Question for all you commishes out there (1 Viewer)

[Riffraff]

Lottery.

They can only tank long enough to get into the lottery, then it's out of their hands.

 

[Riffraff]

non-playoff teams are determined by the inverse order of "Potential Points".

This would work well too.

 

[jevy]

It's all about having good, solid owners that realize they have a responsibility to keep the integrity of the league. If a guy is willing to tank a game he is probably willing to be involved in other shady business.

I've commished leagues forever, and what you say is good and all, but it takes more than that. You need a solid system. I'm leaning toward the weighted lotto system for non-playoff teams if I can get a site to provide this service.

It's easy. Assign each team a range of numbers, weighted by suckiness. Do a die roll on irony.com that covers your range - if it's 100 numbers roll a d100. Then remove the range that was succesful, and roll for second spot with a lower die.

I'm not that smart, you lost me. Be specific with every step.

Nevermind, I believe I understand what you are saying. edited to say I just quoted myself, lol.

JohnnyU or Anyone Else: Regarding the NBA lotto style draft on Irony.com...Please list step by step with links if possible on how to do this. Thanks.

The problem we have is that you can't set the number of sides on the die outside of the provided numbers.This is what I would do.Assume 6 teams miss the playoffs. Assign each team a group of numbers, so Team 1 = 10 balls so give them 1-10Team 2 = 8 balls so give them 11-18Team 3 = 6 balls so give them 19-24Team 4 = 3 balls so give them 25-27Team 5 = 2 balls so give them 28-29Team 6 = 1 ball so give them 30Goto irony.comHow many dice to roll -> 1How many sides -> 30**Add/Subtract - NoDon't drop highest or lowestRepeat 20 times. (just to be safe)After you get the list of number, compare them to the numbers assigned to each team.Roll 1: 28. - Team 5Roll 2: 6. - Team 1Roll 3: 27. - Team 4Roll 4: 8. - ignoredRoll 5: 3. - ignoredRoll 6: 20. - Team 3Roll 7: 15. - Team 2Last pick goes to Team 6.mailing info - I'm not sure if you can mail the results to everyone in your league at once. If not, send the results to yourself and the co-commish (or someone else in the league) so there are 2 copies of the numbers.**Using 100 or 1000 instead of 30 would probably be a better idea. Adjust the numbers for each team accordingly.

 

[el centro]

Consolation playoffs at the end of the year with the winner getting their entry fee back and pick of draft slot.

Weekly high score payouts.

Maybe go to a lotto for draft picks of non-playoff teams would help.

Too much of a pain in the ###. You would need another get together to pull this off and one scheduled enough in advance to allow for trading of picks.

Not true... there is a Dice rolling site that would allow you to use this. We've used this in leagues before to determine draft order. In my re-draft league - we all live across the U.S. now, and this is the best way to determine draft order. You could use this same system for the Lottery system.

 

[JohnnyU]

The problem with using the lotto system in dynasty leagues, is that it really hurts the bad teams. The worst team should get 1.01 no matter what.

What about using the power rank for non-playoff teams only? How does MFL calculate the POWER RANK?

 

[XFLcommish]

The problem with the power rankins is that it uses records as part of it's formula (not sure what else). That's why we are using potential points.

 

[JohnnyU]

The problem with the power rankins is that it uses records as part of it's formula (not sure what else). That's why we are using potential points.

What about cstu's post which shows the bad side of potential points?

"I don't find that fair at all because in a league with large rosters an owner can be trying to put their best lineup in every week but lose even though they have a strong roster. Those owners shouldn't be punished for putting together a good team and getting hit with some bad luck."

 

[wannabee]

The problem with the power rankins is that it uses records as part of it's formula (not sure what else). That's why we are using potential points.

What about cstu's post which shows the bad side of potential points?

"I don't find that fair at all because in a league with large rosters an owner can be trying to put their best lineup in every week but lose even though they have a strong roster. Those owners shouldn't be punished for putting together a good team and getting hit with some bad luck."

the other thing with potential points is that some positions' back up players will outscore other positions. A back up QB like Alex Smith will outscore a backup WR like Wilford or even Kennison. Also goes for kickers. If you wanted lower potential points, just do not keep a backup kicker or QB that scores. Keep QBs like Campbell, Romo, etc over Alex Smith. This is just my initial thought about potential points. I do not play in a league that considers them, but I do think an astute owner could find a way around this.

 

[cstu]

In the 12 team contract dynasty league I run, we had a problem with a couple teams tanking last year. This year we implemented a new rule to prevent that.Picks 1-8 (non-playoff teams) are determined by the inverse order of "Potential Points". This ensure the worst team gets the higest picks.Picks 9-12 are the inverse order of playoff results.My $0.02.

Like I said, PP is punishment for the teams with good bench players. For example, with all else equal a team that has 3 starting QB's on the roster would draft after the guy with 1 start and two backups. To me, that method only encourages people to draft young players who don't get a lot of playing time to keep their PP down.

 

[coolnerd]

I would say that a subtile tank would be impossible to enforce w/o asome strong armed measured. since you are dealing with poor teams, a good perecentage of these owners got to their record honestly, through making bad decisions. .

 

[XFLcommish]

I'm not talking about total points scored. I'm talking about potential points. The points a team would have if they started the highest scoring players each week within the limits of your starting lineup rules.

I think this gives the truly worse teams the better picks. You may have an unlucky owner get a lower pick that his 'record', but he didn't start the right guys or just had bad luck with matchups. My goal as a commissioner is to get the worst team the first pick, etc. I think this does it better than any other option.

 

[Sweeper]

Trash talk the owner into humiliation. Make a big deal out of his poor football knowledge and get the entire league to laugh at him.

Other then that, are you sure it is not stupidity or ignorance over an actual attempt to tank the game? I mean, 10 minutes on any givien Sunday morning in the ACF can surely convince you that this might just be plain ol' ignorance.

 

[heckmanm]

You know what I mean. Owners who better their draft position by benching guys who should be starting, but isn't bad enough to raise a stink, in hopes to lose games. Example, benching Palmer for Kitna, or Wayne for Reggie Brown, or Rudi Johnson with a great matchup in favor of Lamont Jordan with a horrible matchup, or McGahee for Lundy (although not so subtle)?

Two words: Potential Points. Keep track of both actual points scored by starters, and the points that would have been scored by the best possible lineup each week. Use PP to set your worst-to-first sequences for draft, WW, etc. The only way to tank is to remove good players from your team, which is counter-productive in dynasty.The potential point rankings more accurately reflect the strength of the team, and in a worst-to-first draft, that's what you're looking for, right?

I don't find that fair at all because in a league with large rosters an owner can be trying to put their best lineup in every week but lose even though they have a strong roster. Those owners shouldn't be punished for putting together a good team and getting hit with some bad luck.

So if a really strong, deep team had a run of bad luck, they should draft ahead of a team that's very thin, but caught a few breaks? Isn't that going to make the strong team even stronger the next year, at the expense of the weaker team?Over the course of a season (and barring injury), a team with more strong players will likely outperform a team with fewer. You may hit a bad streak for a few weeks, but I'd say if you're consistently starting players who are far outscored by your bench, you might need to look at your methods for starter selection.I will say that my experience is in a large league (16 teams). In a small league, say 8-10 teams, I could see where a team could have so many studs that it's much harder to pick the right ones. Perhaps PP wouldn't work as well there. We've been using it for 3 or 4 years now, and have had no complaints.

 

[XFLcommish]

You know what I mean. Owners who better their draft position by benching guys who should be starting, but isn't bad enough to raise a stink, in hopes to lose games. Example, benching Palmer for Kitna, or Wayne for Reggie Brown, or Rudi Johnson with a great matchup in favor of Lamont Jordan with a horrible matchup, or McGahee for Lundy (although not so subtle)?

Two words: Potential Points. Keep track of both actual points scored by starters, and the points that would have been scored by the best possible lineup each week. Use PP to set your worst-to-first sequences for draft, WW, etc. The only way to tank is to remove good players from your team, which is counter-productive in dynasty.The potential point rankings more accurately reflect the strength of the team, and in a worst-to-first draft, that's what you're looking for, right?

I don't find that fair at all because in a league with large rosters an owner can be trying to put their best lineup in every week but lose even though they have a strong roster. Those owners shouldn't be punished for putting together a good team and getting hit with some bad luck.

So if a really strong, deep team had a run of bad luck, they should draft ahead of a team that's very thin, but caught a few breaks? Isn't that going to make the strong team even stronger the next year, at the expense of the weaker team?Over the course of a season (and barring injury), a team with more strong players will likely outperform a team with fewer. You may hit a bad streak for a few weeks, but I'd say if you're consistently starting players who are far outscored by your bench, you might need to look at your methods for starter selection.I will say that my experience is in a large league (16 teams). In a small league, say 8-10 teams, I could see where a team could have so many studs that it's much harder to pick the right ones. Perhaps PP wouldn't work as well there. We've been using it for 3 or 4 years now, and have had no complaints.

 

[BigRed]

You know what I mean. Owners who better their draft position by benching guys who should be starting, but isn't bad enough to raise a stink, in hopes to lose games. Example, benching Palmer for Kitna, or Wayne for Reggie Brown, or Rudi Johnson with a great matchup in favor of Lamont Jordan with a horrible matchup, or McGahee for Lundy (although not so subtle)?

er some of those "tankings" could have won you games this year.But if you really suspect it, there are many things you could do. For ex have everyone kick in an extra amount before the draft with an understanding they get it back at the end...except for weeks they finish last in scoring (or bottom 2 or whatever), for which they lose a certain amount (it's withheld).GB not in leagues w/those kind of owners.

 

[GregR_2]

You know what I mean. Owners who better their draft position by benching guys who should be starting, but isn't bad enough to raise a stink, in hopes to lose games. Example, benching Palmer for Kitna, or Wayne for Reggie Brown, or Rudi Johnson with a great matchup in favor of Lamont Jordan with a horrible matchup, or McGahee for Lundy (although not so subtle)?

Two words: Potential Points. Keep track of both actual points scored by starters, and the points that would have been scored by the best possible lineup each week. Use PP to set your worst-to-first sequences for draft, WW, etc. The only way to tank is to remove good players from your team, which is counter-productive in dynasty.The potential point rankings more accurately reflect the strength of the team, and in a worst-to-first draft, that's what you're looking for, right?

I don't find that fair at all because in a league with large rosters an owner can be trying to put their best lineup in every week but lose even though they have a strong roster. Those owners shouldn't be punished for putting together a good team and getting hit with some bad luck.

So if a really strong, deep team had a run of bad luck, they should draft ahead of a team that's very thin, but caught a few breaks? Isn't that going to make the strong team even stronger the next year, at the expense of the weaker team?Over the course of a season (and barring injury), a team with more strong players will likely outperform a team with fewer. You may hit a bad streak for a few weeks, but I'd say if you're consistently starting players who are far outscored by your bench, you might need to look at your methods for starter selection.I will say that my experience is in a large league (16 teams). In a small league, say 8-10 teams, I could see where a team could have so many studs that it's much harder to pick the right ones. Perhaps PP wouldn't work as well there. We've been using it for 3 or 4 years now, and have had no complaints.

I agree. I think most people would agree the spirit of the thing is that we're giving the earliest picks to the worst teams so they have the best chance to improve. Potential points is probably a truer measure of that than is record, anyway.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

However you want to do it, the worst team should not automatically be given the first pick. That eliminates the incentive to tank.

 

[nightshift]

Tanking not allowed in the rules? Is it defined in the rules? Is the penalty (s) laid out in the rules?

If it isn't forbidden by the rules, it's allowed. Otherwise, lay out the rules (be specific), warn them once , second time you replace them.

BTW, make sure it's tanking & not someone making a risky pick. When you got nothing to lose, you might gamble a little more on weak matchups, etc.

Just another reason why dynasty sucks - no one tanks in re-draft.

 

[suchislife]

Just another reason why dynasty sucks - no one tanks in re-draft.

Hmmm, not so sure about that. I've seen many 1-4 teams in re-draft pack it in for the season. As for dynasty leagues sucking, well to each his own I guess. Dynasty leagues only suck if you can't build a team. IMO, dynasty takes much more planning, forecasting, and has a year-long league-wide interest. Nothing like pulling off a trade in mid-May. Can't do that in re-draft. Its not easy managing your lineup, salary cap, contracts, etc.

 

[stevegamer]

It's all about having good, solid owners that realize they have a responsibility to keep the integrity of the league. If a guy is willing to tank a game he is probably willing to be involved in other shady business.

I've commished leagues forever, and what you say is good and all, but it takes more than that. You need a solid system. I'm leaning toward the weighted lotto system for non-playoff teams if I can get a site to provide this service.

It's easy. Assign each team a range of numbers, weighted by suckiness. Do a die roll on irony.com that covers your range - if it's 100 numbers roll a d100. Then remove the range that was succesful, and roll for second spot with a lower die.

What would you assign each team, starting with the best non-playoff team, going to the worst team? Give an example.

Just seeing this. An example with 6 non-playoff teams:Worst team: 1-60 (60 numbers)2nd worst: 61-110 (50 numbers)3rd worst: 111-150 (40 numbers)4th worst: 151-180 (30 numbers)5th worst: 181-200 (20 numbers)6th worst: 201-210 (10 numbers)I like 10 numbers per slot because it makes people feel there's more of a shot, even though the odds are the same whther its 10 out of 210 or 1 out of 21.Whomever gets the top draft pick, you remove the numbers they had, slide the others down - if needed, and go again. It might be marginally better to give the worst team the top 60 numbers, because it will lessen the odds of needing to slide down.

 

[SlimShady]

don't do anything. If they want to pay their money so they can suck and lose games, then so be it. Everyone gets an easy win and they get to continue sucking.

 

[XFLcommish]

don't do anything. If they want to pay their money so they can suck and lose games, then so be it. Everyone gets an easy win and they get to continue sucking.

That's not necessarily true. Below is my biggest issue.Scenario:Team one plays Team Z (tanking team) towards the beginning of the season when Team Z is playing all of their good players and Team Z gets lucky and wins their only game. Team one is fighting for a playoff spot against Team two. Team two plays Team Z later in the season when they are tanking. Team one really needs Team two to take a loss. Is this fair to Team two?? I don't think so. Every team should try to win every week.