Tanking (1 Viewer)

[Bytor]

I'm in a pretty big league (20 teams, dynasty format) and every year at this time we have to deal with the issue of owners selling the farm for draft picks for next year. I'm sure every other league out there has to deal with this, so I thought maybe I'd seek input on how they handle it. Do nothing? Offer incentives to remain competitive? What do you guys do?

All input is welcome.

 

[offdee]

It's just part of Dynasty strategy. Leagues just need to get used to it and embrace it...no real way to properly get around it.

ETA: one big thing is to instil a pay one season in advance entry fee so all teams have skin in the game for the future they are dealing. Your trades go wrong and you bail...them you lose money and your replacement owner gets a free first season to try and correct the wrongs.

 

[Jack White]

It's not tanking in a dyno or keeper league. Just like in baseball, there are going to be buyers and sellers at the deadline.

 

[Zyphros]

One thing I've done is if you stop trading of draft picks, lets say 2 years in advance, then if the commissioner sees fit and detects tanking (empty roster spots, clearly benching guys who are better plays, etc.) then for each infraction you take away their worst pick in the year they aren't allowed to trade. Example: If you allow trading for 2016 and 2017 and someone is tanking then you take away a 4th for 2018 for the 1st offense, 3rd for 2nd offense, 2nd for 3rd offense, and 1st for 4th offense. That and paying forward I've found to be good ways to prevent it.

 

[LittlePhatty]

If an owner gets something valuable in return (draft picks in Dynasty), I think you have to let it go. It may be poor judgement for those owners to sell good players, but with 20 teams the luck factor of winning a championship is greatly increased, so I wouldn't do anything about it. Unless you suspect two owners are colluding, i.e. one is the competitive team and the other is just acting as a farm system to funnel good players onto the other team. Is it always the same owners trading?

 

[mr roboto]

Trading productive vets for draft picks isn't tanking. If you don't realize that as a dynasty owner I don't know what game you think you're playing.

Leaving spots open, starting bad players sure.

 

[bonscott]

Agreed. This is not tanking in a dynasty league. It's totally expected and encouraged.

As stated, now starting bye week or injured players on purposed to try to get a better draft pick, then yea, that's tanking. But trading older vets for younger assets and picks is what you're supposed to do when you rebuild in a dynasty. In my salary cap league I've spent the last 2 years rebuilding to get to this year where I am now undefeated and a lock for the #1 seed in the playoffs. I've spent the last two weeks doing the opposite, trading away my future for players to help me now to try to wrap up that championship. Next year I'm going to be hurting with no picks and very few returning players that are going off contract so I'll be rebuilding once again.

By the way, all my leagues require a deposit for a future year for any traded 1st rounder. At least half if not full fees due for the trade to be accepted. This as noted above helps if that person leaves at least you can get a new team in at a reduced cost to them to deal with the mess. So in the cap league above I'm already paid up for 2016 since I traded away all my picks.

 

[Warpig]

I have no problem with people doing this in a dyno. It's expected. In most of my leagues, we make the people trading away future picks pay for that future year in advance before any trades are approved. Works out fairly even.

 

[ex-ghost]

Another vote for there is no tanking in dynasty.

Our rule is that you can contact the commish and let him know that you are throwing games. At that point you move to last in waivers and the commish takes over your starting lineup each week using fbg rankings to set the lineup.

Has worked well for the past 10 years. Some years we have no teams that throw games, other years we may have up to 3.

 

[Pipes]

Actually it's smart strategy in a dynasty. It doesn't pay to be mediocre. Either be great or unload your older, still valuable commodities, and reload for next year.

 

[Bojang0301]

Tanking isn't selling off your team in dynasty, tanking is purposefully putting bad/hurt/on bye players in your lineup to lose. Those guys at the bottom deserve to trade for picks (especially older guys) to try and get competitive next year.

 

[Pokesfan]

I think there are two different issues here. You have people trying to lose games to improve draft position (tanking) and you have teams that lose interest and don't update their lineups. We have done a couple things to counter those issues.

For tanking, draft order is determined by inverse order of potential points for non-playoff teams.

To keep team's interest, the last 4 weeks of the season, they have the chance to win bidding "money" that carries over by winning games (we are a contract league). They get more if they beat a team over .500 and the winning team is responsible for notifying the commissioner by a set time or they get nothing. The bottom four teams also play in a tournament weeks 15 and 16 and the loser gets a less than flattering image put on their logo for a year.

Teams still trade players for draft picks in our league, but it's mostly players with 1 or 2 years left on them.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I love when other people try to manage teams that are not their own.

 

[tone1oc]

Actually it's smart strategy in a dynasty. It doesn't pay to be mediocre. Either be great or unload your older, still valuable commodities, and reload for next year.

Completely agree.. I can usually tell by week 5 if my team is a mediocre or has a legit shot at championship. I'd rather have a top 3 pick then lose in the first round of the playoffs.

 

[Pokesfan]

I love when other people try to manage teams that are not their own.

I'm not trying to "manage" other teams. I just want people to manage their own.

 

[spider321]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

 

[ShamrockPride]

There's this beautiful simple solution called a trade deadline.

 

[tone1oc]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

 

[spider321]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

Meh. We'd kick you out of the league if we suspected you were doing that kinda crap anyway.

Another thing that helps the really bad teams, is that after the 1st round of the rookie/FA draft, they usually pick higher than everyone else. That is because, after round 1, when they pick next depends on how many players they dropped. Drop more players = Higher picks after round 1.

Bad teams get...

1. High waiver priority EVERY week

2. At least a top 6 pick

3. More/Higher picks after round one in the rookie/FA draft

Imo, this is the most fair and fun way of doing it for everyone. Every team has something to play for every, single week.

 

[tone1oc]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

Meh. We'd kick you out of the league if we suspected you were doing that kinda crap anyway.

Another thing that helps the really bad teams, is that after the 1st round of the rookie/FA draft, they usually pick higher than everyone else. That is because, after round 1, when they pick next depends on how many players they dropped. Drop more players = Higher picks after round 1.

Bad teams get...

1. High waiver priority EVERY week

2. At least a top 6 pick

3. More/Higher picks after round one in the rookie/FA draft

Imo, this is the most fair and fun way of doing it for everyone. Every team has something to play for every, single week.

I'd never join a league with such ridiculous rules designed to fix a problem that doesn't really exist.

Part of the fun of dynasty is being able to acquire young players and picks when you know your teams isn't that good. To me it's fundamental to dynasty, as is the worse teams getting the highest picks.

 

[NeverEnough]

Trading is not tanking. One of my dynasty teams is mostly ####ty & if I could stockpile picks, I'd sell most of my guys to improve the team.

 

[Pipes]

To answer your question though is we reward 5% of the pot to the non playoff team that scores the most points from weeks 10-13 which are the regular season weeks after the trade deadline. Incentivizes teams to put their best foot forward. We also have a ping pong ball system for the top 3 draft picks so every non playoff team has a shot at the top pick. Been in this league for 6 years now without any issues regarding tanking.

 

[spider321]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

Meh. We'd kick you out of the league if we suspected you were doing that kinda crap anyway.

Another thing that helps the really bad teams, is that after the 1st round of the rookie/FA draft, they usually pick higher than everyone else. That is because, after round 1, when they pick next depends on how many players they dropped. Drop more players = Higher picks after round 1.

Bad teams get...

1. High waiver priority EVERY week

2. At least a top 6 pick

3. More/Higher picks after round one in the rookie/FA draft

Imo, this is the most fair and fun way of doing it for everyone. Every team has something to play for every, single week.

I'd never join a league with such ridiculous rules designed to fix a problem that doesn't really exist.

Part of the fun of dynasty is being able to acquire young players and picks when you know your teams isn't that good. To me it's fundamental to dynasty, as is the worse teams getting the highest picks.

Bad teams in my league are welcome to acquire young players and picks.

...and the worst teams do get the highest picks, as well as more picks, and higher waiver priority every week.

In fact, I'd bet that a smart owner can improve a bad team much quicker in our system than in the more traditional system that you cling to.

 

[tone1oc]

Bad teams in my league are welcome to acquire young players and picks.

...and the worst teams do get the highest picks, as well as more picks, and higher waiver priority every week.

In fact, I'd bet that a smart owner can improve a bad team much quicker in our system than in the more traditional system that you cling to.

To each their own I guess.. Love my blind bid waivers too

 

[Skoo]

I have the same problem in one of my leagues, and I think the fact that its a 3 keeper league instead of full dynasty is the problem.

It has gotten worse and worse every year. It's a 10-teamer, this year by week 8 half of the teams had already given up. Then they sell their studs stupidly for a 2nd-rounder the next year. So each year we end up with 3 or 4 fantasy all-star teams, and 5 or 6 teams that get beat by 100 points every week.

I've proposed eliminating the trading up draft picks altogether. Our commish suggested pushing back the date that you can trade picks so people don't start tanking so early, which may be something to consider. We tried penalties for the last place finishers (they have to pay an extra $75), but nothing has worked yet.

Sadly, I'm pretty sure I'm just gonna bail after this year. Once the competitive balance is gone from a league, it stops being fun.

 

[Godsbrother]

We award money every week for a win. Even teams that are out of it want to continue to win to offset their losses.

Note: we even do this during the playoffs. Teams that are eliminated are randomly matched up and the winner gets some cash. It is a way of extending the season past week 13 for everyone.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Our rule is that you can contact the commish and let him know that you are throwing games. At that point you move to last in waivers and the commish takes over your starting lineup each week using fbg rankings to set the lineup.

I don't understand what you are saying here. Why would anyone let the commissioner know if they were "throwing games"? Why would they voluntarily go to the bottom of the waiver wire when part of rebuilding is benefiting from a priority waiver slot?

 

[Tool]

I have the same problem in one of my leagues, and I think the fact that its a 3 keeper league instead of full dynasty is the problem.

It has gotten worse and worse every year. It's a 10-teamer, this year by week 8 half of the teams had already given up. Then they sell their studs stupidly for a 2nd-rounder the next year. So each year we end up with 3 or 4 fantasy all-star teams, and 5 or 6 teams that get beat by 100 points every week.

I've proposed eliminating the trading up draft picks altogether. Our commish suggested pushing back the date that you can trade picks so people don't start tanking so early, which may be something to consider. We tried penalties for the last place finishers (they have to pay an extra $75), but nothing has worked yet.

Sadly, I'm pretty sure I'm just gonna bail after this year. Once the competitive balance is gone from a league, it stops being fun.

That's what we do in my dynasty league. It was a good change.

 

[tone1oc]

Some of these solutions remind me of a great Simpsons episode..

"Since the town considered the pigeons (ie "tanking") to be a nuisance, they are delighted that the lizards have eaten all the pigeons. So, Bart is thanked and honored by Mayor Quimby with a loganberry scented candle. Lisa worries the town will now become infested by lizards rather than the pigeons, but Skinner assures her they will send in "wave after wave of" Chinese needle snakes, then snake-eating gorillas, and then "when wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_the_Mother

 

[Bytor]

Some excellent disussion and some really useful ideas. Thanks guys!

As to those who argue that this isnt tanking; Fair enough, I guess it all depends on what kind of dynasty league it is (full, 2, 4, 6 keeper etc.) but the inescapable fact is that once teams begin to trade away all of their best players for draft picks, they become non-competitive for the remainder of the year, and therefore make a joke of the head-to-head format right up until playoffs. You also cant argue the fact that being non-competitive is rewarded by higher draft picks the following year, whereas the guys who try to win every week can make it to the semi-finals and (in our league anyway) walk away with no cash and a low-end pick. To me, thats pretty much the opposite of what you're trying to achieve, namely, a league that is competitive and fun right up to the last week.

 

[JohnnyU]

If you're getting good value for your players by getting 1st rd picks then it isn't tanking long term and with dynasty that is what matters, not the current season necessarily.

 

[msudaisy26]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

Worst rule ever. Have them play for an extra pick at the end of the 1st round.

 

[Thunderlips]

To answer your question though is we reward 5% of the pot to the non playoff team that scores the most points from weeks 10-13 which are the regular season weeks after the trade deadline. Incentivizes teams to put their best foot forward. We also have a ping pong ball system for the top 3 draft picks so every non playoff team has a shot at the top pick. Been in this league for 6 years now without any issues regarding tanking.

This is what you have to do. You can't dicourage owners from wanting to make their teams better.......but you can encourage middling teams to not want to do everything in their power to completely suck...... and in that....which I'm sure where most of the problems lie....making a playoff or strong team that much stronger.

 

[tone1oc]

Some excellent disussion and some really useful ideas. Thanks guys!

As to those who argue that this isnt tanking; Fair enough, I guess it all depends on what kind of dynasty league it is (full, 2, 4, 6 keeper etc.) but the inescapable fact is that once teams begin to trade away all of their best players for draft picks, they become non-competitive for the remainder of the year, and therefore make a joke of the head-to-head format right up until playoffs. You also cant argue the fact that being non-competitive is rewarded by higher draft picks the following year, whereas the guys who try to win every week can make it to the semi-finals and (in our league anyway) walk away with no cash and a low-end pick. To me, thats pretty much the opposite of what you're trying to achieve, namely, a league that is competitive and fun right up to the last week.

Well if they are trading off their good players, they were already bad and making a joke of the head-to-head format. And just because you trade away established vets doesn't mean you are guaranteed to get worse. For instance, I traded Megatron for Diggs,Snead & 1st Rounder/2nd Rounder.. This was after Diggs' KC game I believe. Diggs has matched Megatron's production, while I avoided his bye as well adding Snead and some picks.

That team started 0-5 and I'm now 2-7

 

[Tool]

Some excellent disussion and some really useful ideas. Thanks guys!

As to those who argue that this isnt tanking; Fair enough, I guess it all depends on what kind of dynasty league it is (full, 2, 4, 6 keeper etc.) but the inescapable fact is that once teams begin to trade away all of their best players for draft picks, they become non-competitive for the remainder of the year, and therefore make a joke of the head-to-head format right up until playoffs. You also cant argue the fact that being non-competitive is rewarded by higher draft picks the following year, whereas the guys who try to win every week can make it to the semi-finals and (in our league anyway) walk away with no cash and a low-end pick. To me, thats pretty much the opposite of what you're trying to achieve, namely, a league that is competitive and fun right up to the last week.

Yep, that's why you need some restrictions - just enough to keep the competitive balance.

 

[Tool]

Some excellent disussion and some really useful ideas. Thanks guys!

As to those who argue that this isnt tanking; Fair enough, I guess it all depends on what kind of dynasty league it is (full, 2, 4, 6 keeper etc.) but the inescapable fact is that once teams begin to trade away all of their best players for draft picks, they become non-competitive for the remainder of the year, and therefore make a joke of the head-to-head format right up until playoffs. You also cant argue the fact that being non-competitive is rewarded by higher draft picks the following year, whereas the guys who try to win every week can make it to the semi-finals and (in our league anyway) walk away with no cash and a low-end pick. To me, thats pretty much the opposite of what you're trying to achieve, namely, a league that is competitive and fun right up to the last week.

Well if they are trading off their good players, they were already bad and making a joke of the head-to-head format. And just because you trade away established vets doesn't mean you are guaranteed to get worse. For instance, I traded Megatron for Diggs,Snead & 1st Rounder/2nd Rounder.. This was after Diggs' KC game I believe. Diggs has matched Megatron's production, while I avoided his bye as well adding Snead and some picks.

That team started 0-5 and I'm now 2-7

If you're trading players for draft picks next year you are guaranteed to get worse.

 

[spider321]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

Worst rule ever. Have them play for an extra pick at the end of the 1st round.

League has been going strong for 15 years, and no problems so far.

I inherited a horrible team 10 years ago.

I like to think that I've been able to put together a pretty talented team.

 

[Hankmoody]

Passive tanking is fine. Refusing to spend waiver money or make short-term trades is understandable for a team that's out of it. Save those assets for future use. Even making a trade that leaves you terrible at one position (that you can solve next year) to build up your roster is fine.

Active tanking, as in starting blanks when there are viable starters on your bench or starting Manziel over Rodgers is still a no-no. Do the best you can do with what you have at your current disposal when setting lineups.

 

[tone1oc]

If you're trading players for draft picks next year you are guaranteed to get worse.

Not really, but even if so we could be overstating the delta between (good) player A that was traded away and (not as good) player B that is now starting. Even if it's a 5-10 pts per week, which is a lot, it doesn't really change the competitive dynamic much for teams that already suck.

What if I told you I sold Charles in a rebuild for a few 1st rounders the week before he got injured? Did my team get worse or better this year from that trade?

Teams do get worse sometimes, not arguing against that, but teams can also get better or not lose that much production while gaining tremendous long term value. There are no guarantees in fantasy.

 

[Hankmoody]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

That's a very overrated concern. There are plenty of great rookie picks every year and there's no guarantee #1 is going to be all that. Look at TRich, now Lacy. Picking 6 last year got you OBJ in most leagues vs. the consensus Watkins/Evans. Two years ago Hopkins (Bell/Ball) was there. 2012 had Jeffrey (TRich/Martin). This year is looking like an exception so far, but let's see where that is in a couple more years. Over all all you gotta do is be right.

 

[tone1oc]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

That's a very overrated concern. There are plenty of great rookie picks every year and there's no guarantee #1 is going to be all that. Look at TRich, now Lacy. Picking 6 last year got you OBJ in most leagues vs. the consensus Watkins/Evans. Two years ago Hopkins (Bell/Ball) was there. 2012 had Jeffrey (TRich/Martin). This year is looking like an exception so far, but let's see where that is in a couple more years. Over all all you gotta do is be right.

Can a saavy or lucky owner clean up with a midround pick? Absolutely.

But your odds of landing a difference making stud picks 1-3 are much greater than picks 4-6. We see it almost every year. Some people are not very pleased with Melvin Gordon as a top 3 pick this year, but Amari & Gurley owners sure are excited. You aren't going to get the blue chip Gurley/Cooper types in the mid 1st.

 

[Bytor]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

That's a very overrated concern. There are plenty of great rookie picks every year and there's no guarantee #1 is going to be all that. Look at TRich, now Lacy. Picking 6 last year got you OBJ in most leagues vs. the consensus Watkins/Evans. Two years ago Hopkins (Bell/Ball) was there. 2012 had Jeffrey (TRich/Martin). This year is looking like an exception so far, but let's see where that is in a couple more years. Over all all you gotta do is be right.

I agree with that, expecially when you have IDP (which we do) which increases the sheer numbers of top prospects every year. There is rarely a true Gurley and usually at least a couple of Coopers.

 

[tone1oc]

The bust rate goes up tremendously after each pick, someone at rotoviz ran the data on it. I'll see if I can dig it up.

You can say that it doesn't matter, but to a man there is no way you'd be okay with switching from even the #3 spot to the #6 spot.

 

[tone1oc]

The bust rate goes up tremendously after each pick, someone at rotoviz ran the data on it. I'll see if I can dig it up.

You can say that it doesn't matter, but to a man there is no way you'd be okay with switching from even the #3 spot to the #6 spot.

http://rotoviz.com/2015/04/rebuilding-a-dynasty-and-the-odds-of-rookie-draft-picks/

 

[Tool]

If you're trading players for draft picks next year you are guaranteed to get worse.

Not really, but even if so we could be overstating the delta between (good) player A that was traded away and (not as good) player B that is now starting. Even if it's a 5-10 pts per week, which is a lot, it doesn't really change the competitive dynamic much for teams that already suck.

What if I told you I sold Charles in a rebuild for a few 1st rounders the week before he got injured? Did my team get worse or better this year from that trade?

Teams do get worse sometimes, not arguing against that, but teams can also get better or not lose that much production while gaining tremendous long term value. There are no guarantees in fantasy.

Yes, there is a scenario where if you trade someone who then gets injured your team does not get worse. In the other 1000 scenarios though, your team gets worse.

 

[tone1oc]

If you're trading players for draft picks next year you are guaranteed to get worse.

Not really, but even if so we could be overstating the delta between (good) player A that was traded away and (not as good) player B that is now starting. Even if it's a 5-10 pts per week, which is a lot, it doesn't really change the competitive dynamic much for teams that already suck.

What if I told you I sold Charles in a rebuild for a few 1st rounders the week before he got injured? Did my team get worse or better this year from that trade?

Teams do get worse sometimes, not arguing against that, but teams can also get better or not lose that much production while gaining tremendous long term value. There are no guarantees in fantasy.

Yes, there is a scenario where if you trade someone who then gets injured your team does not get worse. In the other 1000 scenarios though, your team gets worse.

What if I had Karlos Williams on my bench and he performed just as good as Charles? Is that a 1 in 1000 scenario too?

Not sure how anyone who has played dynasty football for more than a few years could argue against just about any trade going in about 1000 directions.

And to your point, it really doesn't matter if a bad team got slightly more bad, they were bad to begin with.

 

[Madden Curse]

A losing team selling out its present via trades for future talent is not tanking and there's nothing objectionable about it. It's a questionable tactic, though, and something I don't think experienced managers would do, because hitting on draft picks is unpredictable.

On the other hand, repeatedly setting lineups designed to lose (such as starting players on byes when you have available substitutes) is tanking, and I think it should be discouraged. One warning after you've noticed the problem should be enough, and if they continue to tank I think it's fair to replace them (probably after the season unless it's radically skewing the league based on your setup).

 

[ex-ghost]

Our rule is that you can contact the commish and let him know that you are throwing games. At that point you move to last in waivers and the commish takes over your starting lineup each week using fbg rankings to set the lineup.

I don't understand what you are saying here. Why would anyone let the commissioner know if they were "throwing games"? Why would they voluntarily go to the bottom of the waiver wire when part of rebuilding is benefiting from a priority waiver slot?

Sorry, was not clear. Throwing games means you are automatically taking a loss, even if your team wins. Commish taking over lineup means that the team is not tanking by not filling out a lineup or putting marginal players in.

 

[Hankmoody]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

That's a very overrated concern. There are plenty of great rookie picks every year and there's no guarantee #1 is going to be all that. Look at TRich, now Lacy. Picking 6 last year got you OBJ in most leagues vs. the consensus Watkins/Evans. Two years ago Hopkins (Bell/Ball) was there. 2012 had Jeffrey (TRich/Martin). This year is looking like an exception so far, but let's see where that is in a couple more years. Over all all you gotta do is be right.

Can a saavy or lucky owner clean up with a midround pick? Absolutely.

But your odds of landing a difference making stud picks 1-3 are much greater than picks 4-6. We see it almost every year. Some people are not very pleased with Melvin Gordon as a top 3 pick this year, but Amari & Gurley owners sure are excited. You aren't going to get the blue chip Gurley/Cooper types in the mid 1st.

The bust rate goes up tremendously after each pick, someone at rotoviz ran the data on it. I'll see if I can dig it up.

You can say that it doesn't matter, but to a man there is no way you'd be okay with switching from even the #3 spot to the #6 spot.

I didn't say it didn't matter. I said it's mostly overrated. It absolutely matters. Just not to the extent most people make it out to be. No, I wouldn't trade #3 to #6 straight up, but mostly because I know I don't have to. Someone will pay something for it. I did, for example, trade #1 for #7 and a future 1st. Got blasted for giving #1 away. 1 took Watkins, I took Mathews (passed OBJ who went 9) and no one can yet say I didn't get the better player. I wouldn't give Mathews for Watkins today, I can tell you that.

 

[tone1oc]

Toilet Bowl.

Our league is 12 teams. 6 best records play for the championship and the money. 6 worst records play for the top 6 picks.

The winner of the losers' bracket gets the #1 pick.

You wanna tank? Fine, you're likely going to get the 6th pick.

We like it. Gives the "losers" something to play for every week.

This system is mitigated by the fact that the worst records have higher waiver priority every week.

If I was in this league I'd probably tank enough to get into the toilet bowl if I didn't have a really good shot at winning it all. I'd look to dominate the losers bracket if I had a mediocre good team.

It's also not very fair to teams that are legit bad to get stuck with a mid round pick.

That's a very overrated concern. There are plenty of great rookie picks every year and there's no guarantee #1 is going to be all that. Look at TRich, now Lacy. Picking 6 last year got you OBJ in most leagues vs. the consensus Watkins/Evans. Two years ago Hopkins (Bell/Ball) was there. 2012 had Jeffrey (TRich/Martin). This year is looking like an exception so far, but let's see where that is in a couple more years. Over all all you gotta do is be right.

Can a saavy or lucky owner clean up with a midround pick? Absolutely.

But your odds of landing a difference making stud picks 1-3 are much greater than picks 4-6. We see it almost every year. Some people are not very pleased with Melvin Gordon as a top 3 pick this year, but Amari & Gurley owners sure are excited. You aren't going to get the blue chip Gurley/Cooper types in the mid 1st.

The bust rate goes up tremendously after each pick, someone at rotoviz ran the data on it. I'll see if I can dig it up.

You can say that it doesn't matter, but to a man there is no way you'd be okay with switching from even the #3 spot to the #6 spot.

I didn't say it didn't matter. I said it's mostly overrated. It absolutely matters. Just not to the extent most people make it out to be. No, I wouldn't trade #3 to #6 straight up, but mostly because I know I don't have to. Someone will pay something for it. I did, for example, trade #1 for #7 and a future 1st. Got blasted for giving #1 away. 1 took Watkins, I took Mathews (passed OBJ who went 9) and no one can yet say I didn't get the better player. I wouldn't give Mathews for Watkins today, I can tell you that.

2014 was an insanely loaded draft, and it is possible to land studs in mid to late first and beyond in any draft. Its just much, much harder if you are not a top pick. It's not overrated or underrated, it just is.

If you were the worst team in a league that "earned" the #1 pick, you wouldn't feel it was unfair that you are picking #6 because you lost in a loser bracket tournament?