Looking For Feedback On NFBC Draft Champions

[Greg Ambrosius]

Every year we try to get feedback on all of our contests well in advance of the next season so that we can plan ahead. This year we are being extra pro-active because we feel a need to get our NFBC Draft Champions Leagues alive and ready sooner than ever before. We know you addicts like to draft and we're going to be prepared for you this season!!

Our goal is to have the NFBC Draft Champions leagues ready to go in early November after the MLB playoffs are complete. We need the time after the season to set position eligibility not only on all of the major-leaguers but confirm the minor-leaguers too, plus we all need that month break to relax and watch the playoffs. But we want to be up and running with the live draft room after the World Series is complete.

So here's where I need your help: I couldn't be happier with the way the NFBC Draft Champions format ran this year. The idea to expand rosters to 50 players with so many injuries in the game today was brilliant by you owners who suggested it. 15 teams makes this the deepest league in the industry. The no in-season pickups makes this easy to run and adding the DC Express Leagues and 4-Hour drafts, etc., really gave a format for every type of person. I loved the way things ran this year and we obviously finished with a record number of participants and a grand prize of $16,000.

But tell us: Is there anything here we should tweak or adjust? Give us your suggestions now and if it's fine as is we'll plan accordingly. Then the key is deciding how big the grand prize is going to be this year? Can we hit $20,000 in this format? More? We'll decide that shortly.

One very nice feature that should debut this week in the NFFC is our new Draft Prep Tool. Yes, we had it in the NFBC, but it was very tough to move players. Well, this new tool that will be available right away in baseball gives you many ways to set your player default rankings in the draft room very easily. We have drop and drag features and a whole lot more. You can even export your rankings to Excel, although we're still working on an Import function. That's not there yet because we need the Player IDs attached to each player, but we're working on something there. Anyway, this is going to be a great new feature next year because once you set YOUR rankings you can easily import them for every single NFBC online draft after that. You can tweak your Draft Prep as you go during the off-season and just import your latest rankings into the next online draft. You will always have YOUR rankings in the draft room thanks to this very easy to use tool. Nobody else does that.

So let us know what changes, if any, you see for this contest.

We have some ideas to make the NFBC 12 Main Event stronger next season. I think it's time to open that one up to a bigger grand size and get the 12-teamers more visible to the public. There's no reason why we can't have that contest reaching the level of the 15-team Main Event. (Joe Berg is smiling now!! )

And we just introduced a cool, new format for 10-team leagues in the NFFC that has a ton of new people joining us in football. I know we all look down on 10-teamers, but there are millions of people playing in those formats and I think we can do a better job of catering to those folks in baseball. We found a fantastic format to attract them in football; now I have to devise one for baseball. I'll keep working on it and see if we can't do something similar in baseball with a survivor format as the season wears down. That could be a lot of fun. I have some ideas.

Thanks for any and all feedback. We'll take it for all of our contests, but especially the DC. I think this format is going to EXPLODE next year!! Thanks all.

[Outlaw]

I have one idea for the DC. How about allowing a player to be eligible at a posistion at 5 games played at that posistion, or maybe even 1 game? It would help address the posistion flexibilty with teams that have a lot of injuries.

[NorCalAtlFan]

I have one idea for the DC. How about allowing a player to be eligible at a posistion at 5 games played at that posistion, or maybe even 1 game? It would help address the posistion flexibilty with teams that have a lot of injuries.

1 game would be quite extreme and would not be in the best interest of the competition. 5 games? that might be interesting
having the ability to switch out DL'd pitchers on friday might be nice.

[DOUGHBOYS]

With injuries being more and more prevalent, maybe a 10 game positional qualifier the previous year and five games for the current year would be of help.
Not just for the 50's, but for all NFBC leagues.

$375 leagues should be $400 leagues with $1500 pay top threel.

[purpleace]

Please don't replace the 15-team draft champions league with smaller leagues. Changing the football from 14 to 12 teams was disappointing. Larger leagues forces us to be better prepared and more skillful, rather than lucky (granted, a little luck is always needed).

The only suggestion I have is to have one round of free agent bidding for leagues drafting before spring training. $1,000, reverse draft order waiver priority (since some guys may all bid $1,000 on a single player).

[Bronx Yankees]

Greg - I love the Draft Champions format. I have six of those teams now and probably will have more next year. I especially enjoy being able to draft in November, December, January and February. The only downside, as I know you know, is when one or two perpetually slow and inconsiderate drafters ruin the experience for the other 13-14 owners. I'm not talking about taking several hours or even the whole time to make a pick every now and then. Folks get busy with work or family, and every now and then emergencies pop up. Rather, I'm talking about folks who never consider using Auto Pick, who almost always take all or most their time, and never bother to communicate with the other owners. You and others have posted eloquent threads on the need to communicate and be courteous, but I can't help thinking more speeds/formats would increase satisfaction and avoid extreme frustration. As you saw last year, the four-hour option gained in popularity. I did two of them and, while Auto Pick helped the overnight picks go pretty well in both of the drafts that I did, I know some avoid the four-hour drafts due solely to the overnight challenges.

Ideally, it would be great if the drafting software could accommodate two other drafting options:

1. Four-hour drafts with the clock turned off or lengthened during the overnight hours. Except for the middle of the night, the four-hour format is really attractive for those who find the eight-hour format too slow-moving.

2. Drafts where each team has an individual clock. For instance, each team could get 24 hours (or some other amount of time) to make all 50 of their picks. With this option, each draft would have to finish in 15 days and probably would in less time. No one person can unduly slow down the other 14 owners. Once your time runs out, you have to use Auto Pick, thus you still can participate meaningfully even if you run out of time. It also is fair because every owner has the same amount of time. You want to take your sweet time making a critical early round pick and not use Auto Draft? That's fine, but you now have less time to make your other picks. (At a minimum, consider a clock that goes down if you time out. For instance, if you take all eight hours and don't make a pick, the clock for you now will start from seven hours. You time out again, it goes down to six hours, etc. This at least will minimize the extent to which one bad apple can ruin it for everyone else.)

Honestly, I love the general format and will participate regardless. But, every now and then, if I get into a "bad" draft and one or two inconsiderate folks ruin it for everyone else, I tend to get frustrated and take some time off, resulting in me participating in fewer drafts than I would if a more optimal format was available. More importantly, judging from the threads, it seems some have given up on the format due to bad experiences. These additional options could get more folks back into the early drafts. I really think that expanding the drafting options will help to grow the format. Just my two cents. Thanks.

Mike

[Ando]

Individual clocks. Something like 50-80 hours for entire draft; nighttime included. Inconsiderate drafters are the only downside of this format, imo.

[poopytooth]

Greg, I love these drafts and see nothing wrong with having multiple options. I prefer deeper leagues and will join those. Others can elect what they like as well. An overall clock would be interesting.

as far as rules or changes, I enjoy the current format and can't think of anything.

I have always liked the idea of a league where you draft a starting line up only...no bench...no swaps...nothing...but I understand that would require a new format...new prize pool etc...BUT I WOULD SEND OUT THE CHALLENGE TO ALL IF THE GREAT OWNERS HERE...PUT UP YOUR MONEY JUST FOR ONE LEAGUE...

[Greg Ambrosius]

Greg, I love these drafts and see nothing wrong with having multiple options. I prefer deeper leagues and will join those. Others can elect what they like as well. An overall clock would be interesting.

as far as rules or changes, I enjoy the current format and can't think of anything.

I have always liked the idea of a league where you draft a starting line up only...no bench...no swaps...nothing...but I understand that would require a new format...new prize pool etc...BUT I WOULD SEND OUT THE CHALLENGE TO ALL IF THE GREAT OWNERS HERE...PUT UP YOUR MONEY JUST FOR ONE LEAGUE...

Thanks all for the feedback this weekend. I was looking more for format changes than anything else and I don't really see anything wrong with our current format. I have no intention of making these anything other than 15-team leagues and it seems like 50 rounds is perfect. We'll keep the price intact at $150. Good suggestion by Dan to go to $400 for the other format and I'll definitely consider that in order to get everyone up to $1,500 per prize.

As for position eligibility, I'd never go to 1 game and even 5 games seems too low. Just ask the Blue Jays, who found out after 6 games that Brett Lawrie shouldn't play second base. Or look at David Ortiz, who has played 7 games at first base this year, but is really a fulltime DH. If he gets to 10 games this year that will help NFBC teams, but it shouldn't be an easy qualification. In fact, nothing should be easy in the NFBC. How can we run 15-team leagues and then have 1 or 5 game eligibility qualifications? It seems counter-productive to what we're doing, which is to make this a TOUGH competition for the best players in the industry!!!

And 20 games played per position for the next season is pretty standard in the industry and again doesn't make it so easy for everyone trying to fill positions. I don't see us changing that.

Thanks all and we look forward to more feedback, but I think we're headed in the right direction.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Individual clocks. Something like 50-80 hours for entire draft; nighttime included. Inconsiderate drafters are the only downside of this format, imo.

I don't know if individual clocks could ever be programmed, but it's an interesting idea. It might make some people pick quicker in the earlier rounds to make sure they aren't being forced to pick so quickly later, which could help all drafts. I'll bring this one up with IT, but I would imagine it's not an easy addition.

[DOUGHBOYS]

This is probably going to come off as not agreeing or even 'battling' with you, Greg.
It isn't my intention.
I know that the NFBC is supposed to be the toughest contest. That is why the best play here.
At the same time, I really don't care about 'industry standards'. In the past, you have been on the cutting edge of change.
Sometimes, industry standards are just industry standards.
Injuries are multiplying. Each and every year. We barely make do with FAAB now. Some resort to holding a coveted player like Mike Morse or BJ Upton (yes, even BJ Upton), while taking zeroes for the week at a position.
It isn't the way fantasy baseball was intended.
These teams have to because they also have Curtis Granderson and Aramis Ramirez and etc, etc.

Eventually, changes are going to have to be made for the abundance of these injuries. More versatility among position players would seem to be the first step. I know 20/10 has been the standard for years. But that began without obliques and intercostal pulls, whatever they are. And they began with 12 and 10 team leagues.

It's a tough step.
Some would perceive it as watering down our game. I don't think it is.
Brett Lawrie was tried at a new position. He was there long enough to give him a test run. If that is the length for a test run in real baseball, it seems like it would be a good length for fantasy as well.
The paternity list, owwies that don't require the dl, seven days for concussions, being dl'ed, being suspended, all of these take pleasure from the fantasy game and players off our roster.
We need some relief from injury, and now, suspensions.
Something has to be done.
I prefer more flexibility over another roster spot.

As said, this will probably come across as a dissenter.
But, I am more worried about the direction of real baseball and whether fantasy baseball can keep the pace with the missing time, especially in deeper leagues like the NFBC is known for.
Even in a five/ten league for next year, Brett Lawrie would not be eligible as a 2b. And that is the way it is supposed to work. A failed experiment this year, would not be a benefit for next year.
But it would open the door for several other players who have played 10 games at a position to be eligible in order for us to keep full starting lineups next year.
Just my view.

[Outlaw]

This is probably going to come off as not agreeing or even 'battling' with you, Greg.
It isn't my intention.
I know that the NFBC is supposed to be the toughest contest. That is why the best play here.
At the same time, I really don't care about 'industry standards'. In the past, you have been on the cutting edge of change.
Sometimes, industry standards are just industry standards.
Injuries are multiplying. Each and every year. We barely make do with FAAB now. Some resort to holding a coveted player like Mike Morse or BJ Upton (yes, even BJ Upton), while taking zeroes for the week at a position.
It isn't the way fantasy baseball was intended.
These teams have to because they also have Curtis Granderson and Aramis Ramirez and etc, etc.

Eventually, changes are going to have to be made for the abundance of these injuries. More versatility among position players would seem to be the first step. I know 20/10 has been the standard for years. But that began without obliques and intercostal pulls, whatever they are. And they began with 12 and 10 team leagues.

It's a tough step.
Some would perceive it as watering down our game. I don't think it is.
Brett Lawrie was tried at a new position. He was there long enough to give him a test run. If that is the length for a test run in real baseball, it seems like it would be a good length for fantasy as well.
The paternity list, owwies that don't require the dl, seven days for concussions, being dl'ed, being suspended, all of these take pleasure from the fantasy game and players off our roster.
We need some relief from injury, and now, suspensions.
Something has to be done.
I prefer more flexibility over another roster spot.

As said, this will probably come across as a dissenter.
But, I am more worried about the direction of real baseball and whether fantasy baseball can keep the pace with the missing time, especially in deeper leagues like the NFBC is known for.
Even in a five/ten league for next year, Brett Lawrie would not be eligible as a 2b. And that is the way it is supposed to work. A failed experiment this year, would not be a benefit for next year.
But it would open the door for several other players who have played 10 games at a position to be eligible in order for us to keep full starting lineups next year.
Just my view.

My thoughts exactly Dan. What good is it to sell the concept of doing 50 roster DC leagues in October, Nov, Dec, Jan, Feb and what benefit is it for a fantasy player to do them at that time, knowing full well players could and will go down during that time with an injury. I did 5 DC leagues early this year and with the intent of trying to avoid injury prone players, learn the player pool and didn't work out too well too for me. What I did notice, is that with each team I would have drafted at least 5-8 different players in Feb/March than I did in the Fall and January. After round 40 we everyone is scraping the bottom for players who might contribute.

One thing thats interseting is when I look at the FA pool in each DC, there are a lot of decent players that could help any team... Byrd, Mujica..


What is being talked about is allowing more roster Flexibility for the position players. Anything is better than the majority of rosters having 7-15 players on the DL almost all the time. The times are changing, Injuries are at historic levels the past 2 years with no drop-off or end in sight. Offense in BB is dropping dramatically the past 3 years and will continue to do so for a while. Forget PEDS, Greeneis were eliminated and the signs are showing, players cannot stay on the field, even with the slightest of injuries. A drafter may get a jump on some hot prospect in the Fall, but at what expense, injured players... I Have 1 team that had 8 OF, should be enough, right... nope, I start a DL OF guy and that's after another player who gained OF is starting, for 9 OF's.. all 8 I drafted would have been considered starters for their teams. Same goes with MI and CI players. Maybe you should look at how many players would have gained 5-10 eligibility before you totally dismiss the suggestion. I have not looked, but would guess it might be 8-15 players. I agree the 1 game suggestion, isn't a good idea, but I just threw it out for some contrast. Would be nice to slide an Ortiz in for a Puljos at 1B if a team had both.

I know after playing these DC leagues for 2 years now, I'm not joining any before Feb/March, except for Dough's premature league. Too many question marks early. Projecting prospects who might play is a guessing game in the fall and early winter. For everyone that is drafted early and has significant playing time, most teams will pick 2-4 others who never even see the field. Free agents are signing later and later these days too.

I read Glens post yesterday on all his teams injuries wows, at least he had FAAB to attempt to fix it. Injuries are part of the game, but its getting ridiculous the past few seasons.

Just my two sense.

[ToddZ]

How about considering the adaptation that we use in Tout Wars -- making the OF5 spot a swingman spot where you can use any player, hitter or pitcher?

I realize the Friday moves would be an issue which I am sure we can figure out.

The reasoning is when the founding father first came up with the 14H/9P active roster, most MLB teams used 15H/10P or 14/11. Now almost all teams use 13/12 or even 12/13.

This depletes the number of available hitters in FAAB (I know, not an issue in the DC leagues) but what it does do is offer more flexibility for the 23rd spot which should help keep as many players active as possible as well as allowing you to play, as an example, 5 players that qualify at corner (or middle) only - again, helping a team that was hit with an inordinate number of outfield injuries but has several infielders healthy.

Before the argument against "but that's not the way real baseball does it" - I give you Adrian Gonzalez last season as well as Junior Lake this season. MLB teams will use non-OF in the OF under extreme circumstances.

[MadCow Sez]

Happy with DC as it stands. Injuries are part of the game and sometimes that means you have 12-15 little red agents-of-death markers next to your player names.

I realize there are players out there that enjoy taking their full allotted time rather than using the queue even though they're inconveniencing the others in the league. Comes with the territory. There are alternatives (express leagues, 4-hour leagues, etc) if speed is of the essence, and you do have an ability to choose a league to a degree (I declined to enter 2 leagues last year due to a certain slow-roller player being in the league).

Keep it as it is and I'll continue to jump in 3-4/year.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Actually Todd, I think 'the problem created' by Friday moves, would end up being a problem solver.
A lot of folks already want more manuverability with their pitchers. This would give them the chance. While the other nine pitchers remain in stone on their roster, a new pitcher can be moved into this position by owners, giving them more pitcher flexibility.
It does invite streaming of pitchers, at the same time, at the sacrifice of a hitter.
Interesting.

[gpchurchill]

Hi Greg,

I have a dozen DC's this year. At the start of the season, I could go to the 'set lineup' option, and link from that page to any of my teams. then that function was discontinued. i would prefer if i were able to link from the set lineup page to all of my teams.

i am in the camp that would prefer if the in-season position eligibility restrictions were reduced from ten games. six or seven/ a week's worth.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Hi Greg,

I have a dozen DC's this year. At the start of the season, I could go to the 'set lineup' option, and link from that page to any of my teams. then that function was discontinued. i would prefer if i were able to link from the set lineup page to all of my teams.

i am in the camp that would prefer if the in-season position eligibility restrictions were reduced from ten games. six or seven/ a week's worth.

Greg, that function is still there. Just go to the upper right-hand corner where it says "Welcome Greg Churchill" and you'll see a white box with a pulldown to every one of your teams. You can set your starting lineup to all of your teams right there on the Set Lineup page. Good luck and enjoy this feature, which has been there the last few months.

[Greg Ambrosius]

This is probably going to come off as not agreeing or even 'battling' with you, Greg.
It isn't my intention.
I know that the NFBC is supposed to be the toughest contest. That is why the best play here.
At the same time, I really don't care about 'industry standards'. In the past, you have been on the cutting edge of change.
Sometimes, industry standards are just industry standards.
Injuries are multiplying. Each and every year. We barely make do with FAAB now. Some resort to holding a coveted player like Mike Morse or BJ Upton (yes, even BJ Upton), while taking zeroes for the week at a position.
It isn't the way fantasy baseball was intended.
These teams have to because they also have Curtis Granderson and Aramis Ramirez and etc, etc.

Eventually, changes are going to have to be made for the abundance of these injuries. More versatility among position players would seem to be the first step. I know 20/10 has been the standard for years. But that began without obliques and intercostal pulls, whatever they are. And they began with 12 and 10 team leagues.

It's a tough step.
Some would perceive it as watering down our game. I don't think it is.
Brett Lawrie was tried at a new position. He was there long enough to give him a test run. If that is the length for a test run in real baseball, it seems like it would be a good length for fantasy as well.
The paternity list, owwies that don't require the dl, seven days for concussions, being dl'ed, being suspended, all of these take pleasure from the fantasy game and players off our roster.
We need some relief from injury, and now, suspensions.
Something has to be done.
I prefer more flexibility over another roster spot.

As said, this will probably come across as a dissenter.
But, I am more worried about the direction of real baseball and whether fantasy baseball can keep the pace with the missing time, especially in deeper leagues like the NFBC is known for.
Even in a five/ten league for next year, Brett Lawrie would not be eligible as a 2b. And that is the way it is supposed to work. A failed experiment this year, would not be a benefit for next year.
But it would open the door for several other players who have played 10 games at a position to be eligible in order for us to keep full starting lineups next year.
Just my view.

You're not coming across as dissenting Dan: I asked for opinions on the format and that's what I wanted. This is more of a rules question, which is fine, and worthy of a discussion. I would hope folks know me well enough by now that they'd know I don't just follow what the industry does and I think we've been pretty innovative through the years. That's not the reason why we have 20 games played and 10 games in-season played as our position eligibility, but it certainly is a good starting point with most contests starting that way.

Injuries are a major concern in the game. Hell, in fantasy football we've had 10 season-ending injuries during the first weekend of PRACTICES, including to a top 5 TE and a Top 25 WR. These athletes are wired so tightly that they can't even get through practice, yet old guys like us play noon hour hoops every day and nary suffer a sprained ankle. It's crazy, isn't it? It must be the juice us old-timers aren't on.

Anyway, it's okay to ask for lower games played requirements. That's what the thread is for. Nobody has to fear the reaper here. But not every request gets granted either. But again, it's worth a discussion if others agree. Thanks for putting it out there.

[gpchurchill]

Hi Greg,

I have a dozen DC's this year. At the start of the season, I could go to the 'set lineup' option, and link from that page to any of my teams. then that function was discontinued. i would prefer if i were able to link from the set lineup page to all of my teams.

i am in the camp that would prefer if the in-season position eligibility restrictions were reduced from ten games. six or seven/ a week's worth.

Greg, that function is still there. Just go to the upper right-hand corner where it says "Welcome Greg Churchill" and you'll see a white box with a pulldown to every one of your teams. You can set your starting lineup to all of your teams right there on the Set Lineup page. Good luck and enjoy this feature, which has been there the last few months.

neato...

[Baseball Furies]

For me, the big thing that has been posted as a "coming soon" carrot for I don't know how long now, is the Droid app so that mobile drafting especially can happen quickly and easily (not to mention line-up changes etc.). There's just no way of making these things move like they should particularly when those of us who happen to have the "wrong phone" or mobile device are on the clock in the four hour-type drafts. I know that I won't be able to participate in these (and I have about DC 10 teams) now that I've switched from a Blackberry to a Droid-based phone unless something changes (or maybe it has and I don't know it yet?)...and I'm sure that my expert draft facilitation skills will likewise be missed along with my charming personality while doing these.

[Ichiban]

I have a feeling not many will agree with this, which is cool. But personally I would prefer some kind of at least limited FAAB since the DC has so many injuries. For example, allow FAAB, but only allow each team to pick up 5 players a year. Maybe that would be different from the idea of the league, which is mostly about drafting and not needing much time in-season, but would five total pickups ruin that too much? That might be a compromise?

Thanks for even asking for feedback at all- much appreciated!

[Greg Ambrosius]

For me, the big thing that has been posted as a "coming soon" carrot for I don't know how long now, is the Droid app so that mobile drafting especially can happen quickly and easily (not to mention line-up changes etc.). There's just no way of making these things move like they should particularly when those of us who happen to have the "wrong phone" or mobile device are on the clock in the four hour-type drafts. I know that I won't be able to participate in these (and I have about DC 10 teams) now that I've switched from a Blackberry to a Droid-based phone unless something changes (or maybe it has and I don't know it yet?)...and I'm sure that my expert draft facilitation skills will likewise be missed along with my charming personality while doing these.

The NFBC app has been a nice addition this year and we now have a base product to add new features to each year. I don't ever remember promising a draft app as "coming soon" because that is not an easy bit of programming, but long range we all know that's the ultimate goal. Having folks draft NFBC and NFFC teams on their smartphones would be good for all of us, hell, especially US!! The IT department is continuously looking at the app and will add features going forward, but I have no time line for when drafting on the Android would be available. I sure look forward to the day when it happens though.

[DOUGHBOYS]

I have a feeling not many will agree with this, which is cool. But personally I would prefer some kind of at least limited FAAB since the DC has so many injuries. For example, allow FAAB, but only allow each team to pick up 5 players a year. Maybe that would be different from the idea of the league, which is mostly about drafting and not needing much time in-season, but would five total pickups ruin that too much? That might be a compromise?

Thanks for even asking for feedback at all- much appreciated!

I proposed that we draft a few FAAB rounds during the lull of the All Star break.
I was whupped for that proposal.

[DOUGHBOYS]

For me, the big thing that has been posted as a "coming soon" carrot for I don't know how long now, is the Droid app so that mobile drafting especially can happen quickly and easily (not to mention line-up changes etc.). There's just no way of making these things move like they should particularly when those of us who happen to have the "wrong phone" or mobile device are on the clock in the four hour-type drafts. I know that I won't be able to participate in these (and I have about DC 10 teams) now that I've switched from a Blackberry to a Droid-based phone unless something changes (or maybe it has and I don't know it yet?)...and I'm sure that my expert draft facilitation skills will likewise be missed along with my charming personality while doing these.

As you know, Mike, I don't own a cell and don't know the difference between a Black Berry, a Blue Berry, Ken Berry, an ap or tweet.

I do know that no matter what is said in your post, that I can look forward to a world-class facilitated, fast paced, non stop talk, shit-giving, shit-taking drafts with yourself this year.
Those that have drafted in these drafts are never disappointed.

'Charming personality'?.....I'll leave that one alone

[Nevadaman]

If it can be done, I LOVE the idea of individual clocks. That should stop all the whining and complaining (some justified) about inconsiderate owners. This actually seems the fairest way to run these leagues! DO IT!!!