Blind bidding (1 Viewer)

[valhallan]

My league is switching from a first-come, first-served free agent system to a blind bidding system. The BB period will be from Sunday kickoff until Thursday midnight, then back to the free add/drops until kickoff.

I've never used a blind bidding system, so I'd like to hear some opinions on it. Do you like or dislike it? What are the pros and cons? How about conditional blind bidding?

 

[joffer]

absolutely love it, just adds another level of skill to FF. no more worrying about being the first guy to the computer. FCFS =

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I do like it as opposed to FCFS,

but not as a replacement to the worst

to first WW order.

 

[valhallan]

absolutely love it, just adds another level of skill to FF. no more worrying about being the first guy to the computer. FCFS =

Yep, that's exactly why we're changing it

 

[valhallan]

I do like it as opposed to FCFS,

but not as a replacement to the worst

to first WW order.

Actually I've never used that either. FCFS was fine for us in high school and college, but now that we have jobs and responsibilities BB seems like the best route. Why do you like worst to first WW better?

 

[Dave Stauff]

I much prefer BB to W2F . . . in W2F the benefit of losing your first game of the year is often too great relative to the detriment . . . the only issue I have with blind bidding is that conditional bidding may be difficult to manage in this environment . . .

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I do like it as opposed to FCFS,

but not as a replacement to the worst

to first WW order.

Actually I've never used that either. FCFS was fine for us in high school and college, but now that we have jobs and responsibilities BB seems like the best route. Why do you like worst to first WW better?

I like W2F beacause itr promotes balance throughout the league.One of my leagues just switched to BB for the upcoming year.

I'm sure it will be fine, I'm actually stoked to be part of it.

 

[Family Matters]

absolutely love it, just adds another level of skill to FF. no more worrying about being the first guy to the computer. FCFS =

I agree. Not sure why anyone who loves and appreciates this game would feel any other way.

 

[Chaz]

I just convinced the owners in my 4th league to switch to the blind bid over W2F. Those who were against the switch argued that it was better to promote equality. My point was, why would we try to be equal? I want to bury each of them and they feel the same about me. Lets enjoy the competition and let the better man win

I have run the BB system in another league for several years. Never a problem. Usually pretty easy to tally up who gets who.

 

[Dave Baker]

Been in leagues where just about everything under the sun is done.

In order of preference of the most typical ways:

1. Blind bidding. Brings a little more to the game, wehre you not only have to find guys to pick but try to guess how much of your buedget you want to spend and guess what others might spend.

2. Open bidding. This is great fun. Bidding starts on each player, auction-style, and when 24 hours expires without a new bid, most recent bid wins. Only drawback is that you can't pluck the gems off the market that others might not realize are available or had not considered (mostly applies to IDP leagues).

3. Weekly waivers, worst to first. Best way to bring parity to league, but admittedly often does little of that at the end of the day.

4. FCFS - Not bad, I suppose. Not fun trying to be that first guy to make the bid right at midnight (or whenever) is not fun though. My local league actually allows FCFS at ANY time, even on Sundays. Really makes you want to be around to watch the games that day!

 

[BigRed]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."



Tell me how much you want and I'll counter. And so forth. Market value. Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

 

[roadkill1292]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."



Tell me how much you want and I'll counter. And so forth. Market value. Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

Ideally, this is probably true but the logistics of making this happen every (or even some) week(s) of the season are daunting. Blind bidding is the next best thing and both are far better than the other two alternatives. A major attraction of ff is that it provides for equal opportunity, not greater opportunity for some because of their lack of success.I suppose that you could make the argument that FCFS is also a fair method that rewards the most energetic players but, really, isn't it better to keep your participation in perspective?

 

[GregR_2]

Been in leagues where just about everything under the sun is done.

In order of preference of the most typical ways:

1. Blind bidding. Brings a little more to the game, wehre you not only have to find guys to pick but try to guess how much of your buedget you want to spend and guess what others might spend.

2. Open bidding. This is great fun. Bidding starts on each player, auction-style, and when 24 hours expires without a new bid, most recent bid wins. Only drawback is that you can't pluck the gems off the market that others might not realize are available or had not considered (mostly applies to IDP leagues).

3. Weekly waivers, worst to first. Best way to bring parity to league, but admittedly often does little of that at the end of the day.

4. FCFS - Not bad, I suppose. Not fun trying to be that first guy to make the bid right at midnight (or whenever) is not fun though. My local league actually allows FCFS at ANY time, even on Sundays. Really makes you want to be around to watch the games that day!

I prefer bidding, but you left off my favorite type of non-bidding waivers. Making a waiver claim sends you to the end of the list. As people make claims and you don't, you move up in priority.That is the only non-bidding waivers I know of that has any kind of serious elements of strategy to it as people have to decide if dropping to the end of the list is worth a perhaps marginal pick up.

 

[broncofan13000]

Would a silent/blind bidding auction league work? Wouldn't mind trying that for a mock or something....

 

[SSOG]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? No.

Actually... I think that would be really fun, and would add a whole new element of strategy.

Would a silent/blind bidding auction league work? Wouldn't mind trying that for a mock or something....

Agreed.

 

[stugnut]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."

*snip* Market value. agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

 

[crowe1130]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."

*snip* Market value. agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

I've suggested to MFL that they add this capability several times, but no luck yet.

 

[DocNiner52]

I really like it. As has already been stated it kinda gives everyone in the league an equal chance to get a player they may want regardless of won/loss record. Therein lies the only problem I see with it though. The lesser teams in the league maybe getting out bidded on a player ,thus there goes their chance to improve their team. One dynasty league I'm in you get 100 FA points to use in 1year. You can carry over any leftover FA pts. to the next year provided the total does not exceed 200pts with the addition of the next years 100 FA pts. At no time are you allowed to have over 200 FA pts. One year I held on to most of my FA pts and come the following year I had way more points than anyone and was able to pick up RB Dominick Davis. Yes at one point he was on the waiver wire until he blew up on the NFL scene.

 

[BigRed]

YES, this is exactly how an auction is run

? No, it isn't.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

Sounds good to me but I would I think prefer the bidding war idea.Actually it all sounds kinda "busy" to me, but maybe if I tried it I might feel otherwise.

We actually do a combo of worst/first and FCFS (you're allowed a max of 2 FA moves/week so it's one each). Has worked well I think, as it provides a balance.

 

[mozzy84]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."

*snip* Market value. agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

I don't like that, I could just bid the max amount knowing that no one else will and I could get him for way less. If you really want a guy there is not much thought involved there imo.

 

[GregR_2]

I don't like that, I could just bid the max amount knowing that no one else will and I could get him for way less. If you really want a guy there is not much thought involved there imo.

How is that different than a real auction? If your max you are willing to pay is less than someone else's max, you don't get the player. If your max is more than anyone else, you get him for $1 more than the 2nd highest amount someone was willing to go.

 

[stugnut]

I don't like that, I could just bid the max amount knowing that no one else will and I could get him for way less. If you really want a guy there is not much thought involved there imo.

I've heard this arguement before and I don't understand it. But let's break it down and see if it becomes clearer.Scenario 1 - Live Auction

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35.

No one else wants player A.

Your league shows up for a live auction at your house. You start the bidding off for Player A at $1. There are no other bids and you get Player A for $1

Scenario 2 - +1 blind bidding

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35. You enter a blind bid for $35. No one else wants player A so there are no other bids.

Waivers are run by the computer and all bids compared. The bidding for Player A started and ended at $1. You get Player A for $1.

I think you can see how the +1 blind bidding is exactly the same as a live auction. You are getting the player at fair market value. Why should you have to pay $35 for a player that no one else wanted?! You paid exactly what the market said the player was worth, $1.

As for comments about how teams most in need can get out bid, my question would be, "How?". Teams that are most in need are the teams that will be bidding the most money. If they aren't the ones bidding the most money then what the heck are they doing? How much do you really have to carry owners who can't manage their own teams? Maybe a better solution to "keep it competative" would be to take a look how everyone was doing at midseason, and then have the top three teams give one of their stud players to the three worst teams so they can better compete...

 

[lebowski]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."

*snip* Market value. agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

Intersesting but couldn't you just bid max value and then get the guy for only a dollar above the last bid?

 

[lebowski]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."

*snip* Market value. agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

I don't like that, I could just bid the max amount knowing that no one else will and I could get him for way less. If you really want a guy there is not much thought involved there imo.

sorry I missed this post...

 

[Wingnut]

Been in leagues where just about everything under the sun is done.

In order of preference of the most typical ways:

1. Blind bidding. Brings a little more to the game, wehre you not only have to find guys to pick but try to guess how much of your buedget you want to spend and guess what others might spend.

2. Open bidding. This is great fun. Bidding starts on each player, auction-style, and when 24 hours expires without a new bid, most recent bid wins. Only drawback is that you can't pluck the gems off the market that others might not realize are available or had not considered (mostly applies to IDP leagues).

3. Weekly waivers, worst to first. Best way to bring parity to league, but admittedly often does little of that at the end of the day.

4. FCFS - Not bad, I suppose. Not fun trying to be that first guy to make the bid right at midnight (or whenever) is not fun though. My local league actually allows FCFS at ANY time, even on Sundays. Really makes you want to be around to watch the games that day!

I prefer bidding, but you left off my favorite type of non-bidding waivers. Making a waiver claim sends you to the end of the list. As people make claims and you don't, you move up in priority.That is the only non-bidding waivers I know of that has any kind of serious elements of strategy to it as people have to decide if dropping to the end of the list is worth a perhaps marginal pick up.

I like this way the best also.As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

All this "parity" talk with the W2F method doesnt make much sense to me. It penalizes good teams. Just because I have the best record, why should I be last in the order any given week???

I like a random draw for initial waiver order at the start of the season, and when you pick someone up, you drop to the bottom of the order. This brings strategy into play, as Greg R said. The way we do it, is Tues thru Friday we go by the waiver order, then Sat and Sunday is FCFS...That way, if you need to pick up a scub to fill a starting spot late in the week, you dont lose your spot (all the good players have been picked up by then....so if you have a last minute scratch and need a fill-in, you can do it without sacrificing your spot). How anyone doesnt think this is one of the fairest ways is beyond me. Ive found that after picking up a player, I move up back into the top 4 rather quickly each week...its not like when you pick someone up you stay buried in the order for very long...at least in my league...

 

[culdeus]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."

*snip* Market value. agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

Intersesting but couldn't you just bid max value and then get the guy for only a dollar above the last bid?

Just sort of like proxy on ebay I guess.

 

[Kai's Hero]

My league does blind bidding all day on Tuesday, the rest of the week is FCFS. This works great for our league. The BB system has also brought in extra revenue (averaging $1,020.00) to our league allowing us to pay the weekly high scorer each week $60.00!!

What a great way to keep the owners who's teams are struggling towards the end of the year, interested.

 

[joffer]

PLEASE kill that avatar

 

[lebowski]

PLEASE kill that avatar

I second that motion. Nice avatars or no avatars at all.

 

[BigRed]

PLEASE kill that avatar

I second that motion. Nice avatars or no avatars at all.

GB no avatars at all (ie the "don't show avatars" option). It's all kinda #### anyway IMO.Anyway the "+1" idea I think is a good one if you want to go the blind bidding route.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."

*snip* Market value. agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

Intersesting but couldn't you just bid max value and then get the guy for only a dollar above the last bid?

Sure, assuming that somebody else doesn't have the same "genius" idea. If so, you'd better hope that there aren't any other moves that you really have to make because you've just blown your whole budget on one guy.

 

[GregR_2]

Intersesting but couldn't you just bid max value and then get the guy for only a dollar above the last bid?

I can read that question a couple of different ways, so not sure which you mean.If you mean, "Why not just let someone bid what they want, and if they have the highest total give them the guy $1 over the 2nd highest total"... yes, that's what he's talking about doing in saying +1 blind bidding. That isn't regular blind bidding though... in regular blind bidding if you bid $70 and someone else bids $40, you get the guy for $70.

If you mean, "it's a bad thing that you could get a guy for $1 over the next highest total by bidding the max"... no, not necessarily. If you bid the max and someone else bids a few $ under the max, you just used up all your cap. Especially in hard salary cap leagues, that is a big deal.

To give this a real example, someone cut Deuce in my hard salary cap league last year. He was already over-priced pretty bad, but when he went on IR the owner decided to just cut him free now and try to get him back from waivers for cheaper. I bid what I thought was a well-priced $70 on him. Everyone else who blind bid on him did it on the cheap and the next highest bid was maybe $35. The result is that I got him for $70. MFL doesn't currently have an option to allow you to get the guy for $1 over the 2nd highest bid (i.e. +1 bidding) . You could do it, but you'd have to resolve it all and set all the salaries by hand.

 

[valhallan]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

 

[Wingnut]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

What I meant was, giving each team a set amount of dollars for the season will at some point limit how many transactions that team can or will make...Once they blow through their wad they cant make any other pickups...I understand the strategy of that, but it still sets a limit of how many moves a team can make.I didnt word it right in my post...

 

[GregR_2]

You could also have the blind bidding pool refresh each week. To get past the "but then everyone has the same amount and could bid the max so who wins", you could give an extra dollar to each team based on their place in the league (12th place gets $12 extra). Then the last place team would essentially have priority to a player, but if they wanted to get more than one they wouldn't necessarily get their top choice.

I don't really like what I just said, just listing it as an option. Frankly I'd rather just have a hard salary cap. No limit to transactions then, you can bid whatever you want, you just have to free up the cap space to fit the player's salary in that you bid.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid. Would you run an auction draft that way? No. So why do FAs that way? wtf w/the guessing game? That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car. If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it. If you're too low, you can't buy it."



Tell me how much you want and I'll counter. And so forth. Market value. Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun. You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I concur.

 

[valhallan]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

What I meant was, giving each team a set amount of dollars for the season will at some point limit how many transactions that team can or will make...Once they blow through their wad they cant make any other pickups...I understand the strategy of that, but it still sets a limit of how many moves a team can make.I didnt word it right in my post...

Gotcha. But would having a FCFS period from Thursday midnight until Sunday kickoff alleviate that problem?

 

[Mordraken]

We use a blind bid process in the season. We have a cap at the auction of $100 (for 15 spots) and the "in-season" cap expands to $120. The additional $20 can be used to make trades (e.g. trade a $15 for a $5 player) or to add free agents. Droping a player has a cap-penalty of 1/2 the value of their contract (for the current year only).

The result of that is that you have a limited number of transactions you can make, but if you're judicious with your moves, you can often get away with virtually an unlimited number (unless you bid a lot for players).

As for the discussion of +1 bidding vs. Blind bidding, the +1 idea is nice in that it will allow owners to add a player at a lower price than they were willing to pay (or not at all), but is much more forgiving. In the blind bid system, you have to have the balls to bid what you think will get you the player, and KNOW that your money is going to be tied up for as long as that player is on your team. IMHO blind bidding is more of a hardcore rule. Both systems (I think) are equally efficient (i.e they don't require people to get together to run a weekly auction) and involve a level strategy in managing a free-agent budget throughout the season.

 

[Wingnut]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

What I meant was, giving each team a set amount of dollars for the season will at some point limit how many transactions that team can or will make...Once they blow through their wad they cant make any other pickups...I understand the strategy of that, but it still sets a limit of how many moves a team can make.I didnt word it right in my post...

Gotcha. But would having a FCFS period from Thursday midnight until Sunday kickoff alleviate that problem?

I suppose it could, but I think the best players picked up on waivers will be taken before Thursday (Tues and Wed will be where the majority of the "gems" are picked up), so teams will still be spending their BB dollars....Thurs - Sun pickups would mostly be last minute fill-ins for players that maybe get hurt in practice, late scratches on gameday, or bye week fillers....Theres not alot of meat and potatoes to pick from after Thursday...once a team is low or out of bidding dollars, the only options they'll have will be to wait till FCFS on Thursday and pick through the scraps....Im not saying WW gems cant be found on those days, but the chances get slimmer...I guess it depends on what your league is trying to do with waivers...for my league, this way wouldnt work, as we're all used to the way we have it now...but I could see how it could work for othe rleagues.

 

[bueno]

Mixed feelings on FCFS, but anyway...

If you're going to do bidding, IMO blind bids are stoopid.  Would you run an auction draft that way?  YES, this is exactly how an auction is run No.  So why do FAs that way?  wtf w/the guessing game?  That's kinda like walking into a dealership and a dealer goes "I have a bottom-line number on this car.  If you guess higher than that number, you have to pay that amount and buy it.  If you're too low, you can't buy it." 

*snip* Market value.  agreed,this is the best way to handle waivers/FA Let the FA bidding wars happen - fairer and IMO more fun.  You can either let it go or if you really want the player, fork over the cash instead of this "one and done" thing.

I think you are assuming blind bidding means you pay your maximum bid. That is only one way to blind bid. In my opinion, if you want the most fair way of running waivers/FA, you would use a +1 system of blind bidding. In the words of Tone Loc, "And it goes a little somethin' like this":Think of it this way. Most of us here would agree that for the draft an auction is the "fairest" way to run it. If that is the case, the same should hold true for the waivers/FA period. However, trying to get 12+ teams together every week for claims just aint going to happen. However, there is a way to run claims that mirrors an auction process exactly.

With "+1" blind bidding, the computer acts as the auctioneer. As a simple example, lets say your entire league got together for a live auction during week 1 of the waiver process. And lets say 3 owners wanted to acquire the waiver phenom, Brandon Jacobs. Those three owners are willing to bid, $4, $6, and $22. The guy bidding $22 is in dire need of a RB because his RB1 and RB2 were arrested after celebrating their week 1 wins.

what is the fair market value of Brandon Jacobs? It's $7. And that is exactly what he would go for (NOT $22), using a +1 blind bidding system. Because in a live auction Owner 1 would drop out when the bidding hit $5, Owner 2 would drop out when bidding hit $7, and therefore Owner 3 would get BJ for $7 (no pun intended). Well, that is *exactly* what you would pay when the computer acts as auctioneer in the +1 system.

Simply put, blind bidding using a +1 system is the fairest way of running your waivers/FA claims.

Except the fair market value of BJ is variable, depending on the needs of the various owners. Let's say four owners bid $4, $6, $22 and $25. Now what is BJ's fair market value? It is what the market will bear. In your example that is $22. In mine it is $25.No Mercy has used blind bididng since it's inception. It's the best way of doing waivers, IMO. Why should the guy with the worst record be rewarded when someone's star RB or QB goes down? Let the market decide.

 

[bueno]

I don't like that, I could just bid the max amount knowing that no one else will and I could get him for way less. If you really want a guy there is not much thought involved there imo.

I've heard this arguement before and I don't understand it. But let's break it down and see if it becomes clearer.Scenario 1 - Live Auction

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35.

No one else wants player A.

Your league shows up for a live auction at your house. You start the bidding off for Player A at $1. There are no other bids and you get Player A for $1

Scenario 2 - +1 blind bidding

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35. You enter a blind bid for $35. No one else wants player A so there are no other bids.

Waivers are run by the computer and all bids compared. The bidding for Player A started and ended at $1. You get Player A for $1.

I think you can see how the +1 blind bidding is exactly the same as a live auction. You are getting the player at fair market value. Why should you have to pay $35 for a player that no one else wanted?! You paid exactly what the market said the player was worth, $1.

As for comments about how teams most in need can get out bid, my question would be, "How?". Teams that are most in need are the teams that will be bidding the most money. If they aren't the ones bidding the most money then what the heck are they doing? How much do you really have to carry owners who can't manage their own teams? Maybe a better solution to "keep it competative" would be to take a look how everyone was doing at midseason, and then have the top three teams give one of their stud players to the three worst teams so they can better compete...

Except in a live auction, when there are more than one bidders, rebids are allowed. Your example is a special case and the only example where +1 bidding does mirror auction.

 

[bueno]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

What I meant was, giving each team a set amount of dollars for the season will at some point limit how many transactions that team can or will make...Once they blow through their wad they cant make any other pickups...I understand the strategy of that, but it still sets a limit of how many moves a team can make.I didnt word it right in my post...

No Mercy has a $100 limit on the season and blind bidding ends week 12. Most teams don't spend their limit. It does set a limit to how many moves a team can make, but the owners adjust their bidding to make sure the money lasts all season, or go broke.It works fine. Do you really make more than 10-12 moves a year?

 

[Wingnut]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

What I meant was, giving each team a set amount of dollars for the season will at some point limit how many transactions that team can or will make...Once they blow through their wad they cant make any other pickups...I understand the strategy of that, but it still sets a limit of how many moves a team can make.I didnt word it right in my post...

No Mercy has a $100 limit on the season and blind bidding ends week 12. Most teams don't spend their limit. It does set a limit to how many moves a team can make, but the owners adjust their bidding to make sure the money lasts all season, or go broke.It works fine. Do you really make more than 10-12 moves a year?

Oh hell yeah...in my league its a friggin free-for-all...We have strict roster restrictions, but we have one extra spot for one player at any position....everyone is always picking up someone in hopes of landing the next gem, or for picking up a backup to a stud on someone elses roster for trade bait, etc...Id have to go back and look, but Id say the average number of moves made in my league last year was 20+. One guy is famous for making multiple moves EVERY WEEK, and he probably made upwards of 50 moves, maybe more.

I suppose my league is an extreme example, so maybe I should pipe down and let the discussion continue

On a side note, the sky just opened up here in Florida and its storming like a mofo.

 

[yaheRRdme]

We use Blind bidding and I guess I like it as opposed to other options.. but this is basically what will happen..

There really are only going to be a handful of "highly sought after" players available(check your league last year to see who would have deserved a decent bid)... so you just need to spend about 75-80% of your allowance on one of those players when they are there.. you are only going to get one if they are someone EVERYONE else wants.. then from there the players are really just in areas of need or a hunch so you dont need much bidding money anyway....

My suggestion is to give everyone 1000$ bidding money.. but at the same time have a 50$-100$ minimum for all pickups.. if you let people pickup 1$ then there is really not much strategy involved.

 

[bueno]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

What I meant was, giving each team a set amount of dollars for the season will at some point limit how many transactions that team can or will make...Once they blow through their wad they cant make any other pickups...I understand the strategy of that, but it still sets a limit of how many moves a team can make.I didnt word it right in my post...

No Mercy has a $100 limit on the season and blind bidding ends week 12. Most teams don't spend their limit. It does set a limit to how many moves a team can make, but the owners adjust their bidding to make sure the money lasts all season, or go broke.It works fine. Do you really make more than 10-12 moves a year?

Oh hell yeah...in my league its a friggin free-for-all...We have strict roster restrictions, but we have one extra spot for one player at any position....everyone is always picking up someone in hopes of landing the next gem, or for picking up a backup to a stud on someone elses roster for trade bait, etc...Id have to go back and look, but Id say the average number of moves made in my league last year was 20+. One guy is famous for making multiple moves EVERY WEEK, and he probably made upwards of 50 moves, maybe more.

I suppose my league is an extreme example, so maybe I should pipe down and let the discussion continue

On a side note, the sky just opened up here in Florida and its storming like a mofo.

But how much money do you spend prospecting?

 

[bryhamm]

I don't like that, I could just bid the max amount knowing that no one else will and I could get him for way less. If you really want a guy there is not much thought involved there imo.

I've heard this arguement before and I don't understand it. But let's break it down and see if it becomes clearer.Scenario 1 - Live Auction

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35.

No one else wants player A.

Your league shows up for a live auction at your house. You start the bidding off for Player A at $1. There are no other bids and you get Player A for $1

Scenario 2 - +1 blind bidding

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35. You enter a blind bid for $35. No one else wants player A so there are no other bids.

Waivers are run by the computer and all bids compared. The bidding for Player A started and ended at $1. You get Player A for $1.

I think you can see how the +1 blind bidding is exactly the same as a live auction. You are getting the player at fair market value. Why should you have to pay $35 for a player that no one else wanted?! You paid exactly what the market said the player was worth, $1.

As for comments about how teams most in need can get out bid, my question would be, "How?". Teams that are most in need are the teams that will be bidding the most money. If they aren't the ones bidding the most money then what the heck are they doing? How much do you really have to carry owners who can't manage their own teams? Maybe a better solution to "keep it competative" would be to take a look how everyone was doing at midseason, and then have the top three teams give one of their stud players to the three worst teams so they can better compete...

Except in a live auction, when there are more than one bidders, rebids are allowed. Your example is a special case and the only example where +1 bidding does mirror auction.

The +1 is designed to mimic the rebid process. Let's use an example of a live auction. Below I have listed 3 owners, with the number in parenthesis being the max amount that they are willing to spend (obviously know one else knows this except them).Owner A (7): I would like to start the bidding on RB X at $1.

Owner B (12): I will go $2

Owner C (30): I will go $3

B (12): $4

A (7): $5

B (12): $6

C (30): $7

A (7) thinking to himself -- I can't go any higher

B (12): $8

C (30): $9

B (12): $10

C (30): $11

B (12): $12

C (30): $13

B (12) thinking to himself -- I can't go any higher

The bidding ends and C gets him for $1 more than B's top price.

 

[Mordraken]

Id have to go back and look, but Id say the average number of moves made in my league last year was 20+. One guy is famous for making multiple moves EVERY WEEK, and he probably made upwards of 50 moves, maybe more.

I suppose my league is an extreme example, so maybe I should pipe down and let the discussion continue

Averaging that many (20) would mean in a 16 week schedule you're making at least one move a week. I would say that's pretty normal, although on the high side (I'd assume that in a couple of weeks you wouldn't make any moves, and in other weeks you'd move for positions you need (e.g. a #2 defense or kicker).Making 50 moves is probably excessive. I would expect that (assuming a 15 player roster) that team only has about 10 good players, and the other 5 spots are being rotated in and out based on the "hot" player of the week, or whatever rumor is swirling. If that's the case, then occasionally one of those guys will perform well, but if you are making 50 moves a season, your team probably isn't that good .

 

[Wingnut]

As for blind bidding, I get how people would like that as well, but only if you play in a league with a transaction limit. My league has unlimited transactions, so setting a cap on bidding dollars doesnt work.

Can you expand on this? Why is a transaction limit necessary? Why won't a cap on the dollars work?

What I meant was, giving each team a set amount of dollars for the season will at some point limit how many transactions that team can or will make...Once they blow through their wad they cant make any other pickups...I understand the strategy of that, but it still sets a limit of how many moves a team can make.I didnt word it right in my post...

No Mercy has a $100 limit on the season and blind bidding ends week 12. Most teams don't spend their limit. It does set a limit to how many moves a team can make, but the owners adjust their bidding to make sure the money lasts all season, or go broke.It works fine. Do you really make more than 10-12 moves a year?

Oh hell yeah...in my league its a friggin free-for-all...We have strict roster restrictions, but we have one extra spot for one player at any position....everyone is always picking up someone in hopes of landing the next gem, or for picking up a backup to a stud on someone elses roster for trade bait, etc...Id have to go back and look, but Id say the average number of moves made in my league last year was 20+. One guy is famous for making multiple moves EVERY WEEK, and he probably made upwards of 50 moves, maybe more.

I suppose my league is an extreme example, so maybe I should pipe down and let the discussion continue

On a side note, the sky just opened up here in Florida and its storming like a mofo.

But how much money do you spend prospecting?

We got rid of transaction fees a few years ago when we moved the entry fee up to $200....I guess that was the tradeoff: guarnateed, set amounts for the payouts.And there's the rub.

 

[bueno]

I don't like that, I could just bid the max amount knowing that no one else will and I could get him for way less. If you really want a guy there is not much thought involved there imo.

I've heard this arguement before and I don't understand it. But let's break it down and see if it becomes clearer.Scenario 1 - Live Auction

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35.

No one else wants player A.

Your league shows up for a live auction at your house. You start the bidding off for Player A at $1. There are no other bids and you get Player A for $1

Scenario 2 - +1 blind bidding

You want Player A. The most you are willing to spend is $35. You enter a blind bid for $35. No one else wants player A so there are no other bids.

Waivers are run by the computer and all bids compared. The bidding for Player A started and ended at $1. You get Player A for $1.

I think you can see how the +1 blind bidding is exactly the same as a live auction. You are getting the player at fair market value. Why should you have to pay $35 for a player that no one else wanted?! You paid exactly what the market said the player was worth, $1.

As for comments about how teams most in need can get out bid, my question would be, "How?". Teams that are most in need are the teams that will be bidding the most money. If they aren't the ones bidding the most money then what the heck are they doing? How much do you really have to carry owners who can't manage their own teams? Maybe a better solution to "keep it competative" would be to take a look how everyone was doing at midseason, and then have the top three teams give one of their stud players to the three worst teams so they can better compete...

Except in a live auction, when there are more than one bidders, rebids are allowed. Your example is a special case and the only example where +1 bidding does mirror auction.

The +1 is designed to mimic the rebid process. Let's use an example of a live auction. Below I have listed 3 owners, with the number in parenthesis being the max amount that they are willing to spend (obviously know one else knows this except them).Owner A (7): I would like to start the bidding on RB X at $1.

Owner B (12): I will go $2

Owner C (30): I will go $3

B (12): $4

A (7): $5

B (12): $6

C (30): $7

A (7) thinking to himself -- I can't go any higher

B (12): $8

C (30): $9

B (12): $10

C (30): $11

B (12): $12

C (30): $13

B (12) thinking to himself -- I can't go any higher

The bidding ends and C gets him for $1 more than B's top price.

To exactly mimic an auction, A would bid $5, B $12 and C > $12 is what you're saying, but not everybody thinks that way. Maybe A bids $5, B 12 and C, thinking he could get the player on a low ball bid bids $10. Now C would get the player for $11.I don't see where it mimics the auction process. Different strategies required for each.

 

[Wingnut]

Id have to go back and look, but Id say the average number of moves made in my league last year was 20+. One guy is famous for making multiple moves EVERY WEEK, and he probably made upwards of 50 moves, maybe more.

I suppose my league is an extreme example, so maybe I should pipe down and let the discussion continue

Averaging that many (20) would mean in a 16 week schedule you're making at least one move a week. I would say that's pretty normal, although on the high side (I'd assume that in a couple of weeks you wouldn't make any moves, and in other weeks you'd move for positions you need (e.g. a #2 defense or kicker).Making 50 moves is probably excessive. I would expect that (assuming a 15 player roster) that team only has about 10 good players, and the other 5 spots are being rotated in and out based on the "hot" player of the week, or whatever rumor is swirling. If that's the case, then occasionally one of those guys will perform well, but if you are making 50 moves a season, your team probably isn't that good .

But see, we have roster restrictions (19 man roster) - you have to carry 3qbs, 4rbs, 5wrs, 2te, 2k, 2def...and one extra player at any position, so teams dont have to ever pick up a #2 K or DEF for bye weeks. Its a wacky league, but never boring.

And the guy who makes all those moves is usually competitive but hasnt been in the money in the last 4 years or so...surprise surprise.