|
Post by NAUHurdler on Mar 20, 2015 19:10:42 GMT -5
Anything can happen as always. If I was putting money down in Vegas, you know where it'd go. Haha
Sent from The Office of the Phoenix Suns General Manager
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2015 11:38:57 GMT -5
If I was putting money down in Vegas, you know where it'd go. Haha Sent from The Office of the Phoenix Suns General Manager On me?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2015 15:42:32 GMT -5
Just lost to a dude not even setting his lineups. Does someone want to tell Atlanta he's in the conference finals? He clearly doesn't know.
|
|
|
Post by Munich Barons GM on Mar 23, 2015 2:52:40 GMT -5
Just lost to a dude not even setting his lineups. you suck
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2015 8:24:24 GMT -5
Just lost to a dude not even setting his lineups. you suck Tell me about it. Anthony Davis sprains his ankle in shoot around, costs me a trip to the conference finals. How do you sprain your ankle bad enough in drills that you miss two games?
|
|
|
Post by Roar GM (Josh) on Mar 23, 2015 10:04:47 GMT -5
Random question. Has the league ever considered implementing a game limit? Just noticed that Manchester barely beat Great Britain (6 3's and 30 pts), but got to play 6 more games. Doesn't seem fair that luck should play that big a part. I understand that injuries are a part of it too, but 6 games in 7 days seems a little much. Just curious.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2015 10:27:22 GMT -5
Random question. Has the league ever considered implementing a game limit? Just noticed that Manchester barely beat Great Britain (6 3's and 30 pts), but got to play 6 more games. Doesn't seem fair that luck should play that big a part. I understand that injuries are a part of it too, but 6 games in 7 days seems a little much. Just curious. This is a fair point. However, I don't know how you could implement such a policy. Doing so would require an overhaul of games to the regular season as well. Technically, all these guys play the same number of games (or are supposed to) during the regular season. There isn't really a way to curtail the problem even during our playoffs. I don't think you can "cap" teams to only playing x-number of games per week. That could throw everything out of balance.
|
|
|
Post by Roar GM (Josh) on Mar 23, 2015 13:20:05 GMT -5
Random question. Has the league ever considered implementing a game limit? Just noticed that Manchester barely beat Great Britain (6 3's and 30 pts), but got to play 6 more games. Doesn't seem fair that luck should play that big a part. I understand that injuries are a part of it too, but 6 games in 7 days seems a little much. Just curious. This is a fair point. However, I don't know how you could implement such a policy. Doing so would require an overhaul of games to the regular season as well. Technically, all these guys play the same number of games (or are supposed to) during the regular season. There isn't really a way to curtail the problem even during our playoffs. I don't think you can "cap" teams to only playing x-number of games per week. That could throw everything out of balance. In my redraft league, we implement a 35 game limit. They all play the same amount of games for the season but not on a weekly basis. Most NBA teams play 4 games a week, but some play 3 and some play 5. It just so happened, Manchester's teams played more games throughout the week than GB's teams. With 2/3 of the cats being positive counting stats, it would seem like we'd want to eliminate luck as much as possible and let every team play on an even playing field. Why do you think we wouldn't be able to cap it? Teams may have to plan the week and select a few players to sit out, but it's not like teams would have to sit their stars. Some weeks it won't matter. But then you have a situation like this where GB seems to have the better team but didnt play as many games.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2015 14:51:05 GMT -5
This is a fair point. However, I don't know how you could implement such a policy. Doing so would require an overhaul of games to the regular season as well. Technically, all these guys play the same number of games (or are supposed to) during the regular season. There isn't really a way to curtail the problem even during our playoffs. I don't think you can "cap" teams to only playing x-number of games per week. That could throw everything out of balance. In my redraft league, we implement a 35 game limit. They all play the same amount of games for the season but not on a weekly basis. Most NBA teams play 4 games a week, but some play 3 and some play 5. It just so happened, Manchester's teams played more games throughout the week than GB's teams. With 2/3 of the cats being positive counting stats, it would seem like we'd want to eliminate luck as much as possible and let every team play on an even playing field. Why do you think we wouldn't be able to cap it? Teams may have to plan the week and select a few players to sit out, but it's not like teams would have to sit their stars. Some weeks it won't matter. But then you have a situation like this where GB seems to have the better team but didnt play as many games. I see what you're saying. I don't think it's a bad idea in all honesty. It levels the playing field. If you have other experience with how it was implemented, do share. I have no clue if you can do this on ESPN, but I'd be curious to hear other people chime in on this. It's intriguing to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by TrailDucker on Mar 23, 2015 15:00:39 GMT -5
You can set a game limit in the settings of the league. What should that game limit be at though for teams this size?
|
|
|
Post by Roar GM (Josh) on Mar 23, 2015 15:34:08 GMT -5
I don't necessarily think it has anything to do with the amount of teams in the league. It's all about the roster spots. We had 9 starting roster spots and a 35 game limit. We basically found out the average number of games played by a fantasy team was somewhere around 40. We factored in a game or two for injuries and then lowered it to 35. So, a fully healthy team was having to sit ~5 guys a week. We had less rostered players so it was harder, at times, to decide who to sit. However, it did play into strategy. "Do i want to go with all big men to try to steal blocks and sit my assist/steal guys? Do i bench Deandre tonight bc im barely winning FT% but have a decent lead in boards? It added an element that was new to us.
With only 7 roster spots, the equal proportion would be 27 games. By no means was it very scientific so that's just a number. I would suggest figuring out the number of games played like we did and go from there.
Unfortuantely I don't have this awesome story about how it's changed our fantasy league. However, we are strong believers in trying to eliminate luck because, after all, this is "fantasy" basketball. We want ideal conditions.
|
|
|
Post by NAUHurdler on Mar 23, 2015 19:15:28 GMT -5
Random question. Has the league ever considered implementing a game limit? Just noticed that Manchester barely beat Great Britain (6 3's and 30 pts), but got to play 6 more games. Doesn't seem fair that luck should play that big a part. I understand that injuries are a part of it too, but 6 games in 7 days seems a little much. Just curious. Just to play devils advocate here, though it could be looked at as GB had bad luck here because of a lack of guys playing games but on the flip side, he may have won a game or two throughout the season vs other teams when he probably had a grip of players going. Balances out, just bad timing in regards to the schedule. Interesting idea though, like the strategy that goes into it. Sent from The Office of the Phoenix Suns General Manager
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2015 19:30:59 GMT -5
As someone who just had a 7-game advantage and lost (but would have won with a 10-game advantage had Davis and Lee been healthy), I don't know what to think.
I like the idea in theory.
|
|
|
Post by San Diego Scorpions on Mar 24, 2015 0:28:31 GMT -5
I want all my guys games to count no matter which week, so I am not a fan of this rule proposal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 24, 2015 8:38:12 GMT -5
I like the idea of it... but it never seems to work out like planned. I've done it both ways in re-draft leagues, and I honestly prefer no limit.
Plus, the way ESPN sets up the "game limit" is not a hard limit. Once you hit that limit, it continues to count the rest of the games on that day. So if your limit is 20 games, and you hit 20 in an afternoon game, it will still count all of that day's later games. So it ends up being unbalanced anyway.
I think that by setting up the IR to disallow players moving back-and-forth, we have already addressed this issue adequately. Really this issue is just inherently part of the problem with head-to-head fantasy basketball. The only real fix to this problem is to do rotisserie-style. And if I had to pick between the two, I'll still take head-to-head any day... even with its flaws.
|
|