Tis the Season To Be Tanking Fa La La La La (1 Viewer)

[steelers1080]

We had an issue in year 1 with people joking that they were going to tank for 1.01 so starting the next year we implemented new rules. Any team obviously tanking would be punished by the Commish (me) with a TBD punishment agreed upon by a majority of the league.  We've talked about just moving them to last pick in the 1st from wherever they ended up. Not as bad as completely taking it away, but still bad.

We also installed punishments for the Sacko. So, they get the 1.01, but they have to buy a case of beer for the league, Ice themselves before each draft pick (must be warm and they must kneel, even in a bar/restaurant), put the glorious sacko trophy in their living room next to their TV (says Fantasy Loser with a giant photo of Tom Brady holding a baby goat, lots of glitter which gets everywhere, and is 3 feet tall), and they have to wear an OJ Simpson jersey on every Sunday during football season no matter what (including the family dinner on Christmas Eve). It's not that crazy, but it makes people aim for 1.02 most of the time instead of 1.01.
 

This past year we implemented a new rule which got people to stop trying to tank in the middling competitions. The battles for 3rd, 5th, and 7th all matter now. The winner of these competitions now gets the higher pick. For example:

1. Sacko, loser of the league
   
2. Beat the sacko in the toilet bowl
   
3. Winner of the fight between 7th and 8th
   
4. Loser of the fight between 7th and 8th
   
5. Winner of the fight between 5th and 6th
   
6. Loser of the fight between 5th and 6th
   
7. Winner of the fight between 3rd and 4th
   
8. Loser of the fight between 3rd and 4th
   
9. Runner up
   
10. Champion
    

This makes it so that everyone wants to win that final matchup, and moving up 1 pick can be a huge deal. At least for 2 years, we've had 0 people even talk of tanking.

 

[Chapelboy]

Well it's that time of year where teams quit, claim the dog ate their homework/they went hunting for Sasquatch and had no internet and magically they were rewarded with the 1.1 for their "efforts". Post the most egregious tank jobs here and if anyone is calling the guy out/if commish is doing anything about it. 

1) Team in position to get 1.1 but 1 team on his heels "starts" John Brown (declared out on Friday).  TBD how/if commish will address, expect a warning only.

2) Team could get anything from 1.2-1.6 starts "Chris Thompson" (IR). 3rd Offense this year. Commish hasn't addressed any of the 3 times.

NOTE: Rules are in place for both leagues but I don't expect either commish to step up and do anything about it.

Interested in others stories, level of egregiousness, how addressed.  Not snarky 1 liners..."your league sucks", "get a new commish", "get a new league", "you reap what you sew" blablabla perspectives.

sounds like a commish problem, not a tank problem...

 

[DirtyCashDylan]

I have about a 2% chance of making playoffs and am currently tied for last place even though I'm far ahead in points, so I wanted to start low key tanking. I started Doug Martin. It worked!

 

[Chapelboy]

I've commished for over 20 years and always hated tankers and the idea of tanking, but over the years I've softened my stance and really don't worry much about tankers or their motives.  Rules such as preventing teams from playing anyone on IR or declared OUT, or playing anyone on a bye week take care of 99% of the tankers.  Yes, tankers can affect the competitive balance or playoff positioning, but isn't that the case in professional sports anyway?  Players check out, coaches check out, so do fantasy owners. 

Someone said it already, the key is the quality of ownership you have in a league. Sad to say, in this day and age of anonymity in online leagues and the slow death of the personal, local 'buddy, neighbor' leagues, quality ownership is getting harder and harder to find.  Too many guys join online leagues, try to win now, field a crappy team and leave.  Anyway, I'm digressing a bit. If the tanker is still an issue, just show him the door next season and continue the search for a good owner.

 

[jeaton6]

sounds like a commish problem, not a tank problem...

It's both.

 

[mcintyre1]

We have the non playoff teams continue with an out bracket.

Winner of the out bracket gets 1.1, loser of the out bracket title game gets 1.2...and so on.

One of my leagues has a similar setup, but the winner of the Toilet Bowl gets the "13th" pick of the first round (12 team league). I actually like it quite a bit. Some incentive for those near the bottom to still be active.

 

[jeaton6]

I've commished for over 20 years and always hated tankers and the idea of tanking, but over the years I've softened my stance and really don't worry much about tankers or their motives.  Rules such as preventing teams from playing anyone on IR or OUT, or playing anyone on a bye week take care of 99% of the tankers.  Yes, tankers can affect the competitive balance or playoff positioning, but isn't that the case in professional sports anyway?  Players check out, coaches check out, so do fantasy owners. 

Someone said it already, the key is the quality of ownership you have in a league. Sad to say, in this day and age of anonymity in online leagues and the slow death of the personal, local 'buddy, neighbor' leagues, quality ownership is getting harder and harder to find.  Too many guys join online leagues, try to win now, field a crappy team and leave.  Anyway, I'm digressing a bit. If the tanker is still an issue, just show him the door next season and continue the search for a good owner.

Problem is those rules from a system perspective only prevent you from setting a lineup. If those players are in lineup and then go on IR, are on bye or OUT then they can stay in lineup. You just can't make lineup changes. One more advantage for the tanker. Hey my player on bye got set in my lineup now I can't change my lineup to put in player not OUT. Oops. My bad. 1.1 yes.

 

[jeaton6]

One of my leagues has a similar setup, but the winner of the Toilet Bowl gets the "13th" pick of the first round (12 team league). I actually like it quite a bit. Some incentive for those near the bottom to still be active.

Only active after regular season ends. They can still tank for early pick then compete in toilet bowel and get 1.1 and 1.13.

 

[tangfoot]

False logic.  First of all, as you said any team can "just get hot".  Second of all, if you have competitive owners that are always trying you don't end up with a huge gap from playoff to non-playoff teams.  Just FYI, in the 5 years I have played this format, the last team to miss the playoffs has never won the TB.  2 times has been the team with the worst regular-season record and 2 more have been second worst.

It sounds like you have legislated a legitimate strategy out of your league.  That's too bad, because there are lots of ways to build a winning dynasty roster, and always playing to Win Now is only one of them.

 

[Hankmoody]

It sounds like you have legislated a legitimate strategy out of your league.  That's too bad, because there are lots of ways to build a winning dynasty roster, and always playing to Win Now is only one of them.

Those things are not mutually exclusive and you are incorrect, we haven't legislated anything out.  If someone wants to blow up their roster and be non-competitive they can, they just may have to settle for the 1.04 in the process.  Oh shucks, they won't have a shot to draft Kamara, OBJ, Hopkins, David Johnson .... oh wait.

 

[tangfoot]

Those things are not mutually exclusive and you are incorrect, we haven't legislated anything out.  If someone wants to blow up their roster and be non-competitive they can, they just may have to settle for the 1.04 in the process.  Oh shucks, they won't have a shot to draft Kamara, OBJ, Hopkins, David Johnson .... oh wait.

You don't honestly believe that there isn't a significant value drop between 1.01 and 1.04 in any given year.  If you do get lucky and draft someone late, that's just great.  But I wouldn't ever expect to do it.

 

[jeaton6]

As expected:

League 1 - commish warning. Guy who did it is stand up guy, it didn't be make a difference and was first time offender.

League 2 - commish said nothing. Even though 3rd time offender. Guy came on all huffy that I Called him out on his 3rd offense. But apologized to the league and admitted he's in too many leagues and will be dropping many, this one included. I would expect commish to say something, anything, on how to make sure he fields competitive lineup for the last game or way forward on rules. But, he hasn't. 

 

[Hankmoody]

You don't honestly believe that there isn't a significant value drop between 1.01 and 1.04 in any given year.  If you do get lucky and draft someone late, that's just great.  But I wouldn't ever expect to do it.

I'll debate the significance depending on the year but yes, there generally is some value drop > 0 but the extra equity you get along the way by adding good talent staying active outweighs it and it's not like the 1.01 is a lead pipe lock either.  You put way too much weight on probabilities, especially if you haven't ever played in the format.  Have you? 

 

[tangfoot]

You put way too much weight on probabilities, especially if you haven't ever played in the format.  Have you? 

Yes, for many years.  And it's not that I'm putting too much weight on probabilities, it's that everyone is.  Every dynasty player in the world would rather have the 1.01 over the 1.04.  In most seasons there's 1-2 consensus top picks and then everyone else.  To award that premium pick to the team that was likely a hair's breath from making the playoffs (or better than most of the playoff teams and got screwed by the schedule) is a poor choice for the long-term health of the league.  

You may have a tremendous set of owners who all love the "win now" mentality that you have fostered, but my argument all along has been that you are choking off a legitimate strategy by not allowing a team to burn itself down to the ground.

 

[Doug B]

Best ball? I guess tankers can still cut all their decent players, though.

 

[candian fantasy guy]

Auction leagues don't seem to have this problem. 

It's a real debate as to what is fair and what it is not. If this were an issue in one of my leagues, I think I would opt for a "power ball" type of lottery for the first 4-6 picks. Also, obviously tanking teams/owners should be warned and then replaced if the issue persists.  

 

[Hankmoody]

Yes, for many years.  And it's not that I'm putting too much weight on probabilities, it's that everyone is.  Every dynasty player in the world would rather have the 1.01 over the 1.04.  In most seasons there's 1-2 consensus top picks and then everyone else.  To award that premium pick to the team that was likely a hair's breath from making the playoffs (or better than most of the playoff teams and got screwed by the schedule) is a poor choice for the long-term health of the league.  

You may have a tremendous set of owners who all love the "win now" mentality that you have fostered, but my argument all along has been that you are choking off a legitimate strategy by not allowing a team to burn itself down to the ground.

Of course they would rather have the 1.01, but the reality is that there's no guarantee you even get the best player in that year's draft.  The rest of your post is just a bunch of assumptions that are at best false logic and at worst dead wrong.  But feel free to roll that way if that's how you wanna do it.

 

[jeaton6]

Right now a guy who has zero incentive in our league to tank because he doesn't own his pick and potential points is used for non-playoff seeding has the following players in:

Eli, McKissic, Amendola, Lafell, Roger Lewis, Seals-Jones (I could see a case)

Over:

Hundley, Duke,  Robby Anderson, Stills, Rishard Matthews, Delanie Walker (top 16 RB, top 12, 20, 30 WR, Top 5 TE)

Can start 1-4 RBs, 2-5 WRs, 1-4 TEs.

He is playing team in 2nd place that must win for 1st round bye.

To me at best he's being lazy and/or trying to be funny and at worst he's trying to help the other guy. Any reason to not put this guy on blast?

 

[Arodin]

Fournette, Elliott, Gurley

or

McCaffery, Doctson, White

Nope, can't see any compelling reason to think the 1.1 would be substantially more valuable than the 1.4.  Can you?

 

[Hankmoody]

Fournette, Elliott, Gurley

or

McCaffery, Doctson, White

Nope, can't see any compelling reason to think the 1.1 would be substantially more valuable than the 1.4.  Can you?

Sammy Watkins, Tavon Austin, Trent Richardson

or

OBJ, Le'Veon Bell, Andrew Luck

Yeah, you're right, 1.01 is a lead pipe lock.  I'll go alert my league immediately.

 

[Hankmoody]

Right now a guy who has zero incentive in our league to tank because he doesn't own his pick and potential points is used for non-playoff seeding has the following players in:

Eli, McKissic, Amendola, Lafell, Roger Lewis, Seals-Jones (I could see a case)

Over:

Hundley, Duke,  Robby Anderson, Stills, Rishard Matthews, Delanie Walker (top 16 RB, top 12, 20, 30 WR, Top 5 TE)

Can start 1-4 RBs, 2-5 WRs, 1-4 TEs.

He is playing team in 2nd place that must win for 1st round bye.

To me at best he's being lazy and/or trying to be funny and at worst he's trying to help the other guy. Any reason to not put this guy on blast?

None whatsoever.

 

[Arodin]

Sammy Watkins, Tavon Austin, Trent Richardson

or

OBJ, Le'Veon Bell, Andrew Luck

Yeah, you're right, 1.01 is a lead pipe lock.  I'll go alert my league immediately.

Your league may well be different from mine, so I'll assume you're being honest with those example players, and that would make a fair point. 

My own dynasty didn't exist until 2015, so I'm going on MFL adp here:

2014 1.1 was Watkins, 1.4 was Hyde.  They have Beckham at 1.8. 
2013 1.1 was Lacy, 1.4 was Ball.  Bell was 1.5.
2012 1.1 was Richardson, 1.4 was Griffin.  Luck was 1.3.

So by that data, 1.1 still wins fairly solidly over 1.4.  I will grant that I'd rather have "the field" than 1.1, in the sense that every year you can find someone drafted 3-8 that is likely to do as well or better than the guy at 1.1.  Problem is, you're only getting a 1-in-5 shot at that guy, whereas the odds of the 1.1 paying off look to be closer to 4-in-5.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Tankwon Barkley is causing a lot of issues this year.

 

[Hankmoody]

Take-one for Saquon.

 

[jeaton6]

Right now a guy who has zero incentive in our league to tank because he doesn't own his pick and potential points is used for non-playoff seeding has the following players in:

Eli, McKissic, Amendola, Lafell, Roger Lewis, Seals-Jones (I could see a case)

Over:

Hundley, Duke,  Robby Anderson, Stills, Rishard Matthews, Delanie Walker (top 16 RB, top 12, 20, 30 WR, Top 5 TE)

Can start 1-4 RBs, 2-5 WRs, 1-4 TEs.

He is playing team in 2nd place that must win for 1st round bye.

To me at best he's being lazy and/or trying to be funny and at worst he's trying to help the other guy. Any reason to not put this guy on blast?

Commish emailed him and he revised. Seems easy but rarely do I see commishes even do this. Wish More commishes would just give these guys a swift kick in the ### and set an example at someone point.

 

[jeaton6]

.

 

[-OZ-]

Your league may well be different from mine, so I'll assume you're being honest with those example players, and that would make a fair point. 

My own dynasty didn't exist until 2015, so I'm going on MFL adp here:

2014 1.1 was Watkins, 1.4 was Hyde.  They have Beckham at 1.8. 
2013 1.1 was Lacy, 1.4 was Ball.  Bell was 1.5.
2012 1.1 was Richardson, 1.4 was Griffin.  Luck was 1.3.

So by that data, 1.1 still wins fairly solidly over 1.4.  I will grant that I'd rather have "the field" than 1.1, in the sense that every year you can find someone drafted 3-8 that is likely to do as well or better than the guy at 1.1.  Problem is, you're only getting a 1-in-5 shot at that guy, whereas the odds of the 1.1 paying off look to be closer to 4-in-5.

Mine has been going for 15 years. Let's see...

Fournette vs Mike Williams

Zeke vs doctson

Cooper vs Gordon (our league values wr highly)

Watkins vs Ebron (yeah, but that was the pick)

Austin vs gio

Richardson vs luck

Aj green vs Greg little 

Dez vs spiller

 

[slackjawedyokel]

I shared in another thread the best solution I've found to prevent tanking and have 5 years of it working in several of my leagues I Commish.

Simple: penalize each tanking offense by moving that team's pick back 1 spot. It really works!

 

[jeaton6]

I shared in another thread the best solution I've found to prevent tanking and have 5 years of it working in several of my leagues I Commish.

Simple: penalize each tanking offense by moving that team's pick back 1 spot. It really works!

The key is for commissioner to enforce bylaws as written. I have leagues with this as well but commishes are too scared to actually enforce. Almost always issuing warnings (not in the bylaws) instead. 

 

[ShamrockPride]

This is why I run a draft lottery like the NBA in my league. Your record doesn't assure you of squat.

 

[Rove!]

In my long-standing dynasty league, we have good owners most importantly, but it happens occasionally. If another league member sees a player being started who's declared out (injured, suspended, on IR, etc.), they post on the message board (by gametime) & the Commish inserts the highest ranked player on their roster using FBG rankings (it can even be done after the fact).

Simple & effective. You still have the issue of teams "manipulating" their lineup with active players who shouldn't be started, but you hold people accountable. 

Do stupid stuff, win stupid prizes.

If the idea is that the weaker teams should get the higher picks, her is an idea:

if a team is out of contention and a lineup set by rankings would have won, credit that team with a “win” for the purposes of deciding draft picks, regardless if they actually won their matchup...(in this scenario, The opponent could get the league win, and both teams could get a “win” for the purposes of determining draft order)

 

[jeaton6]

Discovered this after this week.

Guy started Geronimo allison and Eli Rogers over Agholor and Crowder this week. If he started Agholor and a Crowder he wins gets 4 VPs ilo 1. He still gets 1.1 based on tiebreakers but this decision looks very fishy to me so I went back and looked at his lineups and it turns out he's been doing these questionable moves for 4 weeks. Week 10 Darboh over Crowder. Week 11 Eli Rogers and Taywon Taylor over Crowder and Agholor. Week 12 Mike Williams and Eli over Crowder and Agholor. These cumulative "odd" decisions directly lead to him getting 1.1. He would have won weeks 11-13 and earned 4 VPs ilo 1 and been 1.3 ilo 1.1. 

I asked commish to look at and he agreed it's fishy and he can't imagine a reasonable response on how what he did is legit. He emailed the owner and is awaiting response.

To me at a minimum he should insert better players in lineup recalculate this guys VPs and see what he would have gotten. Then probably need a vote (personally I'd just boot) on whether to boot him. Any other ideas?

 

[ffinmyblood]

Tanking to get the top pick is bad enough, but to me, the absolute worst thing about it is how it may effect playoff spots and seeding. That's the underlying factor some may not consider when someone is tanking. It could allow an owner to get in that really shouldn't have, and keep one out that really deserved to be.

 

[jeaton6]

Tanking to get the top pick is bad enough, but to me, the absolute worst thing about it is how it may effect playoff spots and seeding. That's the underlying factor some may not consider when someone is tanking. It could allow an owner to get in that really shouldn't have, and keep one out that really deserved to be.

True in this case thankfully it didn't impact playoff teams or seedlings.