Dynasty - How do you determine who gets 1.1 in the rookie draft? (1 Viewer)

[Spin]

In a 10 team dynasty, we assign 1.1 -> 1.10 based on the reverse of the standing. I think this is pretty common. The question becomes, how do you determine who is the worst team?

We do head to head as well as head to head in playoffs, where 6 teams make the playoffs, and 4 are put into the "toilet bowl". The last few years, we pair #10 seed vs #7 seed, # 8 vs #7 etc. Then the losers of those two games play for 1.1 and 1.2. The winner of that game gets 1.2, and the loser gets 1.1. The question I have is, is this a true indication of who is the worst team? In order to give everyone a chance to field a competitive team, you want your worst teams getting higher picks. As, in theory, this will improve their team up to the level of other teams, the whole "parity" thing. Which is good for fantasy leagues. Every owner stays active when they think they have a shot any given year.

The problem I've noticed with our set up, is the team that is often viewed as the worst, is 4-0 in the "toilet bowl". Tanking has not been an issue, he just happens to win, when his team really needs him to lose. So he has gotten 1.4 the past two years, and it could happen again this year. He has by far the lowest points scored, but always seems to have a strong week 14 and 15. So going 0-13, then winning weeks 14 and 15 yield 1.4, whereas a playoff "bubble team" might finish 6-7, but lose week 14 and 15 and get 1.1 over the team that "needs" it more.

So how do you combat this? Do you combat this? I was thinking that when the teams are eliminated from the playoffs, 'total points for' determines 7th-10th, and 1-6 play head to head for the championship.

Just curious how other leagues determine who is the "worst team".

 

[MAC_32]

Non playoff teams - record then total points as a tie breaker. Playoff teams - round eliminated from playoffs then record then total points, for losers of quarter and semi final games.

 

[zed2283]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

 

[Spin]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

How do you determine who the worst team is?

 

[T J]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

How do you determine who the worst team is?

I've always felt the truest reflection of worst, best, whatever, was total points.

 

[Ashem]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

How do you determine who the worst team is?

In your example, the guy at 6-7 may have overachieved, while the guy at 0-13 had the better roster but was rocked with injuries or bad luck with the schedule.Just pick something. Wins, head-to-head, total points, victory points, or flipping a coin. Give the toilet bowl winner an extra pick at the end of the first or second or third round.

 

[lynx4ben]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

How do you determine who the worst team is?

I've always felt the truest reflection of worst, best, whatever, was total points.

Potential points is the best system. This is the points given if the player would start their best lineup every week. We developed it in our dynasty 6 years or so ago. It gives an accurate reflection of whose teams truly do suck regardless of record. Also you can't tank PP without extreme costs. Benching your studs or starting bad matchups would have no effect

 

[Ketamine Dreams]

We still use CBS and it has a power rankings section. It's the combination of record, points, and breakdown. The four teams who don't make the playoffs are inversely ranked for the top 4 picks the following year.

 

[zed2283]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

How do you determine who the worst team is?

Well it certainly isn't a toilet bowl.We use worst record.

 

[GregR]

I think you should always want to do well in the playoffs, even in the losers bracket. That has to be a part of any good system. So we combine who is worst in regular season with doing well in playoffs to get a final draft order for the half of the league that didn't make champ bracket.

Our bottom 6 go into the consolation bracket, with worst team getting the 6th seed and best team (7th place regular season) getting the 1 seed.

Each team is then given their seed times 2 in "points" that go towards draft order.

Teams get additional points based on order of finish in the consolation bracket:

8 - Bracket winner

6 - Runner up

4 - 3rd place

2 - 4th place

1 - 5th place

0 - 6th place

Add up the points based on seeding and result, and the team with the most points gets the #1 pick. Tiebreak goes to the worse regular season team/worse seed.

So the last place team gets the #6 seed and 6*2= 12 "points". If they finish 4th in the playoffs they would get 2 more points for a total of 14. The 8th place regular season team is the #2 seed and gets 2*2= 4 points. If he wins the bracket, he would get 8 more points and end up with 12.

Teams can essentially move about 3-4 spots up or down with the system as it is set up. If you don't want that much movement, just cut the amount of points the playoff results are worth. I think I figured out the last place team can't pick worse than 4th as our system is set up, and if he drops he isn't likely to drop past 3rd.

As an aside, the teams in the champ bracket we don't do straight order of finish. Super Bowl winner gets 12th pick and loser gets 11. But you want the teams playing in the 3rd place game to have something to play for, so the winner gets the 9 pick and the loser gets the 10 pick. Same with 5th place game winner gets 7 pick while loser gets 8 pick. Every playoff game you have incentive to win this way. Super Bowl doesn't need the draft order swapped as there is already incentive to win, obviously.

 

[zed2283]

Or you can just give the 1st pick to the worst team, and all the other picks in order of finish.

 

[DoubleG]

We simply go by record prior to playoffs beginning for determing the "front end" of the draft (slots 1-4) For the back end, it's playoff finish. The two teams eliminated in the "wildcard round" have picks 5 & 6 (based on reverse order of their pre-playoff record). So the Superbowl Champ always picks last, SB loser picks 2nd to last, winner of 3rd place game is thrid-to-last, etc.

Works great - and has for 8+ years.

 

[lsutigers]

I think you should always want to do well in the playoffs, even in the losers bracket. That has to be a part of any good system.

Bingo. 12 team league. Ours is slightly different but same premise. Have to win toilet bowl to get 1.1. Rookie draft is non-serpentine.

 

[SSOG]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

How do you determine who the worst team is?

I've always felt the truest reflection of worst, best, whatever, was total points.

Potential points is the best system. This is the points given if the player would start their best lineup every week. We developed it in our dynasty 6 years or so ago. It gives an accurate reflection of whose teams truly do suck regardless of record. Also you can't tank PP without extreme costs. Benching your studs or starting bad matchups would have no effect

This. Potential points is the best, by far. It's extremely difficult to game, except at the margins (e.g. Just carrying one defense will reduce your potential points, but the difference is slight and that strategy carries risks). I used to do a toilet bowl, but then we had premium picks going to good teams, so we switched to potential points and kept the toilet bowl with the new prize being an "extra" pick at the end of the first round. Still a decent prize that builds excitement, but far less potentially unbalancing. We've been thrilled with the new system- the guys getting top picks now are genuinely woeful.

 

[jkearns]

My 10 year old dynasty league did a toilet bowel to determine the draft order of non-playoff teams early on and it was a disaster. So, we went to a system that ranks the bottom 6 teams according to 60% weight to Total Points and 40% to W/L record. After a few years there appeared to be some "gaming" of that system, so we tweaked it slightly and added a small twist- the bottom 3 teams (using the 60%/40% rank) participate in a weighted lottery. The final product is more complex than most, but we have not experienced any questionable managing down the stretch to "Suck for Luck." Take away the incentive to tank (at least as much as possible) and things usually fall inline.

 

[Spin]

This. Potential points is the best, by far. It's extremely difficult to game, except at the margins (e.g. Just carrying one defense will reduce your potential points, but the difference is slight and that strategy carries risks). I used to do a toilet bowl, but then we had premium picks going to good teams, so we switched to potential points and kept the toilet bowl with the new prize being an "extra" pick at the end of the first round. Still a decent prize that builds excitement, but far less potentially unbalancing. We've been thrilled with the new system- the guys getting top picks now are genuinely woeful.

Does MFL allow you to just add extra picks at the end of rounds? I like this idea and will pitch it to my league.

 

[Spin]

I think you should always want to do well in the playoffs, even in the losers bracket. That has to be a part of any good system.

Bingo. 12 team league. Ours is slightly different but same premise. Have to win toilet bowl to get 1.1. Rookie draft is non-serpentine.

I'm not a fan of this. You're essentially giving the 4th worst team (assuming 4 teams in toilet bowl) the 1.1, instead of the worst team.

 

[kardplayer]

How do you combat this? How about give the worst team the 1.1?

How do you determine who the worst team is?

I've always felt the truest reflection of worst, best, whatever, was total points.

Potential points is the best system. This is the points given if the player would start their best lineup every week. We developed it in our dynasty 6 years or so ago. It gives an accurate reflection of whose teams truly do suck regardless of record. Also you can't tank PP without extreme costs. Benching your studs or starting bad matchups would have no effect

This. Potential points is the best, by far. It's extremely difficult to game, except at the margins (e.g. Just carrying one defense will reduce your potential points, but the difference is slight and that strategy carries risks). I used to do a toilet bowl, but then we had premium picks going to good teams, so we switched to potential points and kept the toilet bowl with the new prize being an "extra" pick at the end of the first round. Still a decent prize that builds excitement, but far less potentially unbalancing. We've been thrilled with the new system- the guys getting top picks now are genuinely woeful.

We use this too. Like you said, eliminates virtually all gaming.

 

[TheFanatic]

We determine it by record, then if teams are tied, head to head record, conference record, and then total points if.they are still tied...

 

[lsutigers]

I think you should always want to do well in the playoffs, even in the losers bracket. That has to be a part of any good system.

Bingo. 12 team league. Ours is slightly different but same premise. Have to win toilet bowl to get 1.1. Rookie draft is non-serpentine.

I'm not a fan of this. You're essentially giving the 4th worst team (assuming 4 teams in toilet bowl) the 1.1, instead of the worst team.

You have to earn the 1.1. You are assuming that the 4th worst team will win two games and that's poor logic. I'm leading the 12 team league in ppg but sit at 4th place at 6-5. Meanwhile the team in 3rd has the 10th best ppg. With decent inseason management the last team place shouldn't be at any noticeable disadvantage vs. the other 3 bottom feeders.

 

[SSOG]

This. Potential points is the best, by far. It's extremely difficult to game, except at the margins (e.g. Just carrying one defense will reduce your potential points, but the difference is slight and that strategy carries risks). I used to do a toilet bowl, but then we had premium picks going to good teams, so we switched to potential points and kept the toilet bowl with the new prize being an "extra" pick at the end of the first round. Still a decent prize that builds excitement, but far less potentially unbalancing. We've been thrilled with the new system- the guys getting top picks now are genuinely woeful.

Does MFL allow you to just add extra picks at the end of rounds? I like this idea and will pitch it to my league.

No clue. My league is on fleaflicker, but we use an off-site message board (because we're in several leagues together), so I just hold the draft there and import the players afterwards. I really like it, because if you have a great team that misses the playoffs through terrible matchup luck, it gives you a consolation prize to play for.

 

[Dan Lambskin]

This. Potential points is the best, by far. It's extremely difficult to game, except at the margins (e.g. Just carrying one defense will reduce your potential points, but the difference is slight and that strategy carries risks). I used to do a toilet bowl, but then we had premium picks going to good teams, so we switched to potential points and kept the toilet bowl with the new prize being an "extra" pick at the end of the first round. Still a decent prize that builds excitement, but far less potentially unbalancing. We've been thrilled with the new system- the guys getting top picks now are genuinely woeful.

Does MFL allow you to just add extra picks at the end of rounds? I like this idea and will pitch it to my league.

It does

 

[SSOG]

I think you should always want to do well in the playoffs, even in the losers bracket. That has to be a part of any good system.

Bingo. 12 team league. Ours is slightly different but same premise. Have to win toilet bowl to get 1.1. Rookie draft is non-serpentine.

I'm not a fan of this. You're essentially giving the 4th worst team (assuming 4 teams in toilet bowl) the 1.1, instead of the worst team.

You have to earn the 1.1. You are assuming that the 4th worst team will win two games and that's poor logic. I'm leading the 12 team league in ppg but sit at 4th place at 6-5. Meanwhile the team in 3rd has the 10th best ppg. With decent inseason management the last team place shouldn't be at any noticeable disadvantage vs. the other 3 bottom feeders.

But the last team that misses the playoffs isn't usually a bottom feeder. Last year, I was 3rd in points and 2nd in all-play record but missed the playoffs due to brutal luck. I had the #1 QB, both of the top 2 RBs, and a pair of top 10 WRs. I absolutely demolished the rest of the poor saps in our toilet bowl. If I'd have been rewarded with Richardson for my efforts, that would have been brutal for my league's competitive balance.

 

[SayWhat?]

This. Potential points is the best, by far. It's extremely difficult to game, except at the margins (e.g. Just carrying one defense will reduce your potential points, but the difference is slight and that strategy carries risks). I used to do a toilet bowl, but then we had premium picks going to good teams, so we switched to potential points and kept the toilet bowl with the new prize being an "extra" pick at the end of the first round. Still a decent prize that builds excitement, but far less potentially unbalancing. We've been thrilled with the new system- the guys getting top picks now are genuinely woeful.

Does MFL allow you to just add extra picks at the end of rounds? I like this idea and will pitch it to my league.

Yes, MFL allows this.

 

[Spin]

I think you should always want to do well in the playoffs, even in the losers bracket. That has to be a part of any good system.

Bingo. 12 team league. Ours is slightly different but same premise. Have to win toilet bowl to get 1.1. Rookie draft is non-serpentine.

I'm not a fan of this. You're essentially giving the 4th worst team (assuming 4 teams in toilet bowl) the 1.1, instead of the worst team.

You have to earn the 1.1. You are assuming that the 4th worst team will win two games and that's poor logic. I'm leading the 12 team league in ppg but sit at 4th place at 6-5. Meanwhile the team in 3rd has the 10th best ppg. With decent inseason management the last team place shouldn't be at any noticeable disadvantage vs. the other 3 bottom feeders.

But the last team that misses the playoffs isn't usually a bottom feeder. Last year, I was 3rd in points and 2nd in all-play record but missed the playoffs due to brutal luck. I had the #1 QB, both of the top 2 RBs, and a pair of top 10 WRs. I absolutely demolished the rest of the poor saps in our toilet bowl. If I'd have been rewarded with Richardson for my efforts, that would have been brutal for my league's competitive balance.

This. This is what we're trying to prevent from happening. I really like the idea of Potential points versus a toilet bowl.

 

[lsutigers]

But the last team that misses the playoffs isn't usually a bottom feeder. Last year, I was 3rd in points and 2nd in all-play record but missed the playoffs due to brutal luck. I had the #1 QB, both of the top 2 RBs, and a pair of top 10 WRs. I absolutely demolished the rest of the poor saps in our toilet bowl. If I'd have been rewarded with Richardson for my efforts, that would have been brutal for my league's competitive balance.

That's a valid situation where our current method fails in regards to the 1.1 pick but highly unlikely. But it protects the competitive balance of the playoffs the same as potential points. Basically I believe in Jack Welch's business philosophy of 20/70/10 and apply it to my leagues. The bottom 10 percent has to go in a churn and burn scenario so that the league stays fresh. If the worst team continues to get the early 1st round draft picks year after years, there's no reason he won't turn out like the Bengals. If he can't make smart WW pickups, then he likely won't draft well. They need to have reason to quit and be replaced.Look at last year's top 5 picks - Ingram/Green/Julio/Ryan Williams/Daniel Thomas - Several studs, several busts, maybe too early to tell.Look at 2 years ago top 5 picks - Matthews/Spiller/Bryant/Best/Bradford - Several serviceable players, mostly bustsWhile the question posed was how do you determine, the real question should be how much of a "sure thing" is the 1.1?

 

[lbouchard]

Like others in this thread, we do a weighted Toilet Bowl. Keeps everyone involved throughout the season and makes certain the "best" worst team doesn't get the 1.1 (highest they can get is 1.3 I believe).

 

[Alex P Keaton]

My 10 year old dynasty league did a toilet bowel to determine the draft order of non-playoff teams early on and it was a disaster. So, we went to a system that ranks the bottom 6 teams according to 60% weight to Total Points and 40% to W/L record. After a few years there appeared to be some "gaming" of that system, so we tweaked it slightly and added a small twist- the bottom 3 teams (using the 60%/40% rank) participate in a weighted lottery. The final product is more complex than most, but we have not experienced any questionable managing down the stretch to "Suck for Luck." Take away the incentive to tank (at least as much as possible) and things usually fall inline.

We do something similar - a lottery for the 1st 2 picks, with only non-playoff teams included in the lottery. Our goal was to discourage "tanking" (however you define that term.....I've found that reasonable people have trouble with a clear definition)....and reward teams for trying to win now.