OTM Fantasy Leagues: Settings
by BobZupcic on Feb 20, 2012 9:06 PM EST
Email
PrintOK, the Vets League is filled and whoever pulls this out is going to have to do a bang up job to get through these heavy hitters! As it seems that the discussion on the Fantasy Site has become sporadic, I thought it would be better to bring it over here since we are setting the rules for both leagues and most of us tend to check in here often. So far we have the following based upon community input
Type: H-2-H Points, Keeper
Draft: Snake, Sunday March 25th, 8:45pm EST
Roster: C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, LF, CF, RF, IF, OF, UT, 5 SP, 2 RP, 2 P, 3 Bench, 2 DL
Scoring:
Batters: TB = 1, R = 1, RBI = 1, BB = 1, SB = 2, SO = -0.5, CS = -1
Pitchers: IP = 3, QS = 3, W = 2, SO = 0.5, ER = -2, H = -1, BB = -1, L = -2, SV = 5
Limits:
Starts: 10*
Weekly Transactions: 7
Keepers: 5
Playoff Teams: 6 (Regular Season Weeks: 1-21, Playoffs: 22-24)
* We are working on a method to manage a hard limit of 10 starts. The current ESPN automatiob only cuts the starts off after the day of the 10th start. Commisioners will remove the points from any start after the 10th and if your 10th comes on a day with multiple starts then you will receive the worst start - point-wise from that day
Players from both OTM #1, OTM #2 and now OTM #3 feel free to chime in and as always: Enjoy
-BZ
395 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
ROSTER
ESPN defaults to 26 players and there is some consensus on both shorting this due to league size and also modifying the defaults:
Suggestion #1 (25): C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, LF, CF, RF, OF, OF, INF, INF, UT, 5 SP, 2 RP, 2 P, 3 B
Suggestion #2 (23): C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, LF, CF, RF, OF, INF, UT, 5 SP, 2 RP, 2 P, 3 B
Suggestion #3 (21): C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, LF, CF, RF, UT, 5 SP, 2 RP, 2 P, 3 B
General Consensus seemed to be 3 Bench and 2 DL Slots
I'll vote #2
With 3 bench and 2 dl
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:22 PM EST up reply actions
Another vote for 2
3 bench and 2 default works, although as a keeper league, a deeper bench wouldn’t necessarily be a negative. Gotta stash those prospects somewhere, although this would be a bigger issue for a dynasty. As a 4-6 keeper format, not as much.
Hi ho, Duke!
by The Duke of Silver on Feb 20, 2012 9:46 PM EST up reply actions
Not a big fan of designated outfield spots.... are those necessary?
Otherwise, option 2 is good with me.
by Braden Beaudreau on Feb 20, 2012 9:46 PM EST up reply actions
Another vote for #2
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Either #2 or #3
Although I kinda dislike having specific OF spots (LF, CF, RF), generally prefer working with the whole OF pool.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 10:38 AM EST up reply actions
I like the individual OF spots, personally.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
#2 or #3
3 bench, 2 DL is good for me.
At first I didn’t like specific OF spots, but the more I think about it, the more I like them. I think it will fore you to think about your picks more.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
This is what I was thinking too...
Rather than just loading up with three CFs for speed, or three RFs for power, you actually need to look at guys that play LF/CF/RF and build a “real” OF this way.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I like it.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Me, too.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I like 2 but
with keepers we should have at least 3 DL spots. I would like 4 DL spots
Jeffrey M Melhorn
2...
… seems okay to me. In lieu of the expanded DL suggesting by 18-1 damn, could we have “keeper” slots designated for non-contributing players? Does that make sense and/or can ESPN do that?
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 21, 2012 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 4:59 AM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure what you mean "non-contributing "
Prospects?
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Yeah, like if someone picks up Harper or Bell etc
Who probably won’t play this year.
I am Sandy's bitch
We Are Because You Were
@WadePSU
As a Red Sox crew, surely everyone here can agree 2 DL spots is not enough
I found myself in a situation where Roy Oswalt, Derek Jeter, and about 3 other starters were hurt and I was in quite a pickle and had to cut a lot of quality guys. I could see as many as 4 DL slots being reasonable as long as you can’t keep guys on the DL indefinitely (some leagues glitch).
exactly
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 4:59 AM EST up reply actions
I think 4 DL is way too many
It is too easy to just stash people there. 2 DL should be enough to keep you flexible.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
I think we should also restrict the max total number of SPs allowed on your roster. (Which is possible in ESPN)
So for example if suggestion 2 is used, we would potentially set the max roster number of SPs to 10 (5 SP, 2 P, 3 Bench) or less.
I believe that this is another measure to help prevent SP streaming. This is through people not carrying a C or SS (for example), to have an extra SP on the roster that can be used to exploit the mentioned loophole.
How about not having the "P" category
and going with something like 6 SP/3 RP or 5SP/4RP. Then people would have to use their bench spots if they wanted extra starters.
that makes some sense
though mandating 3 or more relief pitchers in a 16 team league seems a little ridiculous to me. Someone’s gonna be picking Franklin Morales somewhere along the line.
SCORING
Talk of removing both Wins and Losses from the pitchers and going with maybe QS? Needs to be ironed out obviously
ESPN'S Defaults BTW are below
Hitters: TB = 1, Runs = 1, SB = 1, BB = 1, RBI = 1, K = (-1)
Pitchers: IP = 3, Win = 5, Save = 5, Hit = (-1), ER = (-2), Loss = (-5), SO = 1, BB = (-1)
i HATE HATE HATE K's of any kind being scored.
Why is a K worse for a hitter? It’s just another out and keeps him out of a GIDP.
Why is a K better for a pitcher? It’s just another out and prevents the D from turning a DP (except on a stolen base attempt).
If you keep Wins and Losses, Saves to 2 and add Games Finished as 1.
You can’t keep Saves if you don’t keep Wins and Losses. They’re all just as close to meaningless, anyway.
I mean, it's better for a pitcher
cuz it’s an out he got himself. All without anyone else’s help.
And it’s worse for a hitter cuz if the ball doesn’t get put in play, it literally has 0 chance of being a hit.
And you gotta score some stuff
Um. Yeah. This.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
You're right, but we're comparing different things here.
You’re comparing a K to a batted ball. I’m comparing a K to an already converted out.
In the end we do have to score something, which is why I concede Wins, Losses, Saves, and Games Finished.
My favorite is still sabermetricist Steve Mann’s scoring system:
Hitters
Hit 2
BB 1.5
TB 1
SB 1
AB -0.5
CS -2
This keeps you from overvaluing weak hitters who steal bases, but don’t actually add as many wins to the team as fantasy generally values.
Pitchers:
IP 4.5
WIn 3
Save 2
Game Finished 1
Walk -1
Hit -2.5
Home Run -3
Loss -3
This is actually more accurate than ERA. This stems from the fact that the earned runs allowed by a pitcher can be badly skewed by a handful of outings in which he gets shelled but surrenders only, or primarily, unearned runs. It can be made more accurate if we know the actual singles, doubles, and triples allowed, but that’s not usually published so I went with the Hits and Home Runs Allowed categories here. As for K’s, they’re ridiculous – a glamor stat that is almost meaningless to the game. A ground out is just as good as a K, and even better when there’s a runner on first.
I think that you are trying too hard to make fantasy = reality
which might be cool in a way, but is very divergent from the norm so I doubt it will fly
I'd love to work in a league that dsharp built as close to reality as possible...
… and then field 32 teams too. Just to give all of us armchair GMs a chance to see whether we could really build a “real” team, as opposed to the fantasy games.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
This
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 8:16 PM EST up reply actions
This is fantasy baseball, it's meant to be fun.
Strike outs are fun, and have been part of fantasy baseball since its inception.
Also, a K is relevant for hitters and pitchers. You only cite DP’s, but what about a pitcher that gets a K with a runner at third and less than two outs? Or how much a K hurts a hitter in the very same scenario?
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 8:16 PM EST up reply actions
I'm all aboard with dropping W's and L's
And adding QS’s @ 3 points apiece.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:27 PM EST up reply actions
QS
Is 3 pts for a QS enough, if a Save is worth 5? And does it make sense to add Holds worth the same value (or perhaps a pt less) than Saves?
by The Laser Show on Feb 21, 2012 8:45 AM EST up reply actions
Holds
Yeah, I hear you and I kind of hate them too…but I also hate saves. Perhaps I’m in the minority, but chasing candidates to become closers and reading up on possible next-in-line closers is easily my least favorite part of the fantasy baseball experience.
by The Laser Show on Feb 21, 2012 9:38 AM EST up reply actions
I've got no problem with holds & saves....
2pts for a hold doesn’t seem like it’s that bad an idea. If we need to have relief pitchers, they have to get some value somehow.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
yeah, I mean, my problem with them
is that you can get one for getting one out, which seems dumb to me. Admittedly, that can also happen with saves, but is a lot more rate. If it’s 2 points, fine.
Personally, I kinda like chasing saves, just because closer seems to be the most consistently fluid part of a baseball roster. I like the change.
I'd bring saves down to 4pts.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I'd leave saves at 5
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 5:00 AM EST up reply actions
YES. Quality starts, cut wins and losses. The whole wins/losses thing really devalues some of the best pitchers.
by Braden Beaudreau on Feb 20, 2012 9:43 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
And what about Holds in addition to Saves? I always hate that non-closer relief pitchers have very little value…and even less value if we are taking away wins.
by The Laser Show on Feb 21, 2012 8:41 AM EST up reply actions
Also, could stolen bases maybe be two points? They almost seem irrelevant the way they are now.
by Braden Beaudreau on Feb 20, 2012 9:47 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I was thinking the same thing myself... Saves are as overrated, no??
And, for the record… I may be running Mirabelli League, but I’d be all for jumping into one of these if you guys come up short on teams.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I think we're all signed into the Vets league
but sounds like Rick has some spots in the #2 league. You should get priority there, I feel like.
Yeah, Rick and I have talked, so if his last spot remains open, I may jump in.
Of course, if one of these threads generates another 15 interested players, I’d be happy to set up an OTM3 in ESPN following the rules/scoring you guys set up here.
So far, though… looks like just me out here.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I kind of like having the Wins and Losses
Just like in real baseball, you can luck out if the offence picks you up, and you can get gyped if the offence lets you down. Add a little bump up for the QS.
Not a deal breaker for me, though.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
At the end of the day, the W does matter somewhere, right?
Maybe not 5 points, but maybe split the 5 points across QS & the W?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
You have to keep W/L is you also count Saves. Otherwise, what are they saving?
And, as I said, lower Saves to 3 and add 1 point for Games Finished.
I'm down with removing W/L, place it with QS
I think saves and holds should be equal in points, isn’t a save just a hold in the 9th?
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
I've seen 1 out saves too.
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 21, 2012 3:00 PM EST up reply actions
yes, those happen
but are very high pressure and much more rare. And usually it’s by someone replacing the closer.
You get a hold any time you come into the game when you’re winning by 3 or less, don’t give up the lead, and don’t get a save. In fact, if you come into a game with the bases empty and a one run lead, walk the bases loaded, strike out a batter, then are replaced by a new pitcher who allows any of those runs to score, you still get a hold. I just don’t really feel like middle relievers need to have any significant value in fantasy.
I like QS at 3 points
I would also like wins and losses count as 2 and -2 respectivly. I think they should count, but 5 is crazy. I would even be down with lowering Saves to 2 and blown Saves to -2. I like holds at 1 and blown holds at -1.
Jeffrey M Melhorn
Yeah, this looks good to me.
A QS with the win would be worth 5 points, a QS with the loss is 1 (sucks, but can happen) and a QS with no decision ends up 3 points.
Agree with the Saves/Blown Saves and Holds/Blown Holds too.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
To add more fuel, here is an example run down based upon suggestions
Using stats from last year for Justin Verlander & Jacoby Ellsbury
Current ESPN Default:
Ellsbury: 581 (Lead Major Hitters)
Verlander: 733 (Led Major Pitchers)
As you can see the top pitchers outpace the top hitters. 5 pitchers scored more than Jacoby
Modified
Removing W/L alltogether and making QS = 3pts, Adding 2 = SB, -1 CS
Ellsbury: 605
Verlander: 722
Modified #2
Making K’s both -0.5 for hitters and 0.5 for pitchers, keeping the modifications above
Ellsbury: 654
Verlander: 597
Well, considering I think Ellsbury should have won the actual MVP...
… I think Modified #2 looks good.
Hate to ask you to do more work, but if that is a comparison of the top two, what about adding comparisons for the top closer’s point value, and top catcher/SS for a look as well.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
With Modified #2
Top C, SS, RP (2nd in parens)
RP: Kimbrel – 410.5 (Axford 378)
C: Martinez – 455.5 (Santana 452.5)
SS: Tulo – 512.5 (Reyes 503.5)
Ah, Kimbrel and Axford...
… the only good draft picks I made.
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 21, 2012 6:37 PM EST up reply actions
Hmm
I mean, Modified #2 has the two the closest, but still not perfect.
Is there a little bump we can give pitchers to even it out a little bit more? What if we keep the QS but do what 18-1 said and make Wins only +2 and Losses -2?
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
But they can't be perfect
I don’t see how adding in stats that the pitcher doesn’t have control over. At least a QS is something quantifiable.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Well they have partial control over it
Which is why a much reduced point allocation for them is in order.
Also not looking for things to be perfect, just as close as possible. I prefer balance between hitting/pitching anyway.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 3:49 PM EST up reply actions
Modified #3
Modified #2 with W=2, L=-2
Ellsbury: 654 (Kemp actually leads leage now with 657.5)
Verlander: 635
Top 10 would run this way - from 2011
Kemp, Ellsbury, Verlander, Braun, Cabrera, Granderson, Bautista, Kinsler, Fielder, Gonzalez
Second pitcher is just out of the Top 10 with Kershaw coming in at 11th
I like that
But defer to the will of the majority
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 22, 2012 9:17 AM EST up reply actions
Hey I had both those guys
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
Wait... you had Verlander and Ellsbury??
No wonder you won…
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
And Miggy Cabrera
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 23, 2012 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
Bad Starts
One of the best ways to discourage streaming (aside for starts limits) is to setup the scoring to punish bad starts. With the Modified #3 version shown in comments below if a starter came up with a line like the following
3.2 – 10 – 9 – 2 – 3 with a Loss (Lackey’s April 2nd 2011 line BTW)
Would score: +11 (IP), -10 (H), -18 (ER), -2 (BB), +1.5 (K), -2 (L) = -19.5 pts
I think that is fair and will tend to keep people from streaming less than stellar starters
I'm okay with that
Increase the risk. Makes sense.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
PLAYOFFS
General Consensus seemed to be 6 teams: Both Division Winners and then the next 4 best records.
I agree with the general consensus
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:25 PM EST up reply actions
PLAYOFFS???
YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT PLAYOFFS????
/obligatory
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I like it
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
KEEPERS
We run the gamut of some wanting only 4 and a few wanting larger numbers (dynasty). After some discussion the 4-8 range seemed to be where most were landing. Still needs to be ironed out or voted on
I'd like it to be a dynasty league,
but that doesn’t seem to be the consensus. So I’ll vote for 6 keepers.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:24 PM EST up reply actions
6 keepers work
Although I’m all for dynasty format.
Hi ho, Duke!
by The Duke of Silver on Feb 20, 2012 9:43 PM EST up reply actions
No more than 6.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
3/4
I want the draft to be as important as possible
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah...less the better, I should add.
I enjoy the draft.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
How about you automatically get to keep three, and then two have a one game playoff for the fourth spot!
certainly that makes a lot of sense.
Doe dynasty mean the whole team?
I enjoy the draft the draft as well. I’m thinking 4, though I’m fine with 5.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
STARTS LIMITS
ESPN defaults to 12, which personally seems a bit high. Talk off maybe 10 or even 7-8 came up
10
Is my vote.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:24 PM EST up reply actions
or more
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:52 PM EST up reply actions
I would probably prefer 8
10 would be OK. I certainly wouldn’t have more than that. Even at 10, streaming sounds pretty valuable to me.
I go with the majority on this one.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Probably 9/10
Depends on the roster size as well.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 10:33 AM EST up reply actions
10 seems cool
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Considering that you have 5 starters
and likely 7 if you fill your P slots with starters. 10 would allow all 7 starters to go along with 3 slots for those having double start weeks. Of course -as I mentioned on the ESPN League Forum – there is a loophole to consider!
Let me explain the "Loophole" so everyone understands
You can actually get in more starts than the stated amount due to the way ESPN runs stats. Your pitching stats cut off the day AFTER you reach your designated start limit. This makes some sense as ESPN’s software would have to be pretty awesome to find when your pitcher made that start and then stop collecting data. So lets say that you have 9 starts already and are entering the last day and you have 4 starters going. You would accumulate for 13 starts even though say 10 is the limit.
This is a real good argument to set the bar fairly low (say 7-8)
I'd like to think we're all better than using Loopholes to win
And if not, I reserve the right to whine incessantly about it.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 22, 2012 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
I too would like to think that...
… but my endless stream of mediocre pitching from last year makes it difficult for me to really believe it.
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 22, 2012 11:45 AM EST up reply actions
Well I'm not sure its really a "loophole" if everyone knows about and is aware.
I can say now that I would probably try to take advantage of it throughout the season if I think it is worth the pickup/risk. (I’m 100% sure that LC is in the same boat).
What would partly help is if we establish a league rule that you have to have at least one position player for every starting roster spot that can be occupied by a position player. Part of the issue last year is that people (like me) were not carrying a catcher or a middle infield position half the time for more SPs.
How would you enforce that?
The key might be to not have position spots that carry little value. If a position player is producing the same value or more as a pitcher during a 5 game span, he won’t be dropped to stream another pitcher.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
You enforce by keeping an eye out, and then shaming them with all the might of OTM. Potentially some sort of penalty like they have to throw their match-up the next week if it was intentional.
As to your example…how about I keep the noted position player for the first 4 games, then drop him for a pitcher making the start that 5th game? Potentially almost double my value from that one roster spot.
If I see my match-up is going to be close towards the end of the week then this situation could very well happen.
Really the best solution to eliminate pitcher streaming, that I have mentioned for a couple OTM fantasy seasons now, is to go to weekly lineups instead of daily. Not that I’m against daily lineups.
Really?
You’re joking, right?
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 8:20 PM EST up reply actions
The bold section.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 5:10 AM EST up reply actions
Well he would because that
spot could hold at least 7 starters assuming you swap one per day and its most likely that 7 starts > one week of hitting. But since we have limits in place that will most likely not happen
So the MI is worth less than the bench spots?
Or the starters that aren’t starting and giving you zero points?
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
In case of our leagues last year (at least in the Tek league),
The lowly MI or C was worth less than additional roster spots for SPs.
You don’t drop your ace/solid SPs that aren’t starting and giving you zero points. The vacant roster position represented by not having a MI or C is being taken by the mediocre pitcher(s) with decent matchups that you picked up to stream that day.
I think lowering the overall value of SPs will help with that
as well as the fact that under the new scoring regime a bad start will really hit you hard (see above) whereas last year you could troll out guys non-stop with very little risk factor (bad starts might have netted you -2 pts or something like that). We could also limit starts to 7-8 like I suggested so the best you could do even if you streamed would be say 13-14
Unenforceable, upCHUCK.
And yes, I will take advantage of every loophole. I play to win.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 7:59 PM EST up reply actions
It is enforceable as long as people have some sort of honesty.
If I’m playing you and I see you don’t have a SS or catcher for additional SPs I’m going to call shenanigans. I don’t think it is that ridiculous to have a basic rule that is not restricted by the physical league settings controlled by ESPN/Yahoo.
I’m really just spit balling…however I interpret from your response that it is impossible to hold people to any integrity on the internet.
I respectfully disagree.
The league rules(or settings) might have loopholes, but they are fixed, and unchanging. The settings might not be ideal, but they are unwavering, and once in place, cannot be argued with. When you try to go outside of the fixed settings to make judgments on teams, you are opening a can of worms you might not like. Who makes the decisions? What are the exact criteria? Who monitors the league for offenses? What are the penalties? Are there tiers of penalties, based on severity?
I don’t like it when leagues make up the rules as they go along. I like knowing what I can, or can’t do prior to playing.
I have been in a league that tried to do this(shocking, I know), and it didn’t work out very well. And to be honest, smart managers can still use outside settings to affect the outcome of the league.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 5:50 AM EST up reply actions
Well I would not say that we are making it up as we go along if we establish it before the start of the season.
I still think this would potentially work if thought through. Though I respect your previous experience.
Have you played alternatively where in the roster settings, you can restrict the total number of players per position type for the roster? (This is possible in ESPN)
Thankfully, we haven't established the rules completely yet
And can make changes accordingly
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 23, 2012 9:31 AM EST up reply actions
But not every scenario can be forecast prior to the start of play.
Last year, I was the one who came up with the idea to not carry a C, or MI, in favor of a SP. No one knew I would do this. Heck, I came up with it on the fly. Who’s to say we don’t run into a new issue that hasn’t been covered by our “outside rules”? I just think the rules should be what are set in stone via the website we use, not what we make up on our own.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 7:48 PM EST up reply actions
As long as everyone knows going into the game exactly what the rules are, what's the harm?
I guess I don’t get the objection for setting up the rules now. If you can find a new loophole during the year, great, we can re-examine after the season. I see nothing wrong with this.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 23, 2012 8:33 PM EST up reply actions
He plays to win, ladies and gentlemen.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I would like to say that I, for one,
will exploit loopholes to win. I am not better than that. You may whine.
I think the Loophole is really a problem
I dont know what kinda power I have as commisioner in the season ( i mean within the ESPN software). I would actually love this rule: You have X starts per week if you exceed that number via the loophole you will automatically lose a) the whole matchup b) 20 points for every start exceeding X. (I know that a comminsioner can substract points in CBS i dont know whethere I’ll have that power in a free league on ESPN.
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 26, 2012 4:03 PM EST up reply actions
I would have assumed you already knew about the loophole.
I rarely use ESPN, and even I knew about it. ;)
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 26, 2012 4:57 PM EST up reply actions
As upCHUCK stated earlier.
If everyone knows about it, it isn’t really a loophole. It’s just a limit in the settings. I don’t believe outside rules are a good idea.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 26, 2012 4:59 PM EST up reply actions
well, no, it's a dumb loophole
the intent of the rule isn’t “shove as many starts as possible into a day at the end of the week,” it’s “limit the starts”
It does limit starts.
You can’t stream pitchers in and out every day, so yes there is a limit. Maybe not as much as you might like, but a limit nonetheless.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 26, 2012 8:02 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not in favor of trying to do more than what ESPN automatically does
We’ve limited the number of starts, and the number of additions you can do per week. Add to that making a pitchers bad start HURT you more will automatically curtail streaming. If there is a high risk putting out Joe Saunders at the end of the week, people are going to think twice.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
This
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 26, 2012 10:29 PM EST up reply actions
I just think its the dumbest loophole ever
limit your starts to X-1 up untill sunday and then ideally roll out 7 starts on sunday to max out points. Its just plain dumb when its smarter to bench a good starter on saturday so that i can be 1 start under my limit so i can roll out a bunch of mediocre starters and exceed the limit on sunday.
I normally hate gentlemens agreements or outside rule enforcement but i find this loophole utterly annoying to be honest. if there is a possibility, for me as the commish to say substract 20 points for every start you go over the said limit, you have to really gamble that your extra start brings you more than 20 points and even Verlander doesnt average that amount.
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 27, 2012 2:15 AM EST up reply actions
I disagree with "outside" rules.
I have given my reasons already in previous comments. That said, I’ll play within whatever rules are put in place.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 27, 2012 7:45 AM EST up reply actions
How is it an outside rule if its agreed upon beforehand.
Because the software has limits?
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 27, 2012 7:51 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly
Can you even dole out the punishment you proposed? If not, what kind of punishment does get doled out? Who monitors every teams number of starts per week(all match-up’s must be monitored)? Are there different levels of punishment based on severity, or intent? What happens when teams go inactive(it always happens), and go over the limit? Do you make changes to inactive teams to keep it from happening? Is that fair to those who played them when they were active?
These are just a sample of questions that can be asked when outside judgement is used, instead of letting the system do the work.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 27, 2012 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
Here: from ESPN League Rules
ADJUST SCORING
The Adjust Scoring feature is only available in League Manager H2H points-based leagues. The “Adjust Scoring” link can be accessed from both the LM Tools and Scoreboard pages. Using this feature the LM can adjust the scoring of any game by simply adding or subtracting points from a team for a given week. If the scoring adjustment changes the end result of the game (ie, from a win to a loss), the standings page will immediately update to reflect the adjusted game result.
It would be some work on the part of the commish, but he could just tally up the points past the 10th start and reomve them weekly – that way its 10 starts hard and fast
We could just come up with a rule where
on the day of the 10th start you get the start that occurs first (earliest game).
I hope inactivity is less of an issue in a keeper league
but i’d like a blacklist anyway. Meaning players who are inactive over multiple weeks of the season wont be part of the Veteran league in future season.
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 27, 2012 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
That's fine
But that “blacklist” doesn’t change the effects of inactivity on the current season.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 27, 2012 11:51 AM EST up reply actions
I think that the league setup itself will most likely take care of this problem
Here is what we have in place so far
1. 10 start “limit”
2. Modified pitching scoring that lowers the overall value of starters
3. Scoring system in place to not reward risky starts but in fact punish (see comments above)
4. 16 team league with 5 – 7 starter slots meaning that right after the draft there may be up to 112 starters already on teams (that’s about every major league team’s 1-4.
Basically if you decide to go the streaming route you are most likely going to be swapping in and out #5 starters each with a risk of scoring in the -10 range
Another suggestion to even limit this further would be to limit the number of open P slots and go 6 SP, 3 RP or even 5 SP, 4 RP – then you are forced to use your bench to stream.
I actually like this
10 starts hard cap! If you have 11 you get -20 on your point total (which already includes the points of start number 11 btw). If you have 12 starts you get -40 and so on. So -20 for every start over 10. Maybe it will almost never be an issue but its easy to enforce with the LM tools and will prevent the exploitation of our start limit. For me this a good and easy solution. opinions?
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 27, 2012 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
Rather than have 20 pt fines
just remove the actual points that the 11th start produced (and 12th, 13th, etc.). That would require a bit more effort, but be utterly more fair – in case someone accidentally left a guy in, etc.
beat me too it BZ
by the by r u the early 80’ies BZ or just a fan. I feel I should know this and I dont.
Jeffrey M Melhorn
Not the real Bob Zupcic no
Just met the guy when I was a youngster at Spring Training one year and he was very nice to me so it stuck and I became a fan of his
I disagree.
You have to let the points count, and subtract afterward.
Example:
I throw out 9 SP’s through Saturday, and then throw out 6 more on Sunday. How do you determine which pitcher counts? You can’t always go by which one pitched first, many games start at the same time.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 27, 2012 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
then you take the one with the least amount of points
I know it sucks but it’s fair
Jeffrey M Melhorn
Yeah if you have multiple starts at sunday you should get to keep the worst of starts
this means you can get a negative start and a positiv and i’ll substract the positive later if you exceed the limit.
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 27, 2012 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
I agree...
It’s up to the manager to make sure he has the right number of starters on Sunday… so if you’ve got 9 starts heading into Sunday, and Verlander and Padilla both starting… then you get the lower of the two.
If Verlander throws a no hit gem for 20+ and Padilla gets lit up for -10, the LM subtracts the points for Verlander’s start and you get the lower start value.
That should help incentivize the managers to make sure they use that tenth start judiciously and don’t throw out six guys and hope the best start is the one that counts.
As for how to know when a team goes over? I suspect your opponent that week will see it, and can simply shoot the LM a message (if the LM doesn’t see it himself).
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I think the problem would be with intent
I would think that if a team has played by the rules and around the AS break there on vacation and forget to update there team. Leaving the team to manage itself is not smart but also not done with malice intent. I hate to dsay it but I agree with gulp Lloyd. I think if it’s a one time thing then just not count the points from that start over or if it keeps up then limiting that teams ability to add and drop would be my next step.
Jeffrey M Melhorn
As BZ has shown, loading up on starters isn't going to be easy
What did we agree on, 7 pick ups? What are the chances you didn’t use most of those during the week? There are 16 teams having to pick up Andrew Miller and Vicente Padilla to get points at the end of the week. More often than not it will fail.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Loading up on starters
through the waiver wire is one thing. Drafting a multitude of starters is quite another.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 27, 2012 11:44 AM EST up reply actions
I too would strongly prefer banning this loophole.
I don’t see the point of limiting the gamesmanship of start streaming with another form of it, just limited to a day. A hard and fast limit should be just that.
I agree.
I think BZ has the enforcement correct as well… the LM simply subtracts the points for the extra starters, and I think Lloyd’s point about many games starting at the same time is a valid one too.
So… I think if you start multiple starters over your limit on Sunday, you should only get points for the worst performance, to help incentivize managers to make sure they have the 10th starter they want in the game on Sunday.
And if you’ve got Verlander and Kershaw (rather than my previous example), it’s in your best interest to monitor your starts numbers all week… but if you didn’t, you still have to pick the guy you think will do the best on Sunday, rather than throwing both of them in the hopes of getting the higher score.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
7 sounds reasonable
And gets my vote.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 20, 2012 9:25 PM EST up reply actions
I'm fine with whatever on this.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
7 is good
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Proposal: Any SP picked up needs to be kept on active roster for 14 days barring injury.
Let’s have none of this “10 different starters a week” stuff.
I don't like this
Say I have Beckett, he goes on the DL for his yearly 2 week resting some time in June. With 16 teams the waiver wire for pitching is going to be pretty thin. Why shouldn’t I be able to replace his production with different pitchers that have better match ups? I like the idea of limiting pick ups, but why should I be told how to use my pick ups?
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Exactly
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 8:03 PM EST up reply actions
Again,
unenforceable.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 8:02 PM EST up reply actions
How do you plan on enforcing that?
Call me curious.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 8:21 PM EST up reply actions
Honour system.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Yeah, can't the Commish step in at some point?
Maybe not about this, 14 days sounds way too long. But maybe about other things, like not having a full lineup should be enforceable somehow. Like a warning at first, but I know on Yahoo a Commish can add/remove players, set Waiver priority, and artificially use up all of that week’s remaining moves. Not sure about ESPN.
Not saying we should use that kind of precedent, of course, but there could be consequences if we wanted them.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 23, 2012 9:41 AM EST up reply actions
maybe
I don’t really agree with the principle though. Sometimes you have a pitcher missing a start and just need to grab a guy to try to make up some points- I feel like that’s fine. The pitcher streaming I want to try to avoid is guys constantly grabbing everyone available every day instead of fielding a shortstop or whatever. I don’t want the rules to make it difficult to actually make changes to the team.
Honestly, I think the only really necessary solution is what BZ suggested- make bad starts hurt more so that bad pitchers aren’t worth picking up.
I don't really want a 14 day retainer
I’m more talking about having to have a legitimate line-up with every spot filled day in/day out. I think that’s just one of those things that should be a rule.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 23, 2012 10:05 AM EST up reply actions
But what about off days?
If my SS has an off day, am I supposed to drop somebody to replace him? I don’t think that is fair. If we want to limit pitching streaming, just limit the amount of acquisitions per week and make bad starts hurt.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
I guess I'm not understanding you completely
Off days happen, but just because he’s not playing doesn’t mean you can drop him and add a pitcher. I’m talking about not carrying a Catcher so you can have an extra bench spot dedicated to a pitcher or whatever.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 23, 2012 12:52 PM EST up reply actions
I think I interpreted that to the extreme
You must always have a position player spot filled and active. I agree that we shouldn’t be punting C or SS.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
I don't think anyone is saying that there needs to be someone playing a game at every position every day
just that there should be a player in the shortstop position every day- even if they aren’t playing that day. Doesn’t bother me if someone wants to have a player who is on the DL in their shortstop position, just that there’s someone there.
How about this
which ever amount of position players we decide on. If you team dosent fill each feilding position then your points dont count. If every position is filled and we keep to the 7 or less tranz this should limit shenanigans. course there will always be shenanigans because it’s so fun to say the word. Like salsa.
Jeffrey M Melhorn
Oy
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 7:41 PM EST up reply actions
No
How do you plan on making it so someone’s points don’t count. Better yet, lets say I’m in last place(hypothetical, NEVER gonna happen). Your team is on the cusp of a playoff berth, and I’m playing the team vying for the same playoff spot you’re trying to attain. Let’s say I decide not to fill my my roster that week, and the other team makes the playoffs instead of you because, under your “system”, my points no longer count that week, and he blows me out.
Rules outside of the ones within the settings are a can of worms that shouldn’t be opened. I’m just sayin’.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 24, 2012 1:33 PM EST up reply actions
ok
I just thought if your signing up for Fantasy Baseball in Feb your gonna be checking you team(s) at least once a week. It may also make the league more competitive. my 2 cents
Jeffrey M Melhorn
Say
WHAT???
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 24, 2012 3:15 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 7:54 PM EST up reply actions
I have not been keeping up with the site... :/
I just transferred into a University and got crazy busy! Are all the spots full? I know I had asked for a spot and if one is still being held I am in. Email me at kraken613@gmail.com
I love Lester, Pedroia, and Gonzo!!! ITS MAN LOVE!
I'd be willing to run both Mirabelli League (on Yahoo!) and an OTM3 League on ESPN...
… if there is still enough interest. I want to play in one that manages to make the “official” designation, and matches the set up of the “sanctioned” leagues on the site.
And I still want the Mirabelli League winner posted below the other two for 2011 on the home page!
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I have one slot left. If he doesn't respond by Wednesday, you're in Aloha
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 21, 2012 2:36 AM EST up reply actions
Wow... what time zone are you in??
I’ll take that slot, provided we don’t suddenly come up with enough interest for an OTM3 that I run on ESPN, following the same set up as the OTM1 and OTM2.
I’ve got 6 registered in Mirabelli, with a few more telling me they will play (or would play if we don’t get to 12), and only one responding that they’re out for 2012. (I have TLD and The Name Is Dalton, I believe, on deck to fill any holes I might end up with over there.)
Draft date will be March 24th as well? That should give us time for me to take the open spot, and give it up if we suddenly generate enough interest for an OTM3.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I'm in PST for a couple more weeks
I’m moving back to the east coast sometime in March (FINALLY!) Yeah, all settings, including draft date/time will be identical.
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 21, 2012 2:44 AM EST up reply actions
Wow... you were up late last night.
Of course, I’m just getting back from my ski vacation in Colorado, so I was out about 5 minutes after my post last night.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Y'know, I was gonna ask....
where the @#$% would a Hawaiian go for a vacation? They already live in Hawaii.
Now I know.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Yeah, those are my rules for living in Hawaii.
A ski trip every winter (been skiing since I was 3, so it’s in my blood, but with 7 knee surgeries… the up and down of weather on the mainland is rough on the arthritis, and I doubt I could log 50 ski days a year any more), and a Red Sox game every summer.
Since I moved here in 2005, I’ve actually done both… including catching at least one game in Fenway every summer, and Game 2 of the 2007 World Series (when a friend offered me his tickets at face value on Sunday night, and the game was Thursday, I think??).
So… not too bad, I’d say. I do, however, also take at least one week vacation a year here on the islands (but going to a neighbor island like Big Island, Kauai or Maui).
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I would like a spot somewhere if possible!
I love Lester, Pedroia, and Gonzo!!! ITS MAN LOVE!
by kraken613 on Feb 21, 2012 10:51 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Whoops.
I was on my iPod and the chat looks weird on it. I didn’t realize this was off my comment.
I love Lester, Pedroia, and Gonzo!!! ITS MAN LOVE!
I have a spot in Mirabelli League, as one manager isn't returning.
Different set up than these “official” leagues, but we’d like to fill that one still.
I’ll send you the invite today.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I can't wait to destroy you punks
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Yes. I will destroy you in 2026
And when I do you will weep, blubbering: “This feels just like when he destroyed me in 2012! Waaaaaaaaaaahhhhhh!!”
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
You're funny
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 21, 2012 7:32 PM EST up reply actions
Thank you.
Perhaps you were being sarcastic. That matters not to Bloggy. I will take it as a legitmate assessment of my awesome.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
You mean,
awesomeness?
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 22, 2012 8:04 PM EST up reply actions
You will be destroyed
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 21, 2012 8:04 PM EST up reply actions
Date?
Is that supposed to be Saturday, March 24 or Sunday, March 25?
I assume ESPN would set a random?
With as much turnover as there is for 2012, doubt it’d be worth going by 2011 results. So, random set within an hour of the draft, or we could have BZ & Rick draw names from a hat and announce the order, so folks can plan for weeks ahead of the draft.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I like knowing ahead of time
Probably has little actual significance, but knowing whether you’re going to be in the middle or on one of the turns helps me better prepare I feel like.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 1:17 PM EST up reply actions
I believe German said that he was going to enter us into a random number generator soon
To determine draft order now. Otherwise we would have to wait until the day of the draft for the order and some people wanted to be able to start planning now. He said he’d do it as soon as we’re full, so any day now.
I am Sandy's bitch
We Are Because You Were
@WadePSU
Draft Length
Anyone have a decent estimate of draft length? How much time is allowed for each pick? I just realized that with 16 teams, and a 23-man roster (suggestion #2), even with 1 minute per pick, the draft will take over 6 hours. Pretty rough for us east coasters!
I guess my question is really...
does it usually move a lot faster because the average time used per pick is much less than 1 minute?
by The Laser Show on Feb 21, 2012 2:13 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, it probably won't take 6 hours
Especially in the first few rounds since you have a good idea of who you want to pick. But sometimes the guy you really want is taken right before you’re up and you need a full minute to re-strategize.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 2:44 PM EST up reply actions
Gotcha, thanks
So it probably averages more like ~20 to 30 secs per pick, making it more like ~3 hrs?
by The Laser Show on Feb 21, 2012 2:47 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe more like approaching 4
Still not exactly speedy though. It depends on things like a person’s flexibility, preparedness, etc. as to how long they’ll take for each pick. Early round picks tend to be pretty quick when you’re still in the “All-Stars” category, but when you’re trying to decide between Ben Revere, Jose Tabata, and Dexter Fowler, it can take a whole minute or so.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
Early picks will be quick, later ones - not so much
if you have a few auto-drafters then it goes faster, but I doubt that happens in a leauge like this.
think of it this way
after you pick, you’ll have 16 picks to think about your next move. But yeah, it’ll take a long time.
Unless you pick #1 or #16...
… then you end up with 30 picks between yours, after having back to back picks. (Right, on a snake draft, that’s the way it works…)
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I always hate being on either end of the snake.
So boring waiting for it to come all the way back to you, slam two picks together and then another long wait…
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I know, that's the worst
plus, when I have to wait that long, I end up going through wayyyyy too much boredom whiskey and my draft suffers.
I prefer it
you get to kill two birds with one stone and set the trends. I like it better then being in the middle
Jeffrey M Melhorn
other than the wait
I think the turn or close to the turn is probably the best bet at least in the early rounds. You get the 16th/17th best players, which in these days is probably better than the 1st/32nd
Ha ha ha!
I’m with BZ, but I can see the temptation to pick #1 overall too.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I like picking Top 3-4
Still on a turn, but you get your choice from a Top 5 player anyway in the beginning.
by South Coast Ghost on Feb 21, 2012 4:47 PM EST up reply actions
Right... I like somewhere between 4-8 or so.
Top 10 player, but your second pick is 20-25 range, rather than 32.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I drink during that time.
And…during other pauses while drafting.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
What time does the draft start for The German, then?
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
On time.
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 21, 2012 6:39 PM EST up reply actions
http://instantrimshot.com/
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 21, 2012 6:39 PM EST up reply actions
Well, he is German.
(Are Germans a timely people? I feel like they are. I know one German…always punctual.)
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Yikes. Hope homeboy's got the coffee maker set.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
i feel like if I was the commissioner, and in Germany,
I would make the draft happen at like 9 AM German time. Sounds like a sound strategic move to me.
He's up to something.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
That's how I'd handle it, personally.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I dont drink coffee
I guess it will be lots of Red Bull. ;)
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 26, 2012 4:08 PM EST up reply actions
Crafty.
The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.
by nuthinboutnuthin on Feb 22, 2012 5:47 PM EST up reply actions
May I just say that is a pain in the ass setting your draft rankings on ESPN
It was on Yahoo as well, though.
How do you make the rankings apply to the actual draft once they're set?
by Braden Beaudreau on Feb 21, 2012 8:14 PM EST up reply actions
You can't use them for the mocks, unfortunately
I hope it lists them for you in the order you made when you get into your real league draft, but no real way to check.
I didnt know we moved discussion here :(
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
Well I think we have the roster size/slots down
and are close on keepers and maybe even scoring so It’s not all for naught. I moved it here primarily because there are two leagues and it just seemed that folks did not check into the ESPN site very often
If the leagues are going to have the same rules
It’s only fair we’re in a forum where both parties can talk.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
agreed, just didnt see till last night
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
Decisions
OK, so we can move this thing along, based upon discussion from above here is what I have. We are not going to be able to please everyone so please bear that in mind
ROSTER: 23 Players (C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, LF, CF, RF, IF, OF, UT, 5 SP, 2 RP, 2 P, 3 B)
DL: 2 Slots
KEEPERS: Between 4-6 (compromise at 5?)
PLAYOFFS: 6 Teams (2 Division Winners, next 4 best records)
SCORING: Modified #3
Batters: TB 1, R 1, RBI 1, SB 2, BB 1, K -0.5, CS -1
Pitchers: IP 3, W 2, L -2, QS 3, SV 5. ER -2, H -1, BB -1, K 0.5
STARTS LIMIT: 10
TRANSACTION LIMIT: 7
are people against an extra 3 points or something for complete games?
doesn’t need to be there, but I feel like they’re accomplishments that do enough for the team that it’s worthy of a few extra points.
I'm not really for CS
You’ll already get more points because you pitched more innings, and more than likely had a really good game. If you add on say 3 pts for a CS, was that 9th inning really worth twice as much as each one before it?
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
I think so with how little pitchers do it
it should be a reward. Maybe only 1 or 2 points? I really dont like saves being 5. 3 is more like it
Jeffrey M Melhorn
we gotta get points somehow for relievers
they’re already worth a lot less than everyone else, even with saves being 5
But then should we reward the cycle?
It’s cool too. Or grand slams? I can see that it helps bullpens in real life… But so does going 8 innings. I’m not going to be upset if we go with them, but I think a pitcher will get plenty of points pitching a complete game without the need for extras.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
the cycle is stupid
but it’s stupid because you don’t get it if you hit a homer, a triple, and 2 doubles. Grand slams give you a crapload of points for a guy that’s probably playing 6 days that week. Whatever, I mean, I see what you’re saying, I just think it’s something worth rewarding- I think, for example, what James Shields did last year was just incredible. But like I said, whatever.
I just think some of the little things that can add in points make fantasy more interesting and give something else to think about- makes judging players in advance a bit more challenging. Hell, I’d probably be against making wins and losses worth so little except that it seems to make the points work out really well.
James Shields also went 8 2/3 a couple times, which is like Fulding 2 doubles instead of stopping at first.
Complete games do great things for a team, but not for a fantasy team. Now a closer just lost out on a save. The person with that pitcher won’t get credit. The “team” benefit doesn’t translate to counable points.
no it's not the same as that
8 2/3, you still have a reliever warming up, getting in the game, and throwing game pitches. There is a difference. I don’t really understand your point about the closer thing unless we’re drafting whole teams “with the first pick, I draft the Texas Rangers”
I think its all relative
relievers already take a hit due to low innings and now that we’ve cut K’s down.
I dunno it's kind of just a cool accomplishment
that in actual baseball helps the team a lot by letting the bullpen rest. I think it’s worth rewarding. Like how in actual baseball terms, a single and a steal isn’t really worth more than a double, but it’s certainly more fun.
I like added points for complete game/no-hitter/perfecto, personally.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Same here... of course, we had a "bonus" category in head to head last year...
… one for hitters (Cycle) and one for pitchers (No Hitter).
Again, when they are rare (and even the CG is these days), it seems like there could/should be bonus points for them. So what if you prioritize Roy Halladay in your draft, since he’s about the best workhorse left?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
No
I have no interest in losing due to dumb luck.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 7:34 PM EST up reply actions
Yup. "Dumb luck".
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I have no problem with CG's.
But do we really need to give SP’s more points?
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 7:40 PM EST up reply actions
Well at this point they are lower or equal to elite hitters
EX: Halladay, Lee and Weaver were the 3-4-5th ranked pitchers based upon our scoring system. They are all below Robinson Cano, the 13th best hitter.
Or another way to look at it. If you consider 500+ pts at the elite level
There were 22 hitters and only 6 starters
Another example
as you get mid-tier, starters get worse pretty quick
Gallardo was equivalent in value to Howard Kendrick and very close to Derek Jeter based upon last year’s stats
Until you look at them per game.
Starters value is much higher on a per game basis. That’s why they are so valuable.,
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 8:28 PM EST up reply actions
That's an interesting point...
… per game, since they play every 5 days, they still put up a ton of points.
However… does that really affect the week (now that you’ve got transaction and start limits to help prevent streaming)… instead of rolling one starter after another out, so you’ve got four pitchers starting every day (and no C or MI, as I understand your tactic from last year), you’re going to be looking at a guy with one or two starts against your position players that play everyday.
So… do the changes suddenly make starting pitchers much less valuable than position players?
Say you’ve got Verlander and Ellsbury… you get everyday points from Ells, and at best… two starts from Verlander. Since they both project to about 600 points on the season, it’s probably a wash. However, as you get deeper into the starting pitching, doesn’t the idea of one or two starts get diminished by the idea that of the top 30 players by points scored (using last year’s stats, and the new scoring rules) roughly 22 are position players?
Seems like the balance has tipped towards position players this season, judging by that glance.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
an unbalance that is mitigated
by the ability to stream in 10 starts (or more) per week. Remember that you may have 4-5 starters you are not willing to drop but the two floating P slots you can use your 7 moves to jockey guys in an out. I think its better that on the whole pitchers are lower rated with the exception of the extremely good ones
Works for me.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 23, 2012 7:54 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 23, 2012 8:30 PM EST up reply actions
On a per game basis
14 hitters scored 500+ points last year(using ESPN’s default stats). 11 pitchers accomplished this feat. Now the top pitchers scored more than the top hitters, as no hitter reached 600 points(Top was Ellsbury with 581), with 4 pitchers hitting 600 or higher(733 for Verlander).
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 24, 2012 3:48 PM EST up reply actions
True
and with the change Verlander is still in the top 5 total points but not 152 pts better than the top hitter. The goal was to bring the pitchers inline with the hitters on the whole. I mean Verlander is awesome and all, but we (well at least I) are kinda used to guys like Pujols, etc. being the top rated fantasy types rather than starters. Hence the change.
worth mentioning also
that the change for strikeouts from 1 pt to .5 pts also went along with IP being worth 3 instead of 2.
Playoffs
I went to go update my settings to match these and it seems like the max teams for the playoffs is 4?
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 25, 2012 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
You can set the regular season to 21 weeks
and the playoffs to 1 week and then you can get 6 teams and use the entire season
I shall do that!
Thanks, BZ.
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 25, 2012 6:26 PM EST up reply actions
At some point soon, I'm going to have to set up OTM3...
… and make sure I get all the settings right myself.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
i can live with all of those
I’d still would love to find a good way to deal with the Limited Starts Loophole though
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 26, 2012 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
and Thanks for all the work you've done BZ
especially in working out a new scoring system.
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 26, 2012 4:18 PM EST up reply actions
I'm ready to kick some ass
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
I'm gonna beat you
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 25, 2012 1:15 PM EST up reply actions
can we get the draft order soon?
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
It seems like German has been M.I.A. recently.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 26, 2012 2:03 PM EST up reply actions
Looks like I spoke too soon.
He just made some posts in the OTM1 league page.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 26, 2012 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
Draft Order and Division are up for the Veteran League
and sorry for answering so late but i was on vacation for a week.
Also the Draft Date is Final now: 25th of March 8.45 PM ET.
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 26, 2012 3:47 PM EST reply actions
thank you German!
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
I can't do that day!!!!!!
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 26, 2012 9:23 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry but the date is set
You had 3 weeks to complain in our ESPN message boards, you failed to do so. I think i posted atleast 1 reminder. No one said he could not attend. Anyway its impossible to find a date where all 16 ppl can attend.
))<>((
by German Red Sox Fan on Feb 27, 2012 1:58 AM EST up reply actions
well she did mention it
but it sounds like the 25th is, unfortunately, the only date that works for almost everything. Just sucky for Marisa since last year, she had to end up taking the abandoned, hopeless team halfway through the year.
Marisa, I think you can go through and at least set your player preferences in order, so you can have some semblance of control. Which is obviously not even close to actually being there.
She did mention it once.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Feb 27, 2012 11:42 AM EST up reply actions
More than once
I’ll just have to cancel everything and do it seeing that I need to pick my own team
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 27, 2012 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
hahaha
I’ll just ignore my sister’s birthday I guess
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 27, 2012 10:17 PM EST up reply actions
I recall Marisa writing some where the 25th didn't work
But that date worked for the vast majority
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
I've said it a million times
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 27, 2012 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
what espn message boards
I didn;t even know we had those set.
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 27, 2012 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
they are in the league
When you enter the league you can post/respond to the threads on the main page
Is there a way I can get email notifications for them?
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 27, 2012 10:16 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah...that'd be good.
I don’t really spend a whole lot of time on the ESPN page, either.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
I will set up the draft date/time and order in the next couple days
for OTM #2. I’m in the middle of a project that I should finish today or tomorrow that’s unrelated to OTM. Once I finish it, I will set up the draft.
My only problem is that I don’t know EXACTLY when I’m moving across country, so I’m not yet sure if I will actually be able to be there for the draft my own self. :)
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
Still got plenty of time to set it up
No need to rush yourself, friend.
Here’s hoping you make it for the draft date!
Hi ho, Duke!
by The Duke of Silver on Feb 26, 2012 5:16 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah I'm hoping so
I have a job in RI starting on April 2. I want to be in RI a couple weeks before that to acclimate myself back to the East Coast. I’ve been on the West Coast for the past 12 years.
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 26, 2012 6:13 PM EST up reply actions
HA!
Better chance of getting one there than where I live now. :)
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
by Rick Bentsen on Feb 26, 2012 7:05 PM EST up reply actions
Can't do the draft day
and I want to draft my own team
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
Marisa... if you want to build a draft board
… and give a surrogate power to pick for you (not sure if you have to give access to your account, or if you can name a “co-manager” to let them help), I’d be willing to help you.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
ugh none of my friends I trust like baseball
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 27, 2012 12:44 PM EST up reply actions
My point was... if you email me a draft list (spreadsheet)...
… and make me a co-manager for the draft, I can follow your draft strategy and might do a better job than the autodraft, running off your rankings.
I might even be able to text you at times to get your preference, for instance. If you wanted to email me info, a way to contact you, etc. Since we’re in different leagues, I think I could be trusted to do what’s best for your team there.
Or you could cancel the conflict you have (as you’ve suggested above) and do it yourself… have to admit, even a surrogate probably isn’t as good as making the picks yourself.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I need to make the picks
I didn’t last year and my team ended up 1-22
In Lax We Trust - Official Pro Lacrosse Blog of SBN
Follow me on Twitter - In Lax We Trust
The Lacrosse Radio Network - Unique Lacrosse Programming
MLB Daily Dish
by Marisa Ingemi on Feb 27, 2012 10:16 PM EST up reply actions
Well, you took over a team that wasn't very good to start with.
I finished second in the Mirabelli League, and following your intentions on draft day, we might end up with a much better squad.
That said… I totally get the desire to make your own picks. Never the same as when you pick your own guys.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Thanks... that'll help me make sure I've got them right for OTM3.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
Shouldn't there be more keepers?
At this point, it’s difficult to set up rankings equally weighing both keeper value and current value. With only 5 keepers, the line becomes blurred and you can’t tell if your draft picks will mean anything in a year. Guess I just favor dynasty format, puts a lot of emphasis on that first draft. The way the draft is now (just for this year, really) is complicated.
by Braden Beaudreau on Mar 1, 2012 12:37 PM EST reply actions
the general concensus has been
we like the idea of a keeper type thing, but most people really like drafting and want it to stay important year to year
I guess drafting is pretty fun.
The idea of making midseason trades that could benefit your team years from now is an interesting prospect, though. Not that you couldn’t do that. Oh well, I’m good with everything else.
by Braden Beaudreau on Mar 1, 2012 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
I like the idea of keeping the draft important
To help keep the league interesting year after year. If we keep the majority of the team each year, I assume you’d just have people that continue to be middle of the pack every season.
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Just to throw in a curveball...
… I’d imagine you could start with 5 keepers now, and as the league develops and people get a feel for how it works, consider whether a dynasty format is appealing to the majority.
I mean, maybe you’d end up with managers stuck in the middle of the pack, or maybe the dynasty format would created the trades Braden’s suggesting – that benefit your team a couple years down the road.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I can speak for myself
But the draft is one of, if not the most, enjoyable part of a fantasy league (especially when everyone is there and into it) to Get rid of that completely and rely just on trading/FAs sounds cool on the surface but gets rid of an integral part of my fantasy baseball experience. I come from an older generation where the draft meant, 10 dudes over at someone’s house drinking beer and heckling each other incessantly over picks while pouring over Fantasy baseball magazines. The draft would take endless hours and I would be worse for the wear afterwards but man – those were some times
Yeah
Those were great times. I started playing fantasy baseball in 1989, and everything was done by hand. The draft was the best part of the season, unless you finished in the money. However, a league like this, done over the internet, makes the draft less meaningful.
"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
"To every complex problem, there is an answer that is simple, easy to understand and wrong." – H. L. Mencken
by Lloyd Christmas on Mar 2, 2012 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe true, but not meaningless
I enjoy the in draft chat banter and seeing how many of my picks the guy right in front of me snags and how many times I can say Dammit in one evening
THIS.
I loved the draft the first time I did it. I was great. I love the chirping in the comment section.
DRAFT RULES.
Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself: "Am I a hater troll?"
@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven
Yeah, I definitely wouldn't replace it completely...
… just meant I could see the keepers growing over time. 5 this year, up to maybe 10 years from now.
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I guess it is possible
But I don’t want to end up the As
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Thankfully, fantasy has no owner telling you that you cannot keep your star players...
… because you cannot afford their next contract. Seems like that would be a major difference between fantasy and the real game.
So even if you were the A’s in one season, and opted to trade away your best player to a team that needs him for the playoff run to finish in the money, seems like you’d end up getting keepers back that would rebuild your team for a year or two down the road, right?
I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.
Wait ’til THIS year!
I think there should be a trade deadline
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
Trade deadline maybe to match MLB's?
Author, Dawn of a New Age and The Blademaster
CO, USS Callisto
Avid Red Sox fan :)
I'd suggest that or August 15th
The 2011 Over the Monster Gedman League Fantasy Baseball Champion
I hate free agency
Seems reasonable to me
Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
