bench is going to score a lot of points and that is not indicative of how good that team is.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Tankers will always find a way around

Then owners will be whining that good older players are being traded for peanuts or outright waived when teams are out of it.

 

[eakfootball]

I do a draft lottery also. I and don't think that the total points is a good idea, since teams with a couple of QBs will score way more points.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Weighted draft lottery if you decide to make that big of fuss.

None of the total pt/potential pts are good ideas. If you're going that route, you should just go best ball.

The only dynasty leagues I play in at this point are best ball. You are actually building a dynasty team (where every rostered player matters)

 

[az_prof]

Best way is to let the teams that didn't make the regular playoffs play a consolation playoffs. Winner of the Toilet Bowl gets 1.01 pick the following season.

Our league has two drafts: rookie draft right after the NFL draft. And then a FA draft after the second preseason game. The first 6 picks in FA draft are determined by Toilet Bowl. The first 6 of the rookie draft are still determined by Victory Points. We also have a No Tank rule and if the Commish thinks it is obvious a team is tanking he can call the guy on it and ask him to explain his lineup.It seems to work pretty well and I like two drafts because it gives you two drafts to plan for. We close FA waiver list after the last regular season game so by the time the third week of the preseason rolls around there are usually a couple of highly desirable players.

 

[Jersey35]

Our draft order is in reverse order of record, meaning that the worst team gets pick 1.01.

We then hold a ToiletBowl playoff for the bottom 4 teams in our league which are seeded by overall record, reducing tanking. The winner gains an additional pick which we call pick 1.01a.

At worst, the worst team in the league has what amounts to pick 1.02. Sometimes, with two victories at the end of the season, however, the worst team ends up with what amounts to pick 1 & 2 (1.01a and 1.01). A game changer to be sure. Either way, one of the bottom 4 teams has two picks in the top 5.

This method has really helped shorten our dynasty cycle and keeps people interested.

An additional benefit is that teams can't "accidentally" trade this pick away. In my experience, I've seen teams trade their first rounder before they realized they were going to have a bad year. Nothing worse than having a terrible season and realizing you've traded away your 1st rounder to a playoff team.

We've done it this way for about 5 years now and the response has been tremendous.