This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
thats apples and organes, because the people we hate the most are commissioners who edit rosters and insert players who weren't starters.. under your rationale you must think those types of cretinous managers are the best people on earth and you probably bake them cookies or something all because you want to count Donario's TD. Just doesn't make any sense from A FFB perspective.
There is no luck. Only probability. Like everything in life, there is some inherent skill involved in analyzing a situation and trying to choose the one with the highest probability for success. Sometimes your right. Sometimes your wrong. Just because a situation has a high probability for success does not imply that it will not fail. There's still the probability that it will fail. That is what most people would call luck but in reality its just probability.dennis.moore said:Of course not. It is all luck.Insein said:Isn't it?dennis.moore said:
You need to start that league back up with better owners.
Hmmm... Maybe when our boys are old enough to play
Bestball is NOT just draftmasters (where there are no trades or free agent pickups)There are league that are bestball (that is just the lineup/scoring portion) that still have free agent pickups each week and trades - some keeper/dynasty and some redraft.................bottom line is you can find/create a league that uses many different choicesInsein said:
Just because you can create a type of league doesn't mean you should though and i wouldn't want to play in league where tds were worth 100 points or something messed up and crazy like that either but I would probably like to see gadget plays somehow rewarded.
At thre risk of speaking for someone else, I think his point was simply that the reason bestball isn't more popular is simply that more people don't find it to be preferable. Your original questions is "why isn't it more popular?" - the implication is that you feel best-ball is somehow superior to lineup formats. I don't think as many people agree with that presumption as you seem to think, that's all. Different strokes? Certainly. But you can't very well ask the question you did, then give someone grief for giving their reason - which is that they don't agree with the underlying assumption that best- ball is "better" - different? Sure, but not preferred - at least not by SWC, or others that have weighed in.
We had to call in our line-ups. Not necessarily Sunday morning, but that was the deadline...
Lineups were due at 5pm ET on Friday but could be changed via a phone call until first game on Sunday.
Nah ... I get and accept that. What I was responding to, very specifically, was this:"Just because you can create a type of league doesn't mean you should ..."
That's another innovation I didn't mention in the OP -- all the leagues I played in until the late 1990s had lineups due Saturday night (or Wednesday night when there were Thursday night games). Someone was a game time decision? You had to make the decision to roll the dice 24 hours (or more) earlier, and with less info (FFB Internet media was not particularly mature at the time, though there were some good message boards at the time).
Not "superior to", no. I was assuming, though, that best-ball holds enough charms to carve out a significant niche. Comparable to how auction leagues, IDP leagues, or start-two-QB leagues have done.EDIT: Furthermore, that assumption wasn't based solely on my own preconceptions, but on comments that have been made on this board -- many of which are recurring Shark Pool themes:
Can't tell from this thread ... the yays and nays seem balanced to me.
Very narrowly and specifically, I gave SWC grief only for writing "Just because you can create a type of league doesn't mean you should ...". I didn't give him grief about his opinion of best-ball -- I'm cool with those who don't see any appeal in it.
That was my main concern, actually. I thought the best ball format might reduce the trading since teams wouldn't need to solidify a starting line-up as much as in regular leagues.
Trading frequency seems to be more owner-dependant than league-rules-dependant. If you get 3 or 4 Trader Joe's in the same league, it can really take off.That said, in best-ball leagues, there are a lot fewer pure-garbage players. You can credibly dangle, say, Danario Alexander or Tashard Choice out there in front of someone in a best-ball redraft.
having 1/2/3/1/1/1 plus the 2 flex is A LOT of starters....I think thats part of the reason for all the activity, as every player has a little more value than in smaller starter leagues....lots of WW gem mining and trades of lower tier guys, as well as future draft pick trades....EDIT to add: and being a dynasty also helps the trade front in this league
You're still managing the team all year. You'd still do all the research you currently do, except for whateve you like to do when making lineup decisions.
Why wouldn't you?
wondering if this might be a clue to your main question. as the game has evolved, technology has made it easier to make better start/bench decisions (both in terms of info available and in ability to change your mind), thereby dampening or masking what otherwise could have generated interest in best-ball. As players get used to this new normal, they may start to wonder as you have wondered.I'm on board.
The technology explosion, I believe, has also made actual NFL teams and players much more savvy about the information that leaves the team. IMHO, there's much, much more (a) straight-up misinformation from players/teams (aka McFadden's hamstring) and (b) thin speculation that gets built up into near-fact out there than there was 10+ years ago.IOW, the net result is that technology has not done much to reduce uncertainty. At least as I see it.
I get excited when my opponent has his highest scoring player on the bench.
As I've gotten older I want to spend time worrying about game day decisions less and less, and so in that aspect best ball as some appealing aspects. But it also has some consequences that I don't know if it makes it worthwhile, that help out lesser skilled owners at the expense of more skilled.For example, carrying IDP backups in a league that only starts 2 DL, LB and DB is a mistake. High variability in IDP scoring, lots of startable players on waivers, and ability to do well just playing weekly matchups make it a mistake in a league that doesn't exhaust the player supply far enough. You're better off using the roster spot on an offensive player who has a situation that could end up making him starter worthy. And many owners in such a format draft middling IDPs way too early (where anything other than end of the draft is too early for a non-elite IDP).But switch formats and that backup LB under best ball will help smooth out that variability in scoring. More IDPs should be taken and that makes taking them earlier in the draft more correct than it was before. So the rule change took two types of common incorrect behavior and turned them into the right move. IDP isn't the only such position... PK and defense, and to a lesser extent in a normal setup, TE especially if you don't have an elite one. I think most leagues have a varying range of owner quality, and a switch to best ball probably helps the lesser ones the most. I may not always start the right WR from my stable that includes guys like a 2010 Mark Clayton or Steve Johnson, but if I'm a good owner I'll come out ahead and will probably package them in a trade that puts me ahead.To come back around to the beginning though, as I said, I do see the merit in not being dependent on gametime decisions. I just am not sure that's enough a priority for me to accept the negative consequences yet. We did have a trial backup player thing in one league but it really didn't seem to be worth it as implemented so we scrapped it for now.
There is another variation on this from a league I used to play in before I moved........IF you had a player on the same team at the same position, one starting and one on the bench...IF your starter got HURT during the game and your sub entered the game you got the highest scoring of the two - not both just the most points. (If you changed from the starter to the sub you would also be paying a transaction fee but that is a separate rule and not necessary.)This worked easiest/best at quarterback but there were several times during the season you could get a RB or WR used this way.The commissioner would have to go back in and make the lineup changes after the game(s).
Matter of personal preference I suppose... there's probably a pretty even split of guys like yourself that are in more leagues than they can keep track of and gluttons for punishment like me that feel like the "play or bench" decisions are the true foundation for the weekly fun that is fantasy football.By the way... I had McFadden on the bench this past week due to those "first game back" concerns (and YES, it stung... uh, still stings) but congrat's to those that had the stones to play him. And to automatically get those points handed to you seems to suck the life out of the hobby to me.Like I said... "different strokes."
alert/
Believe it or not, I once played in a hand-scored rotisserie NBA league that was like that. The idea was that your bench would contribute something, just like a real bench does.Righetti said:be awarealertI'm sure there is not a place which would support it but how about thisYou pick your starters and they each accumulate normal stats.. then you pick a backup for each position who accumulates 1/2 points..so picking your starters is still key but you don't get burned by not having a starter in.
/
Mimicking the NFL is exactly why the league I'm in is the best league around imo. We attempt to mimick the NFL whenever we can....and it"s absolutely the most fun of any league I've ever been in and it's not even close.Best-ball is lazy man's FF. Even if all of your start/sit research and debate and message board lurking all amount to pure luck in the end, it's still more fun. managing a team is what makes this so addictive in the first place. Thats the lure of the game, imo. The H2H league I'm in that more closely mimicks the NFL is by far the most active league, with the most dedicated and involved players. Our entire offseason is spent negotiating trades and researching players and just all around discussing football amongst ourselves. I spend the vast majority of my time on this one league, and less than 5 minutes a week combined on the 3 others I'm in.Doug B said:Yeah, but the "gotta mimic the real NFL" ship has sailed a long, long time ago in FFB.SWC said:EDIT: another way to think about it -- there IS a rule in the real NFL that, say, Toby Gerhardt can take the field in the event of an injury to Adrian Peterson. Don't really care about FFB mimicking the NFL but for those that do, there's another way to approach the issue.
that's what I was thinking.. not sure what the percentage would be because obviously an NBA 6th man has a lot more value than an NBA 12th man but in a total nerd-rotisserie league you could give each bench player a value from 6-12 and have their points count a corresponding % of their actual points.Believe it or not, I once played in a hand-scored rotisserie NBA league that was like that. The idea was that your bench would contribute something, just like a real bench does.be aware
I don't buy this excuse. Many times ignorance is bliss. I may miss the playoffs this year because of my getting info on Kenny Britt the week he went off. I sat him because of it. While Mr. Have-to-do stuff never sees this, starts Britt and is clicking his heels.
