Transition to Auction (1 Viewer)

[turnit643]

A league of mine is considering a switch to an auction draft format. (long time, local, 16-team, redraft with optional keepers)

I'm looking for suggestions about how to handle the current keeper players during the transition.

Is anyone familiar with a common method for setting auction values for keepers in a snake-to-auction transition year? (... say one owner has LT under contract for next season and would be carrying him into the auction already rostered ... how much should he pay for LT?)

I searched the pool a few times and read through the first 10+ pages of results for "auction" and found mostly strategy tips, general format suggestions and lots of "auctions are great" stuff but nothing about a similar situation.

Thanks for any help.

 

[mrgerty]

Start over from scratch. There is no fair way to assign auction dollar values without having an auction. One possibility is the concept of "Toppers Rights." That means that everybody goes into the auction. We'll use L.T. for an example. When the bidding ends for L. T. the owner that had him on his roster has the option to Top the highest bid by 1 dollar. In my mind this would be the most fair way to assign dollar values if you switch, but I would bite the bullet and start from scratch.

A league of mine is considering a switch to an auction draft format. (long time, local, 16-team, redraft with optional keepers)I'm looking for suggestions about how to handle the current keeper players during the transition.Is anyone familiar with a common method for setting auction values for keepers in a snake-to-auction transition year? (... say one owner has LT under contract for next season and would be carrying him into the auction already rostered ... how much should he pay for LT?)I searched the pool a few times and read through the first 10+ pages of results for "auction" and found mostly strategy tips, general format suggestions and lots of "auctions are great" stuff but nothing about a similar situation.Thanks for any help.

 

[code]

One possibility is the concept of "Toppers Rights." That means that everybody goes into the auction. We'll use L.T. for an example. When the bidding ends for L. T. the owner that had him on his roster has the option to Top the highest bid by 1 dollar. In my mind this would be the most fair way to assign dollar values if you switch, but I would bite the bullet and start from scratch.

Our is not an auction league, but we do have a free agency period with bidding against a cap that has much the same effect and we use something like the technique above...think of the keepers like free agents, let the market bid on them and then give the current owner first right of refusal (we do ours with a small hometown discount)...

 

[BuckeyeArt]

How do you handle the keepers now? Do you forfeit a 1st round pick for LT or is it dependant upon what round a player was drafted? If everyone is forfeiting the same round for their keepers, you should be able to come up with an average $ amount for a 1st round keeper based upon some average auction draft values. The LT owner won't (and shouldn't) agree to a method that makes him pay more for his player.

 

[Z-Dog]

Another vote for matching rights. If it's an auction keeper, you might even allow the current owner to match at a discount of a few dollars, to reward him a bit for having built the team thus far, but if it's an auction re-draft, straight matching is the way to go.

 

[GregR_2]

MFL has an option that will populate all players in the league with salaries.

You could also use VBD, Draft Dominator, or any other such tool that can create auction salaries.

 

[turnit643]

How do you handle the keepers now? Do you forfeit a 1st round pick for LT or is it dependant upon what round a player was drafted? If everyone is forfeiting the same round for their keepers, you should be able to come up with an average $ amount for a 1st round keeper based upon some average auction draft values. The LT owner won't (and shouldn't) agree to a method that makes him pay more for his player.

Currently, keepers are optional so not all teams keep players. Those that do keep players replace their top picks with the keepers (up to three).It looks like we have these options:1. Start from scratch.2. Allow the keepers to be auctioned with matching rights available for the owner (with or without a discount).3. Have mfl, DD or another source provide a values list and accept that as the price for the player.#3 was what was floating around in my head prior to asking the question, but #2 might be the way to go.Thanks for the input, any other ideas or tweaks to these?

 

[softball]

The first league I ever played in was auction, the year I was invited the remaining owners had made the decision to switch.

That year they had:

3 players to submit as Restricted Free Agents, they would be bid on and you could match. BUT you were only allowed to keep two guys, so one was heading back into the pool no matter what.

The value was obviously the RFA match price. It worked well after some confusion about pulling guys back was cleared up. You couldn't pull anyone off the market.

It was interesting because you really had to decide of the 3 RFAs who did you want the most.

Pretty cool way to start my FF career..

 

[Warhogs]

Simple way is to start from scratch.

I can see some sense in allowing a team to match but I think you don't want to get things too complicated. If rookiies will be drafted and assigned a salary as part of the league maybe you can have the auctions for veterans and then hold a rookie draft with he order based on the value of players that went at auction so if LT goes for the highest salary that guy gets the 1.01 rookie pick? Just a thought...

 

[BuckeyeArt]

How do you handle the keepers now? Do you forfeit a 1st round pick for LT or is it dependant upon what round a player was drafted? If everyone is forfeiting the same round for their keepers, you should be able to come up with an average $ amount for a 1st round keeper based upon some average auction draft values. The LT owner won't (and shouldn't) agree to a method that makes him pay more for his player.

Currently, keepers are optional so not all teams keep players. Those that do keep players replace their top picks with the keepers (up to three).It looks like we have these options:1. Start from scratch.2. Allow the keepers to be auctioned with matching rights available for the owner (with or without a discount).3. Have mfl, DD or another source provide a values list and accept that as the price for the player.#3 was what was floating around in my head prior to asking the question, but #2 might be the way to go.Thanks for the input, any other ideas or tweaks to these?

It really depends what you're trying to accomplish. If you want the teams to retain the advantage they currently have, then I don't think any of those accomplishes that. Currently, a team with LT gives up a #1, the same price as anyone else keeping 1 player. A team keeping a 2nd player would only have to give up 2nd round value for perhaps 1st round talent. None of the above options would mimic that. The problem with #1 is obvious - nobody keeps any advantage. The problem with #2 or #3 is the teams who want to keep players retain very little advantage in that system. Sure, they get to keep their player but it is at a price that is right around market value. You should be able to take the values from mfl or DD and create what an average 1st, 2nd, or 3rd round pick would cost and assign these to the keepers. You could just take the top 12 (or whatever your league size is) values and average them together for the 1st round value. The next two sets of 12 would be the 2nd and 3rd round values. That way, the teams retain the value they have built in their keepers.Of course, if you don't want teams to retain any values, the best way is just to start from scratch.

 

[turnit643]

It really depends what you're trying to accomplish. If you want the teams to retain the advantage they currently have, then I don't think any of those accomplishes that. Currently, a team with LT gives up a #1, the same price as anyone else keeping 1 player. A team keeping a 2nd player would only have to give up 2nd round value for perhaps 1st round talent. None of the above options would mimic that. The problem with #1 is obvious - nobody keeps any advantage. The problem with #2 or #3 is the teams who want to keep players retain very little advantage in that system. Sure, they get to keep their player but it is at a price that is right around market value. You should be able to take the values from mfl or DD and create what an average 1st, 2nd, or 3rd round pick would cost and assign these to the keepers. You could just take the top 12 (or whatever your league size is) values and average them together for the 1st round value. The next two sets of 12 would be the 2nd and 3rd round values. That way, the teams retain the value they have built in their keepers.Of course, if you don't want teams to retain any values, the best way is just to start from scratch.

I am interested in finding a way to preserve some sort of advantage for the owners that would be keeping players. Maybe that advantage is simply having the right to the player at a pre-determined price like you've suggested. To make sure I'm following correctly, in this scenario you last described ...If a team was to keep one player and we use the average 1st round value for his price, the owner's advantage retained would be 1. Having the player locked-in pre-auction, and perhaps, 2. Depending on the player (and definitely in the case of LT), there could be a bit of a discount by being priced as a mid-1st rounder.If a team is keeping multiple players, the advantage grows (or could grow) as the players are assigned avg-1st, avg-2nd, and avg-3rd round prices. Possibly resulting in top talent being priced well below the expected and bringing up another question about determining which player is slotted where.I suppose another touch to all of this would be the idea of pricing all keepers with a single set price - maybe an average of the top 20 or something along that line.

 

[Cecil Lammey]

Your Keepers become Restricted Free Agents.

Other owners can bid on them, but you have last right of refusal. When the bidding stops you can either choose to keep said player, or you can choose to let him go. Throw in some signing bonus money, seperate from your salary cap to spend on RFA's. This will help bring the price down if you choose to re-sign your player.

 

[turnit643]

Your Keepers become Restricted Free Agents.Other owners can bid on them, but you have last right of refusal. When the bidding stops you can either choose to keep said player, or you can choose to let him go. Throw in some signing bonus money, seperate from your salary cap to spend on RFA's. This will help bring the price down if you choose to re-sign your player.

How would the "signing bonus money" work? Everyone gets their allotted amount for the draft and those who choose to re-sign their RFA's get a bit more to ease the blow - basically a discount for the player. Is that right?And, to be clear in case I wasn't, I'm asking solely for the initial transition year. In future years, keeper prices wouldn't be an issue. With so many leagues transitioning to an auction draft format, I doubt it's entirely uncommon for a similar situation to have come up elsewhere. I'm wondering if there are other concerns/obstacles that I'm not yet seeing.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

It really depends what you're trying to accomplish. If you want the teams to retain the advantage they currently have, then I don't think any of those accomplishes that. Currently, a team with LT gives up a #1, the same price as anyone else keeping 1 player. A team keeping a 2nd player would only have to give up 2nd round value for perhaps 1st round talent. None of the above options would mimic that. The problem with #1 is obvious - nobody keeps any advantage. The problem with #2 or #3 is the teams who want to keep players retain very little advantage in that system. Sure, they get to keep their player but it is at a price that is right around market value. You should be able to take the values from mfl or DD and create what an average 1st, 2nd, or 3rd round pick would cost and assign these to the keepers. You could just take the top 12 (or whatever your league size is) values and average them together for the 1st round value. The next two sets of 12 would be the 2nd and 3rd round values. That way, the teams retain the value they have built in their keepers.Of course, if you don't want teams to retain any values, the best way is just to start from scratch.

I am interested in finding a way to preserve some sort of advantage for the owners that would be keeping players. Maybe that advantage is simply having the right to the player at a pre-determined price like you've suggested. To make sure I'm following correctly, in this scenario you last described ...If a team was to keep one player and we use the average 1st round value for his price, the owner's advantage retained would be 1. Having the player locked-in pre-auction, and perhaps, 2. Depending on the player (and definitely in the case of LT), there could be a bit of a discount by being priced as a mid-1st rounder.If a team is keeping multiple players, the advantage grows (or could grow) as the players are assigned avg-1st, avg-2nd, and avg-3rd round prices. Possibly resulting in top talent being priced well below the expected and bringing up another question about determining which player is slotted where.I suppose another touch to all of this would be the idea of pricing all keepers with a single set price - maybe an average of the top 20 or something along that line.

All but that last line you wrote would make the retained value almost identical to losing your top 3 draft choices for 3 keepers. In your current system, if draft slots were assigned randomly, the LT owner would, on average, give up a mid 1st round pick and would be at a discount. The advantage also grows in your current system when someone has more than one top talent player. You are retaining almost identical value as your current system.

 

[dwarfboy]

The best thing to do is to start over from scratch, but I'd imagine the LT owner and others might be upset about losing their players they were looking forward to keeping.

The only way to set the correct price is via the market; in this case the auction bidding system.

Allow owners to designate which players they want to keep, and treat them kind of like restricted free agents. Have each player available for bidding at the auction. When the bidding is over for a player and the value is set give the players' previous owner the option to claim his player back matching or by paying a set amount more(or less); like 5%, or $1 -$2. Give each owner a maximum number of options they can exercise, perhaps one or two less than the players they would have kept. They can still bid on their player and win the auction, thus saving their limited number of options for other players. If they think a player is overvalued at auction they can let the player go and save the option for another of their players later.

Be sure to announce the players restricted status when the player is nominated for bidding so everybody is aware of their status. Other owners might be tempted to bid up a restricted player, but have to be careful because they get stuck with the player if they overbid and the previous owner doesn't want them back.

 

[LTsharks]

How do you handle the keepers now? Do you forfeit a 1st round pick for LT or is it dependant upon what round a player was drafted? If everyone is forfeiting the same round for their keepers, you should be able to come up with an average $ amount for a 1st round keeper based upon some average auction draft values. The LT owner won't (and shouldn't) agree to a method that makes him pay more for his player.

Currently, keepers are optional so not all teams keep players. Those that do keep players replace their top picks with the keepers (up to three).It looks like we have these options:1. Start from scratch.2. Allow the keepers to be auctioned with matching rights available for the owner (with or without a discount).3. Have mfl, DD or another source provide a values list and accept that as the price for the player.#3 was what was floating around in my head prior to asking the question, but #2 might be the way to go.Thanks for the input, any other ideas or tweaks to these?

In the process of going through this ourselves. We went with #3 but with one important tweak - we played one more year under the old rules.Before the 2006 season we voted in our new auction/keeper rules. We then played the 2006 season under our existing rules. This gave everyone a chance to get used to the new rules and prepare their teams.As far as the player values, we gave every player in 2006 a value from a rankings source (meant nothing to your team for that year). Under our keeper rules, the first year you keep a player their salary rises 10% (also some minimum values, depending on position). Therefore, before 2006 even started, everyone new what it would cost against their cap to keep every player in 2007 (10% more then the initial number). We had no (ok - very few) complaints about guys losing players. They got them for '06 like nothing changed, would only cost them 10% more then their previous years value in '07, and we use a franchise system which when applied to one player a year gives them the right to match. The guy who had LT had him for 06, will keep him in 07 (paying a high, but fair price) and then can franchise him in '08. I think if you wanted to start with the auction this year you would almost have to start over. We didn't want to do that and just throw away all we had done. This ended up being a fair compromise for us. Guys have a ton of keeper options this year and we can't wait for the auction.

 

[turnit643]

In the process of going through this ourselves. We went with #3 but with one important tweak - we played one more year under the old rules.

That's the plan for us as well ... regular draft this time around, then make the move for 2008.

 

[Peter_Griffin]

We made the switch a few years ago (auction is totally the way to go) but our keeper system was a little different.

Our draft had been 15 rounds but you were only allowed to keep players drafted after the 10th round or free agent pick ups in the first 3 weeks of the season. Keepers were limited to 2 players.

Comparing that to an auciton, usually your 11th player drafted is only $1 (we have a $100 salary cap)

What we decided for the transition year was that your keepers would cost $3 each. This way you got the benefit of your late round steal. Once we got into the auction full time however, all players were retainable for one year at their salary from last year (again 2 player limit on keepers).

It sounds like your league allows everyone to be retained with the cost being the equivalent of a first, second or third round pick.

I think the fairest way to handle it would be to arive at an average dollar cost for a first rounder based on your cap. Sure the guy with LT is going to make out better then the guy with a later first round caliber player as he will essentially be getting LT at a discount. But then again, he was getting that same advantage by being able to retain the best player under the old system. So assuming you have a $100 cap, the first retainable player will cost $35 (or something like that), the second will be $20 and the third $10, etc. If you don't have anyone worth that much you probably won't keep him. Also, under your old system, you wouldn't keep someone unless you were comfortable keeping him to give up a first rounder.

 

[turnit643]

Thanks for all of the input. I'll present it to the league and see which of these two most popular options they all feel is best (either an RFA-like matching right or a pre-determined equivalent value.)

 

[Cecil Lammey]

Your Keepers become Restricted Free Agents.Other owners can bid on them, but you have last right of refusal. When the bidding stops you can either choose to keep said player, or you can choose to let him go. Throw in some signing bonus money, seperate from your salary cap to spend on RFA's. This will help bring the price down if you choose to re-sign your player.

How would the "signing bonus money" work? Everyone gets their allotted amount for the draft and those who choose to re-sign their RFA's get a bit more to ease the blow - basically a discount for the player. Is that right?And, to be clear in case I wasn't, I'm asking solely for the initial transition year. In future years, keeper prices wouldn't be an issue. With so many leagues transitioning to an auction draft format, I doubt it's entirely uncommon for a similar situation to have come up elsewhere. I'm wondering if there are other concerns/obstacles that I'm not yet seeing.

Signing bonus money is completely separate, and non-transferrable to your salary cap.e.g. i have a cap on $305 ($10 minimum)i have a signing bonus of $30I have 3 RFA's and 1 Franchise (untouchable)first RFA - Willie Parker ends at $80, I use $10 in signing bonus to get him for $70second RFA - Ben Roethlisberger ends at $30, I use $5 to get him for $25third RFA - Brian Westbrook is bid up to $100. I use the remaining $15 to get him for $85.ALL signing bonus money must be used, and cannot be added/transferred, etc.Hope this helps!