Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Breathing new life into redraft (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter The Dude
- Start date
Raw points don't really matter as a comparison to make them valuable. What are they compared to the offensive players in your scoring?
We attempted to make every position equal when comparing tiers. Meaning an RB1 = WR1 = LB1 = DB1
We have done a serviceable job but the biggest hurdle we tried to eliminate was the binge scoring associated with the IDP side. By binge scoring I mean increasing the points for big plays. This made the season long totals similar but game to game were all or nothing. In order to smooth this we broke down the sack components and scored more categories. You get pts for QB hits, Tackle for Loss, forced fumbles, sacks, etc. This helped a lot in smoothing out the scoring and I would highly recommend it.
Bottom line is that to make IDP meaningful you need to have as many or more starting spots as the offensive side and make the scoring similar to the offensive players on a weekly basis. This way you can build your team in many different ways which increases the strategy side of things for the draft.
How much of the competitive balance is affected? It would seem that if you were to win two or three in a row to start the season you end up with a juggernaut that can't be beat or if you lose the first two or three your team is stripped and won't be able to compete
Last edited by a moderator:
candian fantasy guy
Footballguy
I put raw points so that he can compare to his own scoring. I like your ideas of increasing points, but I'm not agreeing that all positions should score equal points or similar amounts. That gets to be way too much work for the long time commissioner(me). Our 7 starters make the IDP meaningful in volume alone. Wait for 1$ to fill your D players and you will find yourself at the bottom of the league at the end of the season.
I wouldn't necessarily agree with the bolded. It is much easier to fine lesser known players in IDP that produce like name players because there isn't as many good resources out there like you have on the offensive side. And if your scoring isn't comparable to the offensive players then it even helps the no name guys even more because the impact is less. I do agree that having a good defense is the key to winning because everyone can find a cheat sheet for the offense. However, you can actually do some digging and research to find gems on the IDP side and that can be a difference maker if your scoring is meaningful.
It isn't very hard to adjust scoring (in MFL) to see how scoring is affected without season by season trial and error. You check to see the distribution of players across your starters (12 teams with 10 offensive and 10 defensive starters is 240 players). So is there a basic equal distribution of positions that match your starting ratio? If so you are in the ball park. Do that over a couple years to account for outlying seasons and you get a good idea where the scoring should be set.
wlwiles
Footballguy
Re: Vulture League where you steal an opponent's player if you win your matchup
Not as much as we thought it might, to be honest. There's always the teams that draft badly and would go 2-10 or 4-9 in a "normal" league, and that same thing happened here to a degree. But by ensuring that if you win and steal a RB, you have to give back a RB from your own starting lineup, then most of the player swaps became things like Kamara for Carson, and very little of Kamara for Singletary. Every once in a while you'd have a scenario where Dalvin is sitting so Mattison plays, then the Mattison owner would win and steal Derrick Henry for Mattison (who'd be irrelevant in two weeks when Cook returned), which was a legal steal according to the rules.
Mostly we did this as a way to force player movement because over the years there became three groups of players. Guys like me who love to trade, guys who NEVER trade, and guys who will only entertain an offer if it's wildly lopsided in their favor. So you end up only seeing trades between players in Group 1. With this league there's 6 trades every week. The guy that started 0-2 then managed to win Week 3 and then steal Mahomes, and rattled off 4 wins in a row. The guy that started 4-0 dropped a game, then found himself without Adams due to a steal, then lost two in a row when he looked poised to whip everyone.
We toyed with the idea of restricting the rules further in order to even up the stealing (for instance, if you steal someone's WR1 you have to give up your own WR1), but ultimately it led to arguements because the guy who drafted Woods and Moore could argue that either was his WR1, then do we just go by site projections? Group consensus? etc... so we decided to limit it to active lineup players only (have to give back from your active lineup). It took us a year to get the rules how we liked them.
In general I'd say overall the competitive balance was altered in that it lead to more parity. A bad team could all of a sudden find themself with a stud if they squeezed a lucky win, and a juggernaut got crippled quick if they dropped a game. We saw Miami and Pitt DSTs get stolen, we saw Koo get stolen, and Kelce changed teams about 9 times iirc.
Last edited by a moderator:
Keith R
The Don
I also play in a Vulture (we call it a Swinger) league. Finished last in 2020 after winning it in 2019 but still a lot of fun.
Like Gally posted, the swaps have to be starter for starter, position-for-position. Flexes are considered RB/WR/TE, not "flex". The only difference is that we allow any starter to be swapped, even if they got injured. The Saquon owner won the week he got hurt and she swapped him for Dalvin Cook. We also had situations where a team was winning going into Monday and the opponent was out of players, so the leader promptly benched Tyreke for Watkins, and then swapped Watkins for Metcalf.
I learned the hard way that your draft strategy better heavily value the early season games.
Like Gally posted, the swaps have to be starter for starter, position-for-position. Flexes are considered RB/WR/TE, not "flex". The only difference is that we allow any starter to be swapped, even if they got injured. The Saquon owner won the week he got hurt and she swapped him for Dalvin Cook. We also had situations where a team was winning going into Monday and the opponent was out of players, so the leader promptly benched Tyreke for Watkins, and then swapped Watkins for Metcalf.
I learned the hard way that your draft strategy better heavily value the early season games.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
That’s exactly what we have been doing for last 10 years and everybody loves it. Mostly because owners get opportunity to get players that really want rather then feeling compel to draft player x since all the experts say so. We draw for draft slots, owner drafting first nominates with bid then go Around until only one owner left. Once you have your 3 players you no longer nominate.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Long-standing 1QB re-draft league that has been at 14 owners for a while. I really think that a super-flex would add so much to the draft and league strategy as a whole.
HOWEVER, I have never felt that putting teams at what is essentially a 7 point disadvantage (give or take) is acceptable for simply suffering a QB injury or having one on bye. To elaborate, we have fairly typical scoring settings. For the majority of teams that are able to field a second QB, I think they would average somewhere in the 17 points / game range, with wide variation. For teams forced to flex a second RB/WR/TE, I think they're somewhere in the neighborhood of a 10 point average. I think it's easier to say tough nuggets, manage your roster better in a 12-team league. In a 14-team league, there's no way around it, teams are going to have to resort to the flex. While that bye week disadvantage might balance out, I don't believe that an owner that loses one of their QBs to injury and isn't able to scoop the backup in free agency should be subjected to a 7 point disadvantage for the remainder of the season. To make it work, I think the challenge is to make average QB2 scoring more in line with the FLEX2 at WR/RB/TE.
Ideas:
1. We currently have 4 points for passing TD, -2 points for interceptions, -2 additional points for pick 6. Perhaps interceptions should be -4 or even more since most starting QBs are in the 2+:1 TD-Interception ratio. Also double pick sixes so that it takes two short yardage passing TDs for a QB to offset a pick six. This would present some real downside to the teams starting a 2nd QB that's near the bottom of the league.
2. Bring in a .5 point per rushing & receiving first downs to increase scoring for WRs, RBs, & TEs. While I think this is a viable fix in MFL and most custom leagues, I'm not sure that our yahoo league would be able to exclude first down scoring from the QBs. So this would have the undesired effect of making running QBs even more productive compared to pocket passers or the RB/WR/TE flex position that we're trying to boost up.
3. Reduce kicker scoring, allow teams that don't start a 2nd QB super-flex, to add a second kicker, along with their second RB/WR/TE. So a 2nd QB -vs- 2nd RB/WR/TE flex & 2nd kicker. I'm not sure that even MFL / custom leagues can facilitate this. I know it's impossible in yahoo. Bringing a second kicker into the mix is less than ideal, but it would balance out the scoring disparity.
4. Same idea as #3, but maybe add an IDP spot to this league that has never had IDPs, and allow teams to plug one in when they're not playing a second QB.
5. Flat 4 point bonus to any team that doesn't play a second QB for their super-flex. Boring, time-consuming from a commish maintenance standpoint, and kind of icky.
Any other ideas to make 14-team super-flex viable? Anybody able to successfully make this transition? Again, I think a 7 point disadvantage is what should happen when you lose a star RB and have to replace them with a middling RB. Not when you lose a middling QB2 and have to replace them with a middling FLEX2 RB/WR/TE.
HOWEVER, I have never felt that putting teams at what is essentially a 7 point disadvantage (give or take) is acceptable for simply suffering a QB injury or having one on bye. To elaborate, we have fairly typical scoring settings. For the majority of teams that are able to field a second QB, I think they would average somewhere in the 17 points / game range, with wide variation. For teams forced to flex a second RB/WR/TE, I think they're somewhere in the neighborhood of a 10 point average. I think it's easier to say tough nuggets, manage your roster better in a 12-team league. In a 14-team league, there's no way around it, teams are going to have to resort to the flex. While that bye week disadvantage might balance out, I don't believe that an owner that loses one of their QBs to injury and isn't able to scoop the backup in free agency should be subjected to a 7 point disadvantage for the remainder of the season. To make it work, I think the challenge is to make average QB2 scoring more in line with the FLEX2 at WR/RB/TE.
Ideas:
1. We currently have 4 points for passing TD, -2 points for interceptions, -2 additional points for pick 6. Perhaps interceptions should be -4 or even more since most starting QBs are in the 2+:1 TD-Interception ratio. Also double pick sixes so that it takes two short yardage passing TDs for a QB to offset a pick six. This would present some real downside to the teams starting a 2nd QB that's near the bottom of the league.
2. Bring in a .5 point per rushing & receiving first downs to increase scoring for WRs, RBs, & TEs. While I think this is a viable fix in MFL and most custom leagues, I'm not sure that our yahoo league would be able to exclude first down scoring from the QBs. So this would have the undesired effect of making running QBs even more productive compared to pocket passers or the RB/WR/TE flex position that we're trying to boost up.
3. Reduce kicker scoring, allow teams that don't start a 2nd QB super-flex, to add a second kicker, along with their second RB/WR/TE. So a 2nd QB -vs- 2nd RB/WR/TE flex & 2nd kicker. I'm not sure that even MFL / custom leagues can facilitate this. I know it's impossible in yahoo. Bringing a second kicker into the mix is less than ideal, but it would balance out the scoring disparity.
4. Same idea as #3, but maybe add an IDP spot to this league that has never had IDPs, and allow teams to plug one in when they're not playing a second QB.
5. Flat 4 point bonus to any team that doesn't play a second QB for their super-flex. Boring, time-consuming from a commish maintenance standpoint, and kind of icky.
Any other ideas to make 14-team super-flex viable? Anybody able to successfully make this transition? Again, I think a 7 point disadvantage is what should happen when you lose a star RB and have to replace them with a middling RB. Not when you lose a middling QB2 and have to replace them with a middling FLEX2 RB/WR/TE.
Last edited by a moderator:
That one guy
Footballguy
In one of my leagues we switched to DK friends league simply because we didn’t feel like hashing out “what happens if…” issues regarding covid and the NFL season. Weekly DFS tourney at $10/week, top 2 payout. Since league was normally $50/entry, we actually tripled payout monies and every week you had a chance to win something. We even kept it up throughout the NFL playoffs.
Certainly we lost out on trades, but those weren’t all that prevalent prior to switch anyway. It definitely improved weekly banter in our group text, which was a plus.
I haven’t switched any other redraft leagues to that method, but I will suggest and be fine either way. It made this one specific league more fun, so victory in that regard
Certainly we lost out on trades, but those weren’t all that prevalent prior to switch anyway. It definitely improved weekly banter in our group text, which was a plus.
I haven’t switched any other redraft leagues to that method, but I will suggest and be fine either way. It made this one specific league more fun, so victory in that regard
Adding one IDP spot will be useless. With that few it will make them worse than kickers as they won't matter at all.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Granted I have ZERO experience with IDP, but if you set interceptions to 4 points, sacks to 2 points, tackles for loss to 1 point, forced/recovered fumbles 2 points, combined with the fact that most teams wouldn't bother to roster any IDPs most weeks, so that most of the IDP super-stars are available on waivers, I fail to see how that wouldn't matter?
Again, the idea is to make average super-flex score of FLEX2 RB/WR/TE reasonably close to QB2. I think -4 point interceptions to QBs is a start. Giving the teams that don't super-flex the QB2 the IDP bonus slot might bridge the remaining gap, or at least get it close enough that they're not at a giant disadvantage to the teams starting 2 QBs. Now, it's true that this would be somewhat clunky to have most teams showing a vacant IDP position in their starting lineup. There's also the minor complication of enforcement, but I honestly think the IDP bonus might be preferable to a second kicker (or DST).
It wouldn't matter because you can pick up anybody off waivers that will score the same. They have no value because the value is all the same. There would be no need to draft the IDP because you could always find one.
If you want to make super flex not essentially a 2QB league change scoring so that other positions score like qb's so they aren't the most valuable. I think trying to artificially build a poaitiin to compete for SF seems like an idea that could lead to other issues.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Agree that there's no reason to draft an IDP player in the proposed scenario. The idea isn't a full-blown IDP League, or anything close to it.
The idea is that average points for:
RB/WR/TE FLEX2 (think RB30-40 or WR36-48, probably a 9.5 point projection)
+
eligible IDP starter position that the QB2 teams aren't allowed
= QB2 (probably a 17 point projection, best teams closer to 20, worst teams closer to 14)
As I write this, the conservative IDP play would probably be picking the DE that you think can get to the QB for a single sack. So maybe you make sacks 4 points, and the big play interception from a DB worth 8 points. Or 6 points and 3 points with points for tackles. I don't know, the point is that it can be done. Maybe not gracefully, but it can be done
.
As far as just adjusting settings so that QB2 = FLEX2, I get where you're coming from a KISS perspective, but actually fear that would be more disruptive then the added IDP element. In the case of my 1/2 PPR league, it probably means converting to full PPR league plus full PPFD. Also, we would have to migrate from a free platform to a premium one that would allow us to exclude QBs from the point per first down eligibility, because I have zero interest in making running QBs even more of a fantasy cheat code than their less mobile, passing counterparts. But yes, this is definitely more viable if you have a premium site to work with.
The idea is that average points for:
RB/WR/TE FLEX2 (think RB30-40 or WR36-48, probably a 9.5 point projection)
+
eligible IDP starter position that the QB2 teams aren't allowed
= QB2 (probably a 17 point projection, best teams closer to 20, worst teams closer to 14)
As I write this, the conservative IDP play would probably be picking the DE that you think can get to the QB for a single sack. So maybe you make sacks 4 points, and the big play interception from a DB worth 8 points. Or 6 points and 3 points with points for tackles. I don't know, the point is that it can be done. Maybe not gracefully, but it can be done
.As far as just adjusting settings so that QB2 = FLEX2, I get where you're coming from a KISS perspective, but actually fear that would be more disruptive then the added IDP element. In the case of my 1/2 PPR league, it probably means converting to full PPR league plus full PPFD. Also, we would have to migrate from a free platform to a premium one that would allow us to exclude QBs from the point per first down eligibility, because I have zero interest in making running QBs even more of a fantasy cheat code than their less mobile, passing counterparts. But yes, this is definitely more viable if you have a premium site to work with.
Last edited by a moderator:
If you want to smooth IDP scoring break down scoring into components and then use as many as you can. If you want sacks worth 4 then make the tackle for loss worth 1 pt, qb hit 1 pt and the sack 2 pts. That way it's not all or nothing. You get the same result for a sack but can also get pts for near misses (qb hit) to smooth the scoring.Agree that there's no reason to draft an IDP player in the proposed scenario. The idea isn't a full-blown IDP League, or anything close to it.
The idea is that average points for:
RB/WR/TE FLEX2 (think RB30-40 or WR36-48, probably a 9.5 point projection)
+
eligible IDP starter position that the QB2 teams aren't allowed
= QB2 (probably a 17 point projection, best teams closer to 20, worst teams closer to 14)
As I write this, the conservative IDP play would probably be picking the DE that you think can get to the QB for a single sack. So maybe you make sacks 4 points, and the big play interception from a DB worth 8 points. Or 6 points and 3 points with points for tackles. I don't know, the point is that it can be done. Maybe not gracefully, but it can be done
As far as just adjusting settings so that QB2 = FLEX2, I get where you're coming from a KISS perspective, but actually fear that would be more disruptive then the added IDP element. In the case of my 1/2 PPR league, it probably means converting to full PPR league plus full PPFD. Also, we would have to migrate from a free platform to a premium one that would allow us to exclude QBs from the point per first down eligibility, because I have zero interest in making running QBs even more of a fantasy cheat code than their less mobile, passing counterparts. But yes, this is definitely more viable if you have a premium site to work with.
I found IDP scoring is boom or bust if you limit items that score points. By lowering pts per item but totally up to the same overall you get a more consistent scoring system. Same goes for INT and pass defensed.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Sage advice. Especially considering sacks are probably a 50/50 most weeks, with the 50 that hit a 50/50 of hitting on multiples. So yeah, tackles, assisted tackles, pass deflections are probably all good things.
Selfishly, I've never played in an IDP and kind of feel like this is a way to expose it to some of the people in my league without making it mandatory or even an ideal play. If I got on a podium and tried to sell my league on making the change from DST to full-blown IDP, it wouldn't get a lot of support.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
We do something similar. We do 2 for a 1/2 sack, 4 for a sack, plus 2 for a tackle, 1 for a 1/2 tackle.
We used to have the same scoring as you but with PPR we wanted defense to be near equal scoring to offense.
Obviously tackle-heavy players get an advantage in this system over sack specialists, but tackles are generally easier to chase, and the few guys who are truly elite & get both are rewarded for it.
it’s more fun when more players score more points - been doing it like this for 6 years & I find it gives teams more ways to win, and keeps the league competitive longer in the year.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Yardage bonuses can be good if they’re kept reasonable.Manster said:
I was in a league that had a ridiculous 10 point bonus at 300 passing yards.
And Ints were only -2, so a lot of scrubby QBs got super inflated numbers.
QB-A threw 301 yards with 1 TD & 2 Int & scores 27 points.
QB-B threw 299 with 2 TD, 0 Int & scored 27 points.
That ain’t right. it’s clear which QB had the vastly better day, yet they scored the same.
I don’t mind bonuses, but when they skew things so much that a terrible QB is rewarded as much as a good QB for those 2 extra yards passing, it can grate on you especially if you’re the owner of QB-B in that scenario.
In the league I commission we have a 2 point bonus at 300+, and 2 at 400. RB/WR get 2 pt at 100 & 1 every 50 thereafter.
We also have a +1 for any TD over 50 yards.
We have some IDP bonuses, too. +2 points at 10 solo tkl, +2 points for 3 full sacks. They’re pretty rare, but they’re sure sweet to hit.
Bonuses are great but be sure to keep them sensible or scoring can be thrown out of whack.
we have some in-season prizes too....single game high score $50, biggest butt-kicking (points differential) $50, season points total (10%)
Last edited by a moderator:
BoltBacker
Footballguy
For casual leagues with managers of varying skill levels and time to commit to the league I'm a big fan of weighting the distance scoring method on offense and turnovers so both actually matter. A few big plays on Monday night can really swing a game.
That's what I'm in the hobby for, to follow and enjoy the big plays watching NFL games. Counting the number of dump off passes at the LOS matters way too much in so many leagues. It also allows you to go much deeper in roster construction because those big play WR's that get very little targets are much more viable players.
That's what I'm in the hobby for, to follow and enjoy the big plays watching NFL games. Counting the number of dump off passes at the LOS matters way too much in so many leagues. It also allows you to go much deeper in roster construction because those big play WR's that get very little targets are much more viable players.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I partially agree. I like the performance bonuses for long TDs & totally agree they make big plays that much more exciting.
bur I tend to see it as a way to balance PPR rather than as an alternative to it.
I like that PPR makes the FA list deeper & gives more value to otherwise marginal 3rd down backs, etc. PPR makes it less likely that a team will give up after a couple of injuries.
distance scoring is a little flukey, and there’s ways to capitalize on that as well with guys like Fuller, Marquis Brown, etc.
I guess I just like leagues where there are more ways to win. Probably why my redraft went to IDP, too.
We have 16 active players, & games will frequently be 245-237. It’s exciting as hell.
I used to play in a redraft league where hardly any points were scored. Yardage was like .1/20 for RB/WR/TE & .1/50 for QB. TDs were the holy grail. We tried to vote in PPR or .5 PPR several times but a contingent of people who hated fun kept voting the proposals down. Games continued to be like 78-64 & it was boring as heck.
That’s when 6 of us broke off & I created my IDP league. a year later 2 of the other 6 asked in, and they ended up LOVING the higher point scoring system. Go figure.
Scoring points is the basis of most games. Scoring points for stuff that happens on the football field is fun. Why would anyone not want more scoring? Mind-boggling.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
I don't mind a fluke factor in casual leagues. Especially if it adds some(or any) amount of drama to what would ordinarily be a bad game.
In "serious" leagues if teams want the least amount of luck I think they should be using rotisserie scoring. Over the course of a game big plays are flukey but over course of a cumulative season I find them less flukey. You drafted Chris Johnson expecting him to have a certain number of big plays over the course of a year. As a side note it's hard to believe that guy is only 35yo. Last time he was relevant was 2013.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
oh I love flukey points. I don’t wanna go overboard to reward it, but so long as distance scoring is balanced with other scoring I’m all for it. More points, yay!
I feel like most FF is flukey & unserious. I would hate to play in a league where league members take themselves so seriously that they wouldn’t want something like a small bonus at a yardage metric because they’re so skilled that they don’t need luck to win and blah blah blah. I’ve played with dudes like that. Not fun at all.
FF basically goes like this: when I win, it’s skill. When I lose; it’s bad luck. It’s an old joke, but the most skilled FF manager out there has luck to thank for their success or failure.
Some will argue that the skill to build a team, or pick the right weekly lineup is what resulted in their success. To that I’d suggest that it was luck that their players stayed healthy. It was luck that the opposing schedule was soft at the right times. Or maybe it was luck that in-game, an opposing DL or DB got hurt.
There are just so many factors that go in to the short and long term success of teams. Whether drafting in a redraft or bullring a dynasty league, I’d rather be lucky than good any day. Ideally both, but luck plays an enormous factor innFF success, good and bad.
But yeah, I agree some players are drafted for the home run hitter type plays. Mostert, CMC, Tyreek, Jefferson, Barkley - I remember DMC taking it to the house on what was supposed to be a “clock kill” run at the end of a game a few years back. Hit his yardage bonus, got a big play bonus, and of course the TD, won that week by 1.x points, largely because of that play. Was I skillful or lucky?
imma go with lucky.
Nemesis
Footballguy
@The Dude Maybe don't change the existing league..........but enhance it, by adding 2 Best Ball Leagues on the side.
I hear from a lot of people that the draft is some of the most fun of the season.......so why do we only do it once a yr?
Last yr my main league created 2 add'l Best Leagues on the side with my owners w/ a $10 each entry fee.
Kept the same scoring rules as reg league, expanded the roster to 22, no FA drops/adds, no H2H, just a Points Scored Leaderboard.
BB League 1 is played out over NFL Wks 1-8
BB League 2 is played out over NFL Wks 9-16
These were quick drafts........and the mid-season draft before wk 9 was a welcome treat (you also knew more about the NFL by then too)
Interesting to see the different potential strategies employed
Increased Strategy: How much do you emphasize looking at schedules, bye weeks
Can play with any # of Owners...........great way to invite "potential new owners" & have a backup list for your regular league
I hear from a lot of people that the draft is some of the most fun of the season.......so why do we only do it once a yr?
Last yr my main league created 2 add'l Best Leagues on the side with my owners w/ a $10 each entry fee.
Kept the same scoring rules as reg league, expanded the roster to 22, no FA drops/adds, no H2H, just a Points Scored Leaderboard.
BB League 1 is played out over NFL Wks 1-8
BB League 2 is played out over NFL Wks 9-16
These were quick drafts........and the mid-season draft before wk 9 was a welcome treat (you also knew more about the NFL by then too)
Interesting to see the different potential strategies employed
Increased Strategy: How much do you emphasize looking at schedules, bye weeks
Can play with any # of Owners...........great way to invite "potential new owners" & have a backup list for your regular league
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Blind bid live auction. Meet on a football field and kick field goals to settle ties.
kutta
Footballguy
I've always thought it would be cool to be able to swap your players mid-game, maybe at half time, or just any time. So if you have a guy that is sucking, or gets hurt in the first half, you could grab a guy off your bench and play him for the second half.
You could even set your lineup based on halves or quarters instead of games, so you could say you want two guys to both play the first half of their games, instead of one guy playing the whole game. It's more the idea that you have x number of minutes of play for each position, and you can divvy those minutes up however you want.
Seems like that would be fun, but would require very active owners to optimize.
You could even set your lineup based on halves or quarters instead of games, so you could say you want two guys to both play the first half of their games, instead of one guy playing the whole game. It's more the idea that you have x number of minutes of play for each position, and you can divvy those minutes up however you want.
Seems like that would be fun, but would require very active owners to optimize.
That would be interesting for sure. I doubt any website would be set up for that but it might be something to ask. I have thought about something similar where you assign an injury replacement but the logistics get in the way without getting to be too much. Meaning you would have to have a replacement for each position because you couldn't pick one (say a RB) and then have the QB get hurt and substitute in the RB points.
Bottom line is figuring out a way to protect from injuries because that is a big luck based component for in game scenarios that seems like a way could be figured out to fix that. I guess allowing in game subs could accomplish that but then you are giving a huge advantage to the guy that watches every minute of every game.
We thought about trying to figure out a way where you can scheme against another team. Essentially setting up your "defense" to block their best player. Something like Henry only gets 60% of his point total but some other player gets 140% of his total. Essentially shift around percentages to try and take out your opponents best options in some way. We haven't been able to really figure out a good approach to that that seemed reasonable but it was an idea. Maybe someone here can add some thoughts to that.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
I was under the impression that some custom leagues already had this. If not, it definitely seems like a good gimmick for a new platform if they can pull this off. It might be a little too intense for me, and I'm someone who has hit for the cycle as far as watching all of Thursday night, all three Sunday sessions, and MNF before. I get that the early game injuries suck, but the idea of having to be "on" coaching my fantasy team for 9 hours + on what used to be relaxing Sunday probably crosses a line for me. I can definitely see some owners loving this though.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Probably another case of a little too much fantasy fun for my tastes. However, if you were trying to implement something like that. Maybe some version of NFL pick 'em, where the "defense" can make 4 picks (perhaps against a spread) to stop Henry. He gets 60-100% (10% deduction for each successful pick). In turn, the offense gets to make four NFL picks (or more) to boost another position.
The more manageable version of "playing defense" that I would really like to see in my league is for the top teams to have a chance to select their playoff opponent from the bottom half of qualifying teams. That way, instead of the top seed falling victim to a round one buzzsaw, they only have themselves to blame for not picking a better matchup.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
One thing that I really appreciate about yahoo is that you can drop players from your bench that have already started in their game and immediately add a player from a game that hasn't started yet.
A lot of people might say that this is a really cheap and unfair way for yahoo to handle roster transactions. Personally, I love it. This is my version of in-game management that makes me feel like I'm outhustling the rest of my league. It's usually more of an early season practice. Let's say there's a dozen deep dives I like for the end of my bench. These are usually upside guys that are rookies or would stand a lot to gain if there was injury in front of them. If all else is equal, I will prioritize the guy with the Thursday night game. If it's the middle of the 4th quarter and he hasn't done anything and there are no relevant injuries, Drop him Add the most intriguing name from the noon Sunday free agents. Rinse and repeat for the 3pm games, Sunday night, and Monday night. Your league might think you're a psychopath, but to me, this is playing the percentages; the ultimate definition of hustling in a fantasy football league. About once every two years I will land a player that would have had a huge waiver price the following week that I got for free. Maybe once a decade you will pull a league winner. This is the version of "in-game management" that I enjoy in fantasy. Frankly, just about every team should be playing this way early in the season, but usually it's me and one other guy that's much less committed to the concept. Usually by the bye weeks I have solidified a bench that I'm unwilling to drop, but this really is the smart play anytime there's free agents that you value equally as the last guy on your bench where they have different time slots.
It would be an added strategic element to any league that currently locks bench players once their game starts, provided that the platform has the ability to switch settings.
A lot of people might say that this is a really cheap and unfair way for yahoo to handle roster transactions. Personally, I love it. This is my version of in-game management that makes me feel like I'm outhustling the rest of my league. It's usually more of an early season practice. Let's say there's a dozen deep dives I like for the end of my bench. These are usually upside guys that are rookies or would stand a lot to gain if there was injury in front of them. If all else is equal, I will prioritize the guy with the Thursday night game. If it's the middle of the 4th quarter and he hasn't done anything and there are no relevant injuries, Drop him Add the most intriguing name from the noon Sunday free agents. Rinse and repeat for the 3pm games, Sunday night, and Monday night. Your league might think you're a psychopath, but to me, this is playing the percentages; the ultimate definition of hustling in a fantasy football league. About once every two years I will land a player that would have had a huge waiver price the following week that I got for free. Maybe once a decade you will pull a league winner. This is the version of "in-game management" that I enjoy in fantasy. Frankly, just about every team should be playing this way early in the season, but usually it's me and one other guy that's much less committed to the concept. Usually by the bye weeks I have solidified a bench that I'm unwilling to drop, but this really is the smart play anytime there's free agents that you value equally as the last guy on your bench where they have different time slots.
It would be an added strategic element to any league that currently locks bench players once their game starts, provided that the platform has the ability to switch settings.
To me this is another version of roster churn that I think is a bit sketchy. It is blocking multiple players from other teams and could be used as a blocking of your opponent from being able to use the waiver wire for what I believe is the intended use.
Don't get me wrong....it is a very smart strategy and has merit on it's face. I just think it is a bit sketchy in application and not sure I think it should be allowed based on my belief of the intent of the waiver wire.
This is what you enjoy but you think the in game lineup changes is a bit too much "fantasy fun". I think this is a very similar time involvement and approach if done "right". Seems a bit contradictory to your previous posts.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Probably a case where the other platforms have it right and yahoo has it wrong, but when you're playing in the land of yahoo, them's the laws and you play the game to the best of your ability within those confines. Ideally, there would be 8-9 owners playing this way. It would be a challenge as to when to cut bait on the Thursday player that's doing nothing, and move on to the most intriguing noon Sunday player. Sometimes the Thursday night player gets cut too early in the game and that makes for some fun trash-talking and weekly waiver wire pickups in its own right. However, I won't apologize if other owners like their bench players so much that they choose not to go this route, or if they need a podcast from their favorite talking head to tell them who the priority pick-ups should be and how much they should bid.
I play in a yahoo league that permits it, and an espn and MFL league that don't. Personally, I like the variation. Both have their advantages and disadvantages and I'm not sure that there is a right or wrong way to do it. There's something to be said for the fantasy owner who can look at the four teams playing at 3pm and immediately know who the upside free agents are from those four teams.
Last edited by a moderator:
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Don't try too hard trying to find contradictory statements in a thread expressing personal preferences. There's quite a bit of difference, but I guess I will have to explain it.
Roster / bench churning in yahoo or any league that allows the Drop/Add. Takes place once ahead of each time slot of games at maximum. You pick up the free agent that you find most interesting from the next batch of games and you're set for anywhere from three hours to three days. When the game starts, you can sit down on the couch and monitor the game and your fantasy roster in peace. Slip off in to a food coma, do some parenting, you name it, the world is your oyster. Usually ends at bye weeks, or when you find guys at the bottom of your bench that you believe have true value over free agent replacements.
Quarterly substitutions? Do I even have to explain the difference? Granted, you could make an easier version that permits swapping out injured players, but if you're talking about quarter-to-quarter lineup management of being able to sub all of your starters in and out, that is so much more of an undertaking if you're committed to maximizing your "coaching" to play winning fantasy football. If the quarter starts out with your RB's opponent having the ball deep in their own territory in a game where they're moving the ball at will and chewing up the clock, do you make the switch to your bench RB that's inferior but is starting the quarter in possession of the ball? It would drive me nutty, but I'm not sitting here judging anyone that would be excited to spend their entire Sunday playing fantasy this way. More power to you. Not my cup of tea.
I get the difference but it is in the same line of work. Just seemed like if you liked one you would like the other. I wasn't looking for a contradiction but it just presented itself. I understand the different level of effort even though it is a similar task.
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
I get it, they're both going down the same path of fantasy football fanaticism, but yeah, I personally draw the line between the two as far as my intended level of involvement on Sundays. If I care about how my fantasy team does (and I do), it would feel like neglect to take a walk on a fall afternoon and potentially miss out on the opportunity to swap out an injured player for a substitution that could have won me the game. I'm also part of a dying breed of people that occasionally likes to divorce themselves from their phone for short periods of time
Nemesis
Footballguy
I played in a Yahoo league last yr for the 1st time and noticed this and was shocked that Yahoo allows this at all. Don't want to argue the point with you about this, but i feel that lineup decisions should lock when a player's game starts.sushinsky4tsar said:
Fast fwd to now......and I was looking into possibly moving the league i run to Yahoo and i contacted their help desk and asked: "The Yahoo default setting allows the drop of bench players, is there a setting the commissioner can change to prevent this?"
YAHOO RESPONSE: The commissioner cannot adjust any settings to prevent managers from dropping bench players after their game has begun or ended for the wk. This is an allowable action in Yahoo leagues. You can impose a league rule preventing this but you would need to monitor the league to enforce that rule.
The fact that Yahoo's default allows this is a debatable issue..........but the fact that Yahoo doesn't allow you to Opt Out of this feature off is idiotic.
Needless to say, i am not switching my league to Yahoo (because of several reasons incl this one)
sushinsky4tsar
Footballguy
Really interesting to see yahoo's response (or non-response) to what you were asking for, but yeah it has been a staple of that platform forever. I definitely get the hate for yahoo doing it that way. To play devil's advocate, there are some trade-offs. For instance, in a league that locks the bench spots after kickoff, I have found it beyond frustrating to have my "last bench player" burn up his game on Thursday night. Then when there's a surprise scratch in my starting lineup on Sunday (or even worse, someone on a snap count for no possibility of IR), I either don't have a viable bench option to drop and am forced to take a zero, or I have to drop a player that I value far more than the guy that went on Thursday. Unlimited IR spots can help that somewhat if the player is a full scratch. But this is definitely a scenario where yahoo not locking bench players is appreciated.
Perhaps yahoo would be wise to force the added player into the starting lineup in situations where you're dropping a bench player after kickoff. Honestly, the only reason that I even brought it up in this thread is that a league could theoretically look at the yahoo setting as a different way of playing. Instead of having all of the boom free agents get pushed to Tuesday waivers, there's a lot more jockeying, and in-game roster management to try to snipe these guys for the end of your bench before the blow up. But I definitely get that a lot of owners and leagues would prefer not to play this way. If you have a league of sharks, it can make for some interesting transactions to monitor throughout the day on Sunday.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
One more way to spice it up is to give players points for PR/KR, and maybe PRTD/KRTD.
In IDP it’s a natural, and my league enjoys that scoring element. It also em an turn a marginal WR3 into a borderline WR2 for those points. We do .3/1, so a day they have 100 PR/KR yards they’ll get an extra 3 points for it. It’s not a ton of points, but it’s not nothing either.
The TDs depend on how your league ages feel about “double scoring” since those TDs would traditionally only be D/ST points. I played in a league where the player & the D/ST both got the TDs & no one had an issue with it.
In IDP it’s a natural, and my league enjoys that scoring element. It also em an turn a marginal WR3 into a borderline WR2 for those points. We do .3/1, so a day they have 100 PR/KR yards they’ll get an extra 3 points for it. It’s not a ton of points, but it’s not nothing either.
The TDs depend on how your league ages feel about “double scoring” since those TDs would traditionally only be D/ST points. I played in a league where the player & the D/ST both got the TDs & no one had an issue with it.
NYRAGE
Footballguy
We do a round or two of blind bidding where we submit bids on paper and the highest bidder wins (or loses if it's a big overpay). I might also introduce a round of bidding like this to see how it goes.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
This topic inspired me to put a couple of scoring changes to vote in my IDP league and they passed.
1. We added .1 point for a 1st down. It doesn't seem like a lot, but it adds up across a roster, and it was a small enough number that it got 100% support. So now a 1 yard plunge for a 1st down is .2 instead of .1, while any other 1 yard run is .1
I like it!
2. PPC for QBs. .2/1, so every 5 completions is 1 point. This is another one that doesn't seem like a huge change, but speaks to QB accuracy, and gives life to some of the efficient mid-tier QBs. Those mid-level guys will still never keep up with the top tier QBs in scoring but testing the scoring system it definitely balances out QB play so they're just a stitch more valuable, and in an IDP league with huge scoring for defensive players, it's nice to give a little bump to QB performance. Of course it helps the elite QBs too, but many of them are getting more big-play points, so I think it'll balance out well.
Glad I saw this topic - I'm excited to see how these changes effect our scoring this year.
Ps - the only one we wanted to do but couldn't was to do OFR. DFR = +1, FF = +1, but OFR = 0. We wanted to do Fumble -1 & OFR +1, so if someone recovered their own fumble it was a 0 point play, but if someone else on offense recovered their fumble it would be -1 for the fumbler & +1 for the WR/TE/RB who picked it up. Unfortunately, the only setting was for "FL", so there's no way to avoid rewarding the person who lost the fumble if they recover their own mistake. No way that should be worth a point, so we flushed the idea. I'm kinda ticked at CBS for that. Why give me OFR if you're not gonna split Fumble from Fumble lost? Curses.
1. We added .1 point for a 1st down. It doesn't seem like a lot, but it adds up across a roster, and it was a small enough number that it got 100% support. So now a 1 yard plunge for a 1st down is .2 instead of .1, while any other 1 yard run is .1
I like it!
2. PPC for QBs. .2/1, so every 5 completions is 1 point. This is another one that doesn't seem like a huge change, but speaks to QB accuracy, and gives life to some of the efficient mid-tier QBs. Those mid-level guys will still never keep up with the top tier QBs in scoring but testing the scoring system it definitely balances out QB play so they're just a stitch more valuable, and in an IDP league with huge scoring for defensive players, it's nice to give a little bump to QB performance. Of course it helps the elite QBs too, but many of them are getting more big-play points, so I think it'll balance out well.
Glad I saw this topic - I'm excited to see how these changes effect our scoring this year.
Ps - the only one we wanted to do but couldn't was to do OFR. DFR = +1, FF = +1, but OFR = 0. We wanted to do Fumble -1 & OFR +1, so if someone recovered their own fumble it was a 0 point play, but if someone else on offense recovered their fumble it would be -1 for the fumbler & +1 for the WR/TE/RB who picked it up. Unfortunately, the only setting was for "FL", so there's no way to avoid rewarding the person who lost the fumble if they recover their own mistake. No way that should be worth a point, so we flushed the idea. I'm kinda ticked at CBS for that. Why give me OFR if you're not gonna split Fumble from Fumble lost? Curses.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wrigley
Footballguy
I don't think you get an OFR if you recover your own fumble. If that is the case you can use FL as the -1 rather than just fumbles. I know we have -3 for fumbles lost so if a guy fumbles but his team recovers it he doesn't lose anything. We also have +3 for fumbles recovered but you don't get anything if you recover your own fumble or your own teams fumble. Just on change of possession (which is really the critical issue with fumbles).Ps - the only one we wanted to do but couldn't was to do OFR. DFR = +1, FF = +1, but OFR = 0. We wanted to do Fumble -1 & OFR +1, so if someone recovered their own fumble it was a 0 point play, but if someone else on offense recovered their fumble it would be -1 for the fumbler & +1 for the WR/TE/RB who picked it up. Unfortunately, the only setting was for "FL", so there's no way to avoid rewarding the person who lost the fumble if they recover their own mistake. No way that should be worth a point, so we flushed the idea. I'm kinda ticked at CBS for that. Why give me OFR if you're not gonna split Fumble from Fumble lost? Curses.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Yeah - that's basically how we have it set up now. We have -2 for FL. But nothing for offensive fumbles recovered & we wanted that to be +1 (to match the FF +1 & DFR +1)
I need to contact CBS support to see if an OFR works as you describe. If so we're back in business - thanks for this, I was about ready to give up on that & I was bummed. I feel like if my WR saves the drive by jumping on your RBs fumble they should be rewarded for that.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
The only bummer is that I can't punish the fumbler unless it's a lost fumble. Even a recovered fumble is typically a negative in RL football - it kills the play, or results in a loss. I would love to assign -1 point to that regardless of whether it's recovered or not. Simply not possible in CBS interface. They only have FL. Laaaaame.
Similar threads
