Make bench spots draftable (1 Viewer)

[Ryan99]

How much would an extra bench position be worth to you? Obviously this depends on the number you have ... the marginal value for that next spot goes down the more you have.

I was thinking that an interesting way of valuing these spots would simply be to make them draftable. Say you're in a 12 team league with 9 starting positions and 7 bench spots. Everyone starts the draft with 9 spots and the remaining 12x7=84 bench spots are added to the pool of players and the draft is extended by 7 rounds. So when your draft slot comes around (or someone nominates one in auction) you can draft a player or an additional bench spot.

You can also make bench spots tradable.

There's two different caveats to this I can think of:

1) If you don't have a bench spot for a player you can't draft one, so you're forced to draft a bench spot instead. If there are none left you're out of luck and your draft is over at that point (somewhat harsh, might work for hardcore leagues).

(edit) OR

2) You can draft as many players as you want but at a certain date (say 1 week before the 1st game) you have to cut down to the number of players that fit on your bench. this seems better for a casual league, and mimics offseason cut days in a nifty way.

Getting an "extra" bench spot, especially since it deprives someone else of one, would be a huge advantage in a 7 bench league.

Questions: Have you heard of anything like this before? Would you enjoy drafting in a league like this? When do you think the first bench spot would be drafted? Any general thoughts?

 

[Concept Coop]

Never heard of anything like it. Don't know that I would be interested. It would add another level of strategy, but I don't know how applicable it is. Interesting to ponder, at the very least.

 

[John 14:6]

Considering how much I go after free agents in my leagues, I'd draft as many bench spots as I could before drafting back-ups...

 

[Dr. Octopus]

So you can draft a bench spot, but then you will be starting less than the 9 palyers everyone else is?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Considering how much I go after free agents in my leagues, I'd draft as many bench spots as I could before drafting back-ups...

Wouldn't those backups be bench spots?

 

[John 14:6]

Considering how much I go after free agents in my leagues, I'd draft as many bench spots as I could before drafting back-ups...

Wouldn't those backups be bench spots?

Unless I'm misunderstanding, first I would have to bench spots before I can draft the back-ups to fill them...

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Interesting idea if it were fine tuned a bit perhaps. (Don't have any real exact suggestions right now)

Perhaps incorporating it into determining draft positions & making them tradeable could work

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Considering how much I go after free agents in my leagues, I'd draft as many bench spots as I could before drafting back-ups...

Wouldn't those backups be bench spots?

Unless I'm misunderstanding, first I would have to bench spots before I can draft the back-ups to fill them...

That's what doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[John 14:6]

That's what doesn't make any sense to me.

An example would be, a team could draft 9 players to fill its line-up. Then, before it could draft another player, first it would have to draft the bench opening, and then the next round it could draft a player to put there...

 

[Ryan99]

That's what doesn't make any sense to me.

An example would be, a team could draft 9 players to fill its line-up. Then, before it could draft another player, first it would have to draft the bench opening, and then the next round it could draft a player to put there...

That's one option. The other option is you draft as many players as you want and then there's a "cut day" prior to the first game where you have to get down to the number of players you have spots for. I like the second option, but the first is more cut throat.

 

[John 14:6]

It's an interesting idea, but I personally don't see much appeal.

 

[unckeyherb]

That sounds terrible. Sorry.

 

[Eminence]

I like it but at what round would this become efficient? Giving up picks 10, 11, 12 to gain picks 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18?

From that perspective you'd be a fool not to since everyone would still be drafting DEF and K.

If you made it so you had to give up rounds 4, 5, 6. It would make more sense.

I'd rather NOT have Shonn Greene and have had room to pickup Cecil Shorts this season.

Interesting but not practical.

 

[packseasontix]

Would be interesting if it was with Auction.

$200

QB, 2RB, 2WR, TE, 2Flex, K, DEF

Use up all your money and your team with roster size it fixed.

So if you drafted 40 people on draft day you get that many roster spots all year, if all you draft is 10 then you only get 10 roster spots all year.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Is there any software that could accommodate 10-16 teams all having differing amounts of roster space?

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Why on earth would I ever draft a bench spot any earlier than absolutely necessary?

 

[Ryan99]

Why on earth would I ever draft a bench spot any earlier than absolutely necessary?

Because it might allow you to gain more bench spots than some others owners. Bench spots are extremely valuable. What draft pick would you give up in a standard snake draft in exchange for an extra bench spot? Look at the players that were drafted in, say, the 7th round and compare having one of those guys to having an extra spot to pick up waiver stars all year.In a league with a "normal" amount of bench spots (6-8) my guess is they would start going somewhere in rounds 5-7.Imagine a league with just one bench spot per person. If I was drafting on the turn in rounds 1/2 I would seriously consider drafting bench, bench with my first two picks.

 

[Chachi]

The Chachinator is not on board with this idea.

 

[footballnerd]

I'd draft all bench spots and have a field day towards the 2nd half of the season.

 

[DiStefano]

I would bench this idea. Permanently.

 

[packseasontix]

I'd draft all bench spots and have a field day towards the 2nd half of the season.

Exactly, it would be interesting as you could take all the waivers where as everyone else would need to drop a starter to pick anyone up.I still think the best way to do this would not be snake draft but auction as then its not so cut and dry and you could spend all your money on starters or save money for the end and build a larger roster.

 

[SSOG]

I've seen a league that got the exact same results through different methods. Everyone drafted the same number of players, but if you later traded a player, you traded that bench spot with him. So, for instance, I could draft Arian Foster #1 overall, and then during preseason trade him to you for the last 6 players you drafted, and afterwards I'd have 5 extra roster spots and you'd have 5 fewer. I wouldn't want every league like that, but it was a really fun and interesting change.

 

[Ryan99]

I'd draft all bench spots and have a field day towards the 2nd half of the season.

Let's say you use every pick on a bench spot until there are none left. You'll surely wind up with more than anybody else, but how many more depends on the other players' draft strategies. Let's say you wind up with 10 bench spots (other people have 6 or 7). That means that you're not drafting any players for the first 10 rounds. Meanwhile other owners have drafted 3 or 4 players during that period.Will this work out for you? Maybe, but it's certainly not obvious that it's an optimal strategy.Here's another question. You join a league late after the draft happened but before any roster moves have been made. Assume the league is 9 starters and 7 bench. How many roster spots would you need for it to be "fair", considering that you will get to pick up that many players before the existing teams make any additional moves? I'm not sure any number of spots would be fair. You'd be extremely hard pressed to field a winning team in the beginning of the year and there's no guarantee you'll find consistent starters, much less #1s, at any position.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Why on earth would I ever draft a bench spot any earlier than absolutely necessary?

Because it might allow you to gain more bench spots than some others owners. Bench spots are extremely valuable. What draft pick would you give up in a standard snake draft in exchange for an extra bench spot? Look at the players that were drafted in, say, the 7th round and compare having one of those guys to having an extra spot to pick up waiver stars all year.In a league with a "normal" amount of bench spots (6-8) my guess is they would start going somewhere in rounds 5-7.

Imagine a league with just one bench spot per person. If I was drafting on the turn in rounds 1/2 I would seriously consider drafting bench, bench with my first two picks.

I don't know, man, I think you're way off the mark. Bench spots aren't that valuable. Especially if I could acquire them later via trade, there's no way I'd be wasting a 5th round pick on one. You're effectively trading a 5th round pick for a... 23rd round pick or something. I don't see a scenario really playing out where I end up losing a bunch of bench spots. I mean, by the time the 10th round comes ill have no choice but to start taking them, and it's not like all 84 of them will be off the board by that point. If they are, then I'm going to have an enormously stacked team. That would mean I'd have 9 of the top ~36 players in the draft. I'll take that all day, bench spots be damned.

Remember, studs are more valuable than their nominal equivalent in less productive players, e.g. a player projected to score 250 points is better than two players projected to score 125 points each, or even 150 points each. I know you're not guaranteed to get studs earlier in the draft but on average it's more likely your going to get studs in the early rounds than the late rounds.

Sure, there's certainly value to having bench spots but I'm just not seeing any value to taking them much earlier than I'd be forced to. That's not to say it isn't an interesting concept, it might be fun to try one year.

 

[Ryan99]

I don't know, man, I think you're way off the mark. Bench spots aren't that valuable. Especially if I could acquire them later via trade, there's no way I'd be wasting a 5th round pick on one. You're effectively trading a 5th round pick for a... 23rd round pick or something.

I don't see a scenario really playing out where I end up losing a bunch of bench spots. I mean, by the time the 10th round comes ill have no choice but to start taking them, and it's not like all 84 of them will be off the board by that point. If they are, then I'm going to have an enormously stacked team. That would mean I'd have 9 of the top ~36 players in the draft. I'll take that all day, bench spots be damned.

Remember, studs are more valuable than their nominal equivalent in less productive players, e.g. a player projected to score 250 points is better than two players projected to score 125 points each, or even 150 points each. I know you're not guaranteed to get studs earlier in the draft but on average it's more likely your going to get studs in the early rounds than the late rounds.

Sure, there's certainly value to having bench spots but I'm just not seeing any value to taking them much earlier than I'd be forced to. That's not to say it isn't an interesting concept, it might be fun to try one year.

Ok, so here's a question for you. In a league with 9 starters and 7 bench spots, would you play in the league with only 9 roster sots if you got the first 9 picks? What about if your first pick was the last pick in the first round and then you got the next 8 consecutive picks?Some people are pretty convinced that you should only draft bench spots, and some think bench spots aren't valuable at all. To me this indicates that people really don't have a good handle on the value of having an extra bench spot, which was one of the reasons I proposed this little thought experiment to begin with.

Another way to think about this is which players would you give up a bench spot to get? Going into this season I would have said Foster, Rice, McCoy, Rodgers, Brees, Brady and Calvin Johnson. And that's it. If you're going to sell a bench spot for a player and it doesn't work out it really hurts you, so you're taking a huge gamble.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I don't know, man, I think you're way off the mark. Bench spots aren't that valuable. Especially if I could acquire them later via trade, there's no way I'd be wasting a 5th round pick on one. You're effectively trading a 5th round pick for a... 23rd round pick or something.

I don't see a scenario really playing out where I end up losing a bunch of bench spots. I mean, by the time the 10th round comes ill have no choice but to start taking them, and it's not like all 84 of them will be off the board by that point. If they are, then I'm going to have an enormously stacked team. That would mean I'd have 9 of the top ~36 players in the draft. I'll take that all day, bench spots be damned.

Remember, studs are more valuable than their nominal equivalent in less productive players, e.g. a player projected to score 250 points is better than two players projected to score 125 points each, or even 150 points each. I know you're not guaranteed to get studs earlier in the draft but on average it's more likely your going to get studs in the early rounds than the late rounds.

Sure, there's certainly value to having bench spots but I'm just not seeing any value to taking them much earlier than I'd be forced to. That's not to say it isn't an interesting concept, it might be fun to try one year.

Ok, so here's a question for you. In a league with 9 starters and 7 bench spots, would you play in the league with only 9 roster sots if you got the first 9 picks? What about if your first pick was the last pick in the first round and then you got the next 8 consecutive picks?Some people are pretty convinced that you should only draft bench spots, and some think bench spots aren't valuable at all. To me this indicates that people really don't have a good handle on the value of having an extra bench spot, which was one of the reasons I proposed this little thought experiment to begin with.

Another way to think about this is which players would you give up a bench spot to get? Going into this season I would have said Foster, Rice, McCoy, Rodgers, Brees, Brady and Calvin Johnson. And that's it. If you're going to sell a bench spot for a player and it doesn't work out it really hurts you, so you're taking a huge gamble.

Sure, hypothetically if you offered me 9 of the first 20 picks or whatever, I might just take my chances with that kind of team. It would suck having no bench but that starting lineup would have a pretty high probability of being dominant. Of course,as I said, in reality I wouldn't end up with that kind of team because 84 of the first 108 picks wouldn't actually be empty bench spots. So I would draft players in the first nine rounds like I normally would, and then start taking bench spots when I needed to. I might end up losing one or two bench spots - I wouldn't realistically expect to miss out on much more than that, and the guys that drafted them ahead of me would be letting better players fall to me in the draft by doing so.

It's not like these other owners will have higher waiver priority than me. There will still only be 192 players off the board at any given time, so this doesn't change the landscape of free agency. I could always acquire bench spots through a trade if I changed my mind after the draft.

Like I said, on draft day, every time you consider taking a bench spot, you're effectively considering trading that pick for a 17th or whatever round pick + whatever tangible marginal value you place on an extra spot at the bottom of your roster. I wouldn't make that kind of trade in any of the earlier rounds of the draft.

 

[SSOG]

I think a more interesting way to do it would be to draft bench sizes, not bench spots. Everyone gets 9 starting roster spots, and then there are 12 "benches" out there. One bench is "12 man", one bench is "11 man", one bench is "10 man", and on down to "1 man". Then you could spend your first round pick to secure the 12 man bench, or your 5th round pick to get the 8 man bench, or maybe spend an 18th rounder to grab that 3 man bench. Otherwise the problem becomes in order to get a 12 man bench, you'd need to use TWELVE draft picks, including a huge percentage of your top 10 picks. That's just way too much draft value to give for way too little return. If getting a twelve man bench will cost my 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 14th, 15th, 16th, and 17th, then forget it. If all it costs is my first, then that's much more interesting.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Why on earth would I ever draft a bench spot any earlier than absolutely necessary?

Because it might allow you to gain more bench spots than some others owners. Bench spots are extremely valuable. What draft pick would you give up in a standard snake draft in exchange for an extra bench spot? Look at the players that were drafted in, say, the 7th round and compare having one of those guys to having an extra spot to pick up waiver stars all year.In a league with a "normal" amount of bench spots (6-8) my guess is they would start going somewhere in rounds 5-7.Imagine a league with just one bench spot per person. If I was drafting on the turn in rounds 1/2 I would seriously consider drafting bench, bench with my first two picks.

Who needs megatron/steven jackson. I have extra bench slots.