Keeper league questions (1 Viewer)

[greggorymac]

After 10years my league is discussing going from a redraft to a 2-keeper league format. Right now we are in deep debate as to if you should loose the draft pick in next years draft based upon what year your keeper was drafted in. For example, if I drafted Mendenhall in the 7th round in 2009 and wanted to keep him on my 2010 roster, I would not have a 7th round pick in the 2010 draft (I would just get skipped that round).

What do you guys think, draft position penalties or not? I'm looking for the pros/cons of each side.

Thanks for your help.

 

[Mr. Bojangles]

After 10years my league is discussing going from a redraft to a 2-keeper league format. Right now we are in deep debate as to if you should loose the draft pick in next years draft based upon what year your keeper was drafted in. For example, if I drafted Mendenhall in the 7th round in 2009 and wanted to keep him on my 2010 roster, I would not have a 7th round pick in the 2010 draft (I would just get skipped that round).What do you guys think, draft position penalties or not? I'm looking for the pros/cons of each side.Thanks for your help.

Our league is a 3-keeper format with a kept players costing a draft pick 2 rounds higher than their original draft spot. Using your example, if Mendenhall was drafted in round 7 in our league, he would cost a 5th rounder to keep. We also do not allow players who were drafted in rounds 1-3 to be kept. We have a 20 round draft and any undrafted players who are kept cost an 18th round pick. I think giivng up a pick a few rounds higher than original draft spot is advantageous because it accounts for future value and also forces owners to make tough decsions in terms of who to keep, which adds a layer of strategy as well.

 

[Black]

We use a similar 'exchange original draft pick for keeping player' so people don't keep all the 1st/2nd round guys each year. I prefer to keep much later round guys with upside.

We don't change that each year...so if you drafted MJD in the 14th his rookie year and held on to him all these years, he's yours for a 14th.

We also only allow 1 'vet' and 1 'rookie'. Vet being anyone on your squad at year's end; rookie had to have been drafted by you as a rookie and maintained on your roster. That throws in another wrinkle that makes people take chances on rookies earlier than normal.

 

[deadstick]

I've commished a keeper league for 14 years now, from total points scored through a newspaper to today's format for us - 5 keepers, each cost you a draft pick one round less than the prior year (similar to Mr. Bojangles). You can't keep first rounders, but you can keep a player in successive years (I am losing Larry Fitzgerald finally after having him since he came into the league - first counted as a 5th rounder to keep, then a 4th, 3rd, etc... until last year he cost me a first and hence, I can't keep him again).

Back in the 4th or 5th year, we were in a format of "keep 3" with no "increasing penalty" of draft picks. On my team, I had Peyton Manning, Marshall Faulk and Priest Holmes - arguably the top 3 players in the league, for 2-3 years. Noone could compete with me and it caused other owners to lose interest.

You still have the issue, to a lesser degree, in any keeper league - but increasing the number of keepers and causing each year you keep a player to cost progressively more has added some parity to the league. It also causes owners to draft a lot more rookies late in the draft (moreso than a normal redraft league) - I, for example, got Crabtree late last year (remember he held out) - that's good keeper value for a 10+ round pick.

Don't forget to address Free Agents. We have a rule that if a player is dropped, and re-added, he maintains his original draft status. If a FA is picked up that was never drafted, he costs a 10th rounder to keep (9th the next year, then 8th, etc..) There's always a handful of prominent FAs in redraft leagues that can skew a keeper league if you've got 1-2 owners more active than the rest (Sims-Walker from last year, for example).

Good luck,

 

[greggorymac]

This is all great input. Please keep the responses coming!

 

[GregR_2]

I tend to prefer the format where your keepers have to have your earliest draft picks spent on them, but you can use your pick normally instead of keeping someone. So anyone keeping 2 uses their 1st and 2nd round picks on them.

I don't find that it's a problem that teams are keeping the best players in the league. There is too much turnover in the positional lists for that to be a big issue. I think it's less of an imbalance when someone gets a top 3 player and has to spend their 1st round pick on them for 2 or 3 years until they drop off a bit, than it is to get the same exact player for a 7th round pick, then a 5th, then a 3rd, etc.

I think it also drives strategy a bit more. Teams have to decide when they are on the bottom half of the keeper quality and if they are better off not keeping anyone so they get first chance at the high profile rookies like an Adrian Peterson.

 

[SSOG]

After 10years my league is discussing going from a redraft to a 2-keeper league format. Right now we are in deep debate as to if you should loose the draft pick in next years draft based upon what year your keeper was drafted in. For example, if I drafted Mendenhall in the 7th round in 2009 and wanted to keep him on my 2010 roster, I would not have a 7th round pick in the 2010 draft (I would just get skipped that round).What do you guys think, draft position penalties or not? I'm looking for the pros/cons of each side.Thanks for your help.

Our league is a 3-keeper format with a kept players costing a draft pick 2 rounds higher than their original draft spot. Using your example, if Mendenhall was drafted in round 7 in our league, he would cost a 5th rounder to keep. We also do not allow players who were drafted in rounds 1-3 to be kept. We have a 20 round draft and any undrafted players who are kept cost an 18th round pick. I think giivng up a pick a few rounds higher than original draft spot is advantageous because it accounts for future value and also forces owners to make tough decsions in terms of who to keep, which adds a layer of strategy as well.

That's how we do it, too. I agree that the strategy is much more layered. The one thing I'd change if I had a chance is that, instead of undrafted players keeping for a very late pick, having undrafted players keep for an 8th rounder or a 10th rounder. It rewards owners who actually identified MJD as a quality prospect before the season rather than lucking into having the #1 waiver priority after MJD broke out (ditto that for guys like Colston or Boldin). If you added MJD as a free agent, you could still keep him for a reasonable cost... but not for the absolute pittance that he would have cost if you'd drafted him in the first place.

 

[SSOG]

This is the format my league uses. Like he said later in his post, the increasing draft pick loss is a parity mechanism. So my opinion is that you only need parity mechanisms if you are playing with bad (low skill) owners, noobies, or whiners. This isn't meant as a knock on the guys who are all experienced and good who play this way, but if you are confident that you are better than everyone in your league then suggest this "keep 3 with no increasing penalty of draft picks" format. If you consider yourself average and are just playing for fun then use all the parity mechanisms you can handle... draft pick penalties, small benches, waiver priority reset every week, etc. There's enough luck in fantasy football already that we don't need to add parity mechanisms to keep the teams even.

I don't agree with the idea of increasing costs as a parity mechanism. Heck, if anything, the advantage of keeping Maurice Jones-Drew for a 17th rounder or Chris Johnson for a 9th rounder while Adrian Peterson is costing the #1 overall draft pick is even greater than any advantage you could possibly derive from owning MJD in a "no-cost keepers" league. In a no-cost keeper league, I would consider trading MJD for a package of draft picks (maybe a 1st and a 2nd, depending on who is being kept and who is entering the league). In my current league, I would never trade MJD for anything, ever, period. Someone could offer me 5 first rounders and I'd turn them down.

 

[SSOG]

Yes, it is easy to point out the few exceptions. But we both know, for the most part, the best players are cut every year because they can't be kept. Either that or it costs you a very early draft pick. It makes it very difficult to build a true dynasty there. If I'm able to trade SJax then AJ, Rice, and Greene could carry my team for several years. You can't get that kind of consistency in a draft penalty league. The poster that I quoted even notes that they only reason they switched to the draft penalty style was to make things more even. There will always be exceptions (most likely luck) but the penalty setting is a parity mechanism. These are popular for good reason. They keep everyone interested. But I'm here to dominate. Not appease the masses.

I agree that guys like MJD for a 17th are the exceptions, but that's exactly my point. How does it promote parity when there's only one guy in the entire league who is able to keep top-5 dynasty players year after year for practically no penalty? In a no-penalty league, then yeah, someone's going to be keeping MJD... but it'll be balanced by the fact that someone else is keeping ADP, and another guy has SJax and Gore, and another guy has Fitz and Andre. In my draft penalty league, I start with a nearly overwhelming advantage over the rest of the league simply because I'm the only guy in the entire league who can keep an uberstud.In my keeper league, for instance, I kept MJD for an 18th and Gates for a 9th (very TE-friendly league, Witten wound up going for the #25 overall). Another guy kept Chris Johnson, Marques Colston, and Aaron Rodgers. The other keeper corps looked like Matt Ryan, Trent Edwards, and Eddie Royal, or like Drew Brees, Antonio Bryant, and Greg Jennings, or like Slaton/DWill/Kevin Smith (that actually looked like a solid corps before the season...), or like BarberIII/Parker/Wayne, or like Benson/Marshall/Larry Johnson. These were actual keeper corps- and every single one of them except for the Ryan/Edwards/Royal trio cost more in terms of draft picks than my MJD/Gates/Ronnie or the other guy's Rodgers/Johnson/Colston.That's not parity. Everyone said before the season that the other guy and I were going to be completely untouchable... and then the season played out, and we were both completely untouchable. Nobody else came within 3 wins of us, only one team came within 25 ppg of us, and we wound up playing each other for the championship. And next season, we'll probably be doing it all over again, because he'll be keeping Johnson/Rice/Rodgers and I'll be keeping MJD/Mendenhall/Desean.And the thing is, it really becomes a self-fulfilling cycle after a while. I have the best keepers because I have the best keepers. Since my keepers are so good, I don't need to worry about this season so much when I'm drafting (because I already have a crushing advantage), which lets me focus more on keepers, which lets me strengthen my keeper corps. Since my keeper corps is now stronger, I can trade guys I couldn't keep anyway in exchange for draft picks next year, which further strengthens my team, which lets me further speculate on future keepers, which just repeats the cycle all over again. Or I can trade my 3rd, 4th, and 5th best keepers in exchange for someone else's best keeper (because he desperately needs quantity while all I care about is quality). Or I can trade away the guy I drafted with my first round pick (since he's not really necessary since MJD was my de facto first round pick), and I can use him to acquire another uber keeper to further strengthen my corps- all without losing competitiveness this season.Draft Pick Penalty leagues are *NOT* a good way to promote parity, because in no-penalty leagues, the best keeper in the league presents a slight advantage (for instance, the guy with Johnson has a slight advantage over the guy with Peterson), but in a penalty league, the best keeper in the league presents a CRUSHING advantage (the guy with Johnson for a 12th has a crushing advantage over the guy keeping Antonio Bryant for a 20th or Matt Forte for a 4th). In order to dominate a no-penalty league, you need a real untouchable keeper roster (like Peterson/CJ3/Andre), and even then there'll be someone else out there who can come close. In order to dominate a penalty league, all you need is one untouchable keeper (like my MJD). And you're a lot more likely to run across someone keeping MJD for an 18th than you are to run across someone who managed to acquire Peterson, CJ3, and Andre.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Yes, it is easy to point out the few exceptions. But we both know, for the most part, the best players are cut every year because they can't be kept. Either that or it costs you a very early draft pick. It makes it very difficult to build a true dynasty there. If I'm able to trade SJax then AJ, Rice, and Greene could carry my team for several years. You can't get that kind of consistency in a draft penalty league. The poster that I quoted even notes that they only reason they switched to the draft penalty style was to make things more even. There will always be exceptions (most likely luck) but the penalty setting is a parity mechanism. These are popular for good reason. They keep everyone interested. But I'm here to dominate. Not appease the masses.

I agree that guys like MJD for a 17th are the exceptions, but that's exactly my point. How does it promote parity when there's only one guy in the entire league who is able to keep top-5 dynasty players year after year for practically no penalty? In a no-penalty league, then yeah, someone's going to be keeping MJD... but it'll be balanced by the fact that someone else is keeping ADP, and another guy has SJax and Gore, and another guy has Fitz and Andre. In my draft penalty league, I start with a nearly overwhelming advantage over the rest of the league simply because I'm the only guy in the entire league who can keep an uberstud.In my keeper league, for instance, I kept MJD for an 18th and Gates for a 9th (very TE-friendly league, Witten wound up going for the #25 overall). Another guy kept Chris Johnson, Marques Colston, and Aaron Rodgers. The other keeper corps looked like Matt Ryan, Trent Edwards, and Eddie Royal, or like Drew Brees, Antonio Bryant, and Greg Jennings, or like Slaton/DWill/Kevin Smith (that actually looked like a solid corps before the season...), or like BarberIII/Parker/Wayne, or like Benson/Marshall/Larry Johnson. These were actual keeper corps- and every single one of them except for the Ryan/Edwards/Royal trio cost more in terms of draft picks than my MJD/Gates/Ronnie or the other guy's Rodgers/Johnson/Colston.That's not parity. Everyone said before the season that the other guy and I were going to be completely untouchable... and then the season played out, and we were both completely untouchable. Nobody else came within 3 wins of us, only one team came within 25 ppg of us, and we wound up playing each other for the championship. And next season, we'll probably be doing it all over again, because he'll be keeping Johnson/Rice/Rodgers and I'll be keeping MJD/Mendenhall/Desean.And the thing is, it really becomes a self-fulfilling cycle after a while. I have the best keepers because I have the best keepers. Since my keepers are so good, I don't need to worry about this season so much when I'm drafting (because I already have a crushing advantage), which lets me focus more on keepers, which lets me strengthen my keeper corps. Since my keeper corps is now stronger, I can trade guys I couldn't keep anyway in exchange for draft picks next year, which further strengthens my team, which lets me further speculate on future keepers, which just repeats the cycle all over again. Or I can trade my 3rd, 4th, and 5th best keepers in exchange for someone else's best keeper (because he desperately needs quantity while all I care about is quality). Or I can trade away the guy I drafted with my first round pick (since he's not really necessary since MJD was my de facto first round pick), and I can use him to acquire another uber keeper to further strengthen my corps- all without losing competitiveness this season.Draft Pick Penalty leagues are *NOT* a good way to promote parity, because in no-penalty leagues, the best keeper in the league presents a slight advantage (for instance, the guy with Johnson has a slight advantage over the guy with Peterson), but in a penalty league, the best keeper in the league presents a CRUSHING advantage (the guy with Johnson for a 12th has a crushing advantage over the guy keeping Antonio Bryant for a 20th or Matt Forte for a 4th). In order to dominate a no-penalty league, you need a real untouchable keeper roster (like Peterson/CJ3/Andre), and even then there'll be someone else out there who can come close. In order to dominate a penalty league, all you need is one untouchable keeper (like my MJD). And you're a lot more likely to run across someone keeping MJD for an 18th than you are to run across someone who managed to acquire Peterson, CJ3, and Andre.

While it's great that it played out the way you thought it would last year...that in itself is very rare. I don't really see how having MJD and Gates makes you so unstoppable. You had to draft pretty well to "dominate" with your team. The advantages you think you have now aren't necessarily even advantages later. I bet the guy who drafted Slaton late in 2008 would have thought he's set for years. He learned a different lesson in 2009. The person who you're supposed to dominate in 2010 might pull out a Jamaal Charles out of his hat in the 18th round next year.Even if I grant that you and the other guy were the two best teams last year...how often to the two "best teams" dominate, or even win the league? I think the guy with Peterson, Johnson and others can compete with you next year, and the year after that. Sure, you have an advantage but I don't see it as crushing or damaging to the league. I just think you earned yourself a nice advantage that others have to overcome-- but they have great players, too (many are better than your guys, actually). You just paid less for yours.

 

[Topes]

After 10years my league is discussing going from a redraft to a 2-keeper league format. Right now we are in deep debate as to if you should loose the draft pick in next years draft based upon what year your keeper was drafted in. For example, if I drafted Mendenhall in the 7th round in 2009 and wanted to keep him on my 2010 roster, I would not have a 7th round pick in the 2010 draft (I would just get skipped that round).

What do you guys think, draft position penalties or not? I'm looking for the pros/cons of each side.

Thanks for your help.

Personally, not in favor of any surrender at all, especially in a 2-keep league.In a 2-keeper league, often, almost everybody keeps one high round pick and one great value pick. The lack of picks at the top of the draft isn't an important enough factor,as that draft starts right around the beginning of round 2, save for rookies.

Kind of indifferent.

BUT, where it gets to be a PITA is when your league allows trading future draft picks (which is common in keeper leagues). If you peg pick-surrender to kept player, you will likely have have cascading repercussions when allowing trades of players and picks in the offseason, each of which will (be perceived to) necessitate another rule.

My 2¢: Keep it simple. Keep 2. Be done with it.

 

[Pickle Rody]

I run a 12-team keeper league. We protect 5 players, no more than 2 per position. We do not lose any picks and we can trade any picks up to two years in advance. We do not restrict the length of time a player can be on your roster. Teams may keep a player as long as they like, until they trade him or drop him. Been this way going on 9 years.

We just voted on a rule change which will go into effect at the end of 2010. We will begin allowing teams to keep 6 players, no more than 3 per position.

Basically, right now, the league protects 60 players. Each team is allowed an in-season roster of 18 players and team defenses. We draft (reverse order of previous seasons final standings, non-serpentine) 13 rounds. We have a 14th round (for those teams who traded away more picks than they received) to allow for make-up picks.

Our deadline for deciding our 5 keepers is 11:59 PM of the last Sunday in July. Three weeks later we hold our "live" draft.

We also hold a Basement Bowl for teams not making the playoffs. The winner of this tourney has the option to swap out one of his keepers for a player who was dropped, providing his keeper roster still falls within keeper parameters......ie: no more than 2 players per position. The Basement Bowl winner has one week to determine if he wants to make a swap, 11:59 PM of the first Sunday in August.

I've got league members who cannot remember what picks they have traded away. We just try to keep things as simple as we can.

I'm not advocating this as the best set-up for a keeper league, it's just that this set-up works the best for us.

 

[SSOG]

While it's great that it played out the way you thought it would last year...that in itself is very rare. I don't really see how having MJD and Gates makes you so unstoppable. You had to draft pretty well to "dominate" with your team. The advantages you think you have now aren't necessarily even advantages later. I bet the guy who drafted Slaton late in 2008 would have thought he's set for years. He learned a different lesson in 2009. The person who you're supposed to dominate in 2010 might pull out a Jamaal Charles out of his hat in the 18th round next year.Even if I grant that you and the other guy were the two best teams last year...how often to the two "best teams" dominate, or even win the league? I think the guy with Peterson, Johnson and others can compete with you next year, and the year after that. Sure, you have an advantage but I don't see it as crushing or damaging to the league. I just think you earned yourself a nice advantage that others have to overcome-- but they have great players, too (many are better than your guys, actually). You just paid less for yours.

I guess to boil it down to a single point... the best keepers in "keeper penalty" leagues are better than the best keepers in "no penalty" leagues. In a no-penalty league, the best keeper in the league (say, Chris Johnson) is just marginally better than the fourth best keeper in the league (say, Ray Rice), or the 8th best keeper in the league (say, Frank Gore). In a penalty keeper league, the best keeper in the league (to use my league as an example: MJD for a 16th) is SIGNIFICANTLY better than the fourth best keeper in the league (if I had my pick of keepers, I'd say my #4 choice would either be Ray Rice for a 6th, Jamaal Charles for a 17th, or Aaron Rodgers for a 13th), and light years of the 8th best keeper (maybe Brees for 9th, Colston for a 16th, or Mendenhall for a 15th). Any system that exacerbates the difference between the best and the rest is not a good system when it comes to promoting parity.

 

[SSOG]

You are right that draft penalty leagues inflate the value of a few players, like MJD if he really went in the 18th round for some reason (he was drafted higher than that in his rookie year in some of my non-keeper leagues - we might be figuring out why this league is so easy for you to win). I think the guy I was referring to was talking about increasing penalties and you don't appear to, but that's fine. It is still similar in that the guys drafted in the highest rounds are either forced to be let go (increasing penalty) or are released in favor of guys with lower costs (your league). So therefore the first round holds more value in it than my no penalty league. There are 12 teams with 3 keepers, so essentially my 1st round is like a normal 4th round, except with a skew towards rookies in the first few rounds. This does not allow for teams to catch up in terms of talent like a league with increasing penalties allows. Most of the top tier talent is available in the draft in an increasing penalties league. I'm sure a lot of talent is available in your first round, too.Given the disparity of talent in the first round of my league, the more difficult it is to overcome the deficit when you are keeping guys valued 2.09, 3.03, and 3.12 while I've got 1.04, 1.07, 1.09 on my team. Even worse if I was able to trade off some of my surplus talent to get extra picks in the draft.An increasing draft penalty system is clearly a parity mechanism. Your league with no increasing penalty is more a combination of parity and luck. I initially wrote dumb luck, but it is more just luck. You knew there was potential for MJD when you drafted him but you didn't expect what you got (if you knew he'd be this good, you wouldn't have let him slip to the 18th). I drafted Slaton very late in 2008 and I never expected what I got. Hell, Kubiak and Rick Smith didn't even expect that. But in a keeper league like yours, Slaton would've appeared to be gold. My league kind of makes the luck a moot point. It costs you as much to keep a guy you drafted very early as it does to keep a guy you lucked out on.

I don't know why you think I'm talking about a non-increasing penalty league. My league is most certainly an increasing penalty league (or else I would be keeping Gates for a 19th and not for a 9th). And I like the quick shot about how bad my league must be because MJD was around so late (for the record, I got him as a street free agent in preseason after the draft, and the reason why he was still available was because we have positional limits, another supposed "parity mechanism").I'm standing by my position. The value of the top keepers is much greater in an increasing penalty league than in a no-cost league. As a result, owning the top keepers is a much bigger advantage in an increasing penalty. As a result, the people who own the top keepers have a much bigger advantage in an increasing penalty league.You're absolutely right that there's a lot more talent available in the first round of an increasing penalty league, but that doesn't mean squat for parity because I've got just as much access to that first round talent as anyone else, because I'm not forfeiting a 1st round pick to keep MJD. The guy drafting ahead of me will wind up with their crappy keepers and DeAngelo Williams, while I'm sitting with my awesome keepers and Frank Gore. That's not parity. It'd be like if you were playing in a keep 3 league, but there was a special rule that said that the guy with MJD got to keep 4.

 

[ookook]

I have played in 2 keeper leagues.

The first was keep 3, for each you keep you give up your lowest available pick.

The second was keep 3, you give up a pick 2 rounds earlier than you drafted them. Undrafted counts as round 9.

I ended up prefering the former in the long run. Worked out much better, required no record keeping, and had none of the anomolies that happen in the D-2 sort of league (I kept three RBs each year, including ADP).

So I suggest give up earliest pick for each of the 2 keepers.

 

[Titans_fan]

I've been running a 2-keeper league for several seasons and we use a "penalty" system of 4 rounds prior. I feel too little a penalty (i.e. 1 or 2 rounds) isn't really a penalty if you grabbed Chris Johnson in round 12 or 14 his rookie season you'll have him the entire peak of his career (likely). In a 4-round penalty system, you might get him 2 or 3 years max, then back into the pool he goes.

Obviously, no one drafted in rounds 1-4 can be kept, so the majority of the upper echelon players are available. We also allow trading of future draft picks, however, you must have your ORIGINAL draft pick if yo want to keep somebody in that round. In other words, if you traded your third-round pick in the upcoming draft, you couldn't keep anyone drafted in the 7th round last year because you don't have your original 3rd round pick. (By original, I'm referring to the draft pick you would have in a "new league" where draft pick trading wasn't allowed.) In you traded for another owner's third-round pick, you still can't keep anybody drafted in the 7th because it wasn't YOUR pick originally.

Also, players hold their draft round throughout the regular season and offseason. If I acquire Boldin in a trade and he was drafted in the 6th round, he still carries that round for keeper considerations. If a player is drafted, dropped, and acquired via free agency, he maintains his drafted round for keeper consideration.

No owner has dominated in this format and I think the restrictions and "penalties" have been a big reason why.

 

[SSOG]

I thought your league was a no penalty league because MJD was being kept for a 17th rounder. I assumed he could not have been drafted later than that. I stand corrected. He was a free agent. Even worse. How many rounds do you have and what are the positional limits? Either way, putting quotation marks around "parity mechanism" doesn't divert from the fact that positional limits are just that. It is very similar to shortening roster sizes.

You can stand by your position all day long but it'll still be wrong. The value of top keepers is only great when they were drafted very late (or strangely picked up off of the free agent pool). So you pretty much have to strike gold (luck). Is that how a guy starting a league wants to base his league? I hope not. The fact of the matter is that a large percentage of "top keepers" are not even keeper eligible in increasing draft penalty leagues. Anyone drafted in the first two rounds is automatically back in the pool. In your league people actually have a shot at acquiring Deangelo Williams and Gore. You can't get a preseason top 10 back on your team in a no penalty league unless you already had him. So in your league a guy with crappy keepers can get one and be more competitive (read: parity) whereas in a no penalty system that guy will be rebuilding and looking for youth with potential.

I put "parity mechanism" in quotes because I find that any additional rule designed to create parity really only creates an advantage for whatever shark is smart enough to exploit it. For instance, in the first two years of the league, the smarter owners in the league used the positional limits (a supposed "parity mechanism") to dominate. While everyone was going RB heavy like they would in a non-limit league, the smart owners got a couple of starters and then ignored the position because they realized that the talent pool in round 22 would be essentially identical to the talent pool in round 10-12. I tend to view rules as nothing more than an opportunity for smart owners to gain an advantage. Which doesn't make for a great "parity mechanism".You're right that the value of top keepers is only great when they were drafted very late... but whether you think that's luck or not, the fact remains that somewhere, somehow, there will be an uberstud starter that was drafted very late. It's guaranteed to happen. Our league started in 2004, and Reggie Wayne, Larry Johnson, and Antonio Gates were all drafted in round 15 or later. If we'd started in 2003, Anquan Boldin would have been drafted super late. MJD and Marques Colston were both drafted late or picked up off the street. Jamaal Charles was a late pickup. Miles Austin was a free agent. You want to say that the guys who grabbed those players got lucky, that's fine... but it doesn't change the fact that those guys were picked up for pennies on the dollar.

Top keepers in a draft penalty league have more value than top keepers in a no penalty league. Period. Whoever owns those keepers in a penalty league has a greater advantage than whoever owns the top keepers in a no penalty league. Therefore, keeper penalties don't promote parity.

 

[SSOG]

You agreed with my point about top keepers only being valuable when drafted late yet you restated the blanket statement of "top keepers in a penalty league have more value than in a no penalty league." So I'll restate that this is crap. Most of these top keepers are forced off of teams and into the draft or they cost a team dearly to keep them, thus the parity. The best players typically re-enter the draft or cost a lot to keep. It was worth repeating/rephrasing. Maybe it'll sink in the second time. Striking gold late in the draft is super nice. I'll grant you that. But that could happen to almost anyone in your league because the smart players can't horde the sleepers due to the position limitations.

I don't think you understand what the phrase "top keeper" means. Here's a quick tip- if you cannot keep a player, he's not a top keeper. He's not a keeper, period. If you can keep a player, but he's so expensive that the value you get from him barely outweighs the value you give up in return, he's not a top keeper. He's barely a quality keeper. The phrase "top keeper" refers to one of the 2-3 best keepers in the entire league. MJD for a 17th is a top keeper. Chris Johnson for a 9th is a top keeper. Adrian Peterson for a 1st is not a top keeper.You're right that striking gold could happen to anyone. In fact, it WILL happen to someone. And when it does, that person will have a larger advantage, because TOP KEEPERS (i.e. the "gold strikes") are worth more in penalty leagues than they are in non-penalty leagues. I really don't get what's so hard to understand about this concept. MJD for a 17th in a penalty league is worth more than Chris Johnson in a no-penalty league; therefore, the owner with MJD for a 17th in a penalty league has a greater advantage than the owner with Chris Johnson in a no-penalty league; therefore, the penalty mechanism does not wind up serving as an instrument of parity.

In the keeper league settings I suggested to the OP there are no position limits. You can horde running backs and trade them for future picks. And you can't plan on keeping a TE and a QB because due to the lack of limits (and the lack of silly TE amplifiers), RB depth is depleted quickly. Don't you realize that you have a lot of parity settings or non-typical settings that mask or even somewhat lessen the parity normally caused by draft penalties? You are able to get by with a RB, TE, and QB because your setting de-emphasize the value of RB's. In a league without position limits and TE heavy settings, you can't get away with that. In my league keeping both a TE and QB really cripples you. There isn't a wealth of RB talent being re-introduced into the draft pool every season and there isn't late value at RB since we have no limits. Just because you stumbled upon a top TE in a TE heavy league and got MJD off of the free agent pool doesn't mean you know some secret to dominating draft penalty leagues. Your settings are odd and you were fortunate.

I've rationalized to myself that I've been posting in the spirit of informing the OP as to what settings he should start his league and I don't want your opinion to wrongly influence his decision. Without stipulating all the unique rules of your league, your experience yields very little credence to your opinion on the matter at hand. Your deep draft, position limits, TE point settings, and inexplicable available free agents in your league make it a special case. I'm not even sure why I'm bothering to argue with you about this stuff seeing as how I don't even know if the OP is still looking for opinions on the matter or if he has already made a decision. Our debate seems to be solely rooted in our combined argumentative natures.

So, greggorymac, you still checking this? What have you gotten from this thread? You made a decision yet?

I like all the personal attacks on my league. You're coming a hair's breadth away from accusing me of being a guppy because TEs are valuable in my league ("silly TE amplifiers"). You then say that draft penalties are a parity mechanism, and short rosters are a parity mechanism, but when you combine them you create some sort of space-time vortex that actually winds up LESSENING parity (apparently two rights make a wrong now...).Regardless of the rules (TE heavy, not TE heavy, positional limits, no positional limits, etc), eventually, somebody is going to get a keeper who is much more valuable than any other keeper in the entire league by a massive margin. You have already acknowledged that it's an absolute certainty that it will happen. And when it does happen, the draft penalty system will serve to REDUCE parity, because no other team in the league can manage to retain as much value from season to season as that lucky team that won the golden ticket.

 

[GregR_2]

...Luck is a parity mechanism because everyone hits it eventually. Having no draft penalties helps cull this effect....

 

[bonscott]

In my league we do similar to the above. 12 teams, can keep up to 5 players, no positional limits.

Each drafted player is assigned a "keeper number" or KN which equals the round they were drafted in.

Each year kept that number reduces by 2 and that number will then equal the round given up to keep the player.

When a KN equals 0 or less the player can no longer be kept and goes back to the draft. Thus all 1st and 2nd round players can never be kept.

Example: I draft Bob Smith in the 8th round. Next year I can keep him for a 6th round pick. The year after that a 4th round, 2nd the year after that and then he goes back to the draft (assuming he hasn't already been let go due to not being worth keeping).

This has worked great for us for nearly 10 years. It's a great balance in that the top players in each year's draft go back to the draft the following year. Players can't be kept forever and eventually go back and it really rewards late round gems. And it allows teams to reload the following year without being locked out of the best players.

Free Agents picked up after the draft get assigned a KN of 9, thus if kept the next year it would be a 7. We used to assign a 12 to free agents but 9 works better for us creating a bit more turnover.

 

[AbidingDude]

In my league we do similar to the above. 12 teams, can keep up to 5 players, no positional limits.Each drafted player is assigned a "keeper number" or KN which equals the round they were drafted in.Each year kept that number reduces by 2 and that number will then equal the round given up to keep the player.When a KN equals 0 or less the player can no longer be kept and goes back to the draft. Thus all 1st and 2nd round players can never be kept.Example: I draft Bob Smith in the 8th round. Next year I can keep him for a 6th round pick. The year after that a 4th round, 2nd the year after that and then he goes back to the draft (assuming he hasn't already been let go due to not being worth keeping).This has worked great for us for nearly 10 years. It's a great balance in that the top players in each year's draft go back to the draft the following year. Players can't be kept forever and eventually go back and it really rewards late round gems. And it allows teams to reload the following year without being locked out of the best players.Free Agents picked up after the draft get assigned a KN of 9, thus if kept the next year it would be a 7. We used to assign a 12 to free agents but 9 works better for us creating a bit more turnover.

I am starting a keeper league as well this year. I have searched dozens of threads here to glean some knowledge on different systems and here is what I found.Increasing penalty leagues are not necessarily about increasing parity, but decreasing the amount of time a player can spend on a single roster. Those rules can be stretched to ensure that their is top talent available in the draft every year which would increase parity. However, they can also be stretched to give players that land a late round gem a huge advantage. While most teams are giving up some 1 - 5 draft picks on marginal talent, one team is giving up late draft picks on top talent. In a league where everyone essentially uses up their top 3 picks, everyone starts in the 4th round. But in a league with increasing penalties some teams start with valuable keepers and their 1st round pick while other teams that did not draft as well have to keep a player that costs them their 1st round pick. When you look at the talent available at that pick (this all depends on the rules and whether the talent is guaranteed to be 1st round talent or can possibly be 4th round talent) it could make sense that someone would give up that pick to keep a more valuable player. But it gives the teams with late keepers an extra 4th rounder on their team. Then the advantage only adds up after that.I am thinking of the following keeper rules:Each team must franchise 1 player on their roster. The franchised player may be kept for a maximum of 3 concurrent years on that teams roster. Franchised players will be "drafted" in round "0". If an owner no longer wishes to keep the previously franchised player, that player will return to the draft pool for that season. Each team may also keep up to an additional 4 players that are on their roster. Each player designated as a "keeper" will be slotted into the owner's draft order at 2 rounds higher than the round they were previously drafted at. (draft picks acquired through trade may not be used to keep any player) This means that in order to keep a first or second round drafted player they must be franchised. In order to keep a 3rd round drafted player you must give up your first round draft pick. The last pick you are allowed to use to keep a player is round 9. This means any players drafted after round 11 or undrafted free agents later acquired will require at least a 9th round draft slot. All drafted players will retain their draft round status regardless of whether they change rosters through trade or free agency. If you have multiple free agent acquisitions you wish to keep, you must designate the rounds they will be kept in starting in round 9 and counting up. FOR EXAMPLE:Last year I acquired undrafted WR Jeremy Maclin and undrafted WR Pierre Garcon from the waiver wire. I wish to keep both players for this season, and will select Garcon in the 9th round and Maclin in the 8th round. If I drafted Leon Washington in the 10th round, then I must designate those three players to be drafted in one of the 9th, 8th, and 7th rounds. After I have designated which round those players retain that status until they are returned to the draft pool and redrafted, or they are kept again at which point they will move up 2 rounds.A manager may not franchise a player after keeping him for 3 concurrent years on that teams roster in order to keep that player an additional 3 years.I think this allows top picks to be kept for a while, adds an advantage to scoring talent later in the draft and presents some interesting strategies to each draft. Also, I imposed these rules on the last 3 years of draft histories to see how it played out. The first year probably changes to have a run on young talent in the middle of the draft. The second year there will still be some second round talent available due to the rules. This will allow teams to catch up as they feel their way - some parity. The third year however, most of the talent will still be on a roster somewhere. Some may still be available in the first round, which presents interesting decisions to make whether to keep a player that may cost you a first round pick or release that player to try to get an upgrade. In the 4th year there will probably be at least 12 decent players that make it back into the draft pool - but not necessarily. My test on draft histories showed injuries and smart drafting meant teams were not always losing a valuable player from their keeper list.Thoughts?

 

[kylechoffman]

I want to resurrect this thread because my long standing keeper league is considering going from our current format to a pick penalty league.

Our Current system is 12 team, 2 player keeper league. You may keep the players for 3 seasons and after three seasons the player goes back to the pool. A players first year in the keeper calendar is the first year they were drafted, so if I drafted matthews this season and kept him, I could hold him until 2013.

We would like to move to a keep 2 player league with penalties The 3 year keeper window would remain but we are toying with allowing any player to be kept at their round drafted minus 2 rounds. So if I took nicks in round 6, he would cost me a 4th next season. In the next season, he would cost me a second.

Here is our problem - our draft results got wiped out so we dont have any history of our draft (ESPN got f'd up and we had to manually load rosters). We dont know the best way to transition to this new format and see two options.

Option 1- keep the current format in place for 2011 and draft 2011 knowing that we are moving to a new format. One problem is how to handle the keepers that are kept this offseason. What do they cost us for 2012 since we dont know what round they were drafted in OR if they were keepers from 2009, we dont know where we drafted them previously.

Option 2 - Use end of year rankings to determine where players value lies. So as an example, top 5 players at QB, RB, WR cost a 1st rounder, 6-15 cost a second rounder, 15-25 cost third rounder and so on. Create valuation kind of like preseason rankings to determine the cost for keeping someone. One problem is that people may have different values for next season and someone who is top 5 this season could be moved to a bad situation or go to jail or get injured etc. This isnt a huge problem since we dont elect keepers until mid august but something to think about.

Thanks for input.

 

[Herm23]

My league that has been running for many years uses the following setup:

- We keep 5 offensive players and 1 defensive player (it is a simplified IDP league)

- Any player that is kept costs you the round he was drafted in (a player drafted in round 1 costs you a 1st round pick to keep, a 2nd rounder costs you a 2nd round pick to keep, etc...)

- When a player is drafted, he assumes a 3 year contract. During this 3 year contract, his keeper cost remains the same to his original draft cost, provided he does not go back into the draft

- After the 3 year contract is up, the player automatically assumes a 1st round cost to be kept

- If a player is not kept and is redrafted, it resets his contract and he assumes the new cost of whatever round he was drafted in

- You can keep players drafted in the same round, with the draft pick cost rounding up (meaning if you have 2 players drafted in the 3rd round, you may keep them both for the cost of a 2nd and 3rd round pick). You may not, however, keep two 1st round players

This system, at least in my opinion, is essentially the best combination of all of the ideas in this thread and has served us well for many years. Part of the problem with a system that penalizes 2 rounds above the draft cost is that it prevents you from keeping personal favorites (for instance, my league is a local Minnesota league and Adrian Peterson would essentially never be able to be kept). Part of the fun of keeper leagues is the ability to "attatch" yourself to players and adopt them as favorites. Why hamper that ability by taking away your opportunity to keep any highly drafted player?

At the same time, I completely understand the argument that says keeping MJD for a 17th round cost for the next 8 years is such an extreme advantage to that team that it becomes almost unfair. Enter the 3 year contract, which allows the owner who was shrewd enough to acquire MJD for a 17th round cost (or Mendenhall for a 9th, Ray Rice for a 6th, Miles Austin as a free agent, etc...) to reap the rewards for a decent length of time while not making it such a prohibitive advantage for the duration of his career.

This system also ensures the top of the draft is well stocked due to 2 factors. First, people are always careful to not keep 1st or 2nd round players that may be overpriced or not as good of a bargain as other, cheaper players on their roster (this upcoming season for us, Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Michael Turner, Drew Brees, Knowshon Moreno, Beanie Wells, Ryan Mathews, and several others will be available because they are either too expensive for their worth or owners have better or equal keeper options that are significantly cheaper). Second, due to the 3 year contracts, people are always trying to balance their keeper group so the contracts aren't all expiring in the same year (you NEVER want wall 5 of your core keepers to have their contract expire at the same time, meaning you would only be able to keep 1 of them). This has caused elite players to be released before their contract is up simply because the owner already had 4 or 5 elite options with the same contract length remaining.

The last benefit of this system is it greatly promotes trading. Big name players get dealt an above average amount of time in our league, not because everyone is trade happy, but becase the owners are shrewd and are always on the lookout for a great deal or to stagger contract lengths. This results in a lot of trades, which is always fun.

 

[footballnerd]

1 keeper drafted in the 5th or later, can only keep 1 year, you lose the round you drafted the player

1 keeper drafted in the 5th or later, can keep for 3 years, you lose the round you drafted the player and plus 1 round each year after.

 

[LittlePhatty]

allowing any player to be kept at their round drafted minus 2 rounds. So if I took nicks in round 6, he would cost me a 4th next season.

This is how our league does it and I really like it. It does several useful things:

- It gives weight to a player's trade value

- It makes the "who to keep" decision more challenging

- And it makes the last rounds of your draft more fun

Here is our problem - our draft results got wiped out

Hmm. I don't like the idea of basing player values for next year off the this year's stats/rankings. it defeats the concept of being able to keep a player in a later round that has out-performed their ADP.I'd say find an ADP list for the current 2010 pre-season, or even a mock draft, somewhere on the web and then have everyone agree on it. Then use those results as if they were your own draft, because chances are fairly good that your league was close to those results.

Take the Football Guys ADP list for example. Make sure everyone agrees that it is a decent approximation of how your league drafted before this season. It won't be exact of course. Then assign players to draft rounds for keepers.

Example: Hakeem Nicks is listed in the #54 consensus slot. That's Round 5 in a 12-team league, so whoever has him can keep him next year as their 3rd round choice.

 

[Ice Cream Man]

Our rules:

Keep 4 offensive players and 4 defensive players (kickers defined as defensive for this purpose). Context: Rosters are about 27 players deep, start 15 players (8 off, 7 def).

No penalty.

Only caveat: Players not drafted cannot be kept. [i.e. if you were lucky to have picked up Steve Johnson or Blount etc midseason, you would enjoy their output this season, but if they were not chosen (by someone) in the draft in August they would be free agents at the end of the season.]

After 8 years, no problems.