This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
- Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 40286
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
This is the final week of the NFBC season and the final scoring period of the NFBC season. Players can change out hitters on Friday, but after that there are no more lineup changes in 2021.
There always is a chance that a couple of teams will have to play a 163rd regular season game on Monday to decide a divisional title or a final Wild Card spot and if that game is played it's considered as part of MLB's regular season, and thus those stats count in all NFBC leagues. If that were to happen, those games would be part of Week 26 in the NFBC as this week's scoring period runs from Monday through Monday. No lineup changes are allowed on Monday as we have instead extended the final week scoring period. Wild Card playoff games are scheduled to start on Tuesday and Wednesday in each league.
Per the rules: The NFBC regular season will extend from the first game of the MLB regular season through the final game of the regular season (including one or more season-ending MLB tie-breaker games as part of the final week scoring period).
This includes all NFBC games, including the NFBC Diamond Challenge. Good luck all and enjoy the final week of the season.
There always is a chance that a couple of teams will have to play a 163rd regular season game on Monday to decide a divisional title or a final Wild Card spot and if that game is played it's considered as part of MLB's regular season, and thus those stats count in all NFBC leagues. If that were to happen, those games would be part of Week 26 in the NFBC as this week's scoring period runs from Monday through Monday. No lineup changes are allowed on Monday as we have instead extended the final week scoring period. Wild Card playoff games are scheduled to start on Tuesday and Wednesday in each league.
Per the rules: The NFBC regular season will extend from the first game of the MLB regular season through the final game of the regular season (including one or more season-ending MLB tie-breaker games as part of the final week scoring period).
This includes all NFBC games, including the NFBC Diamond Challenge. Good luck all and enjoy the final week of the season.
Greg Ambrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
The season might extend into Tuesday if there is a 3 way tie for both wild card spots or even a three way tie for wildcard number 2. Are we to also assume that if there is Tuesday game 164 for one team and 163 for the other that it will also count as part of this scoring period?
- Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 40286
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Yes. All remaining regular season games are part of this final week's scoring period with no roster changes after Friday's hitters moves.Wolfpac wrote: ↑Mon Sep 27, 2021 2:31 pmThe season might extend into Tuesday if there is a 3 way tie for both wild card spots or even a three way tie for wildcard number 2. Are we to also assume that if there is Tuesday game 164 for one team and 163 for the other that it will also count as part of this scoring period?
Greg Ambrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Greg Ambrosius wrote: ↑Mon Sep 27, 2021 1:34 pmThis is the final week of the NFBC season and the final scoring period of the NFBC season. Players can change out hitters on Friday, but after that there are no more lineup changes in 2021.
There always is a chance that a couple of teams will have to play a 163rd regular season game on Monday to decide a divisional title or a final Wild Card spot and if that game is played it's considered as part of MLB's regular season, and thus those stats count in all NFBC leagues. If that were to happen, those games would be part of Week 26 in the NFBC as this week's scoring period runs from Monday through Monday. No lineup changes are allowed on Monday as we have instead extended the final week scoring period. Wild Card playoff games are scheduled to start on Tuesday and Wednesday in each league.
Per the rules: The NFBC regular season will extend from the first game of the MLB regular season through the final game of the regular season (including one or more season-ending MLB tie-breaker games as part of the final week scoring period).
This includes all NFBC games, including the NFBC Diamond Challenge. Good luck all and enjoy the final week of the season.
Can this be discussed and finalized prior to 2022 Rules being posted? Not allowing Monday lineup changes for play-in games was bizarrely put in place last year without any pre-signup notification that I (and others) can remember. This also went against the results of the survey conducted by NFBC just a year prior and endorsed by NFBC.
Will play-in games count for NFBC purposes in 2022?
If they do, will lineup changes be allowed on Monday?
Thanks
- Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 40286
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Sure, discuss away.
Our position isn't changing on the play-in game. It's part of the regular season and part of MLB's regular season stats. We have always followed all official MLB stats and this is part of MLB's regular season totals. It would be like not including their stat changes after they happen. For our stats to coincide with MLB's, we need to include all games played. The survey showed that 55% wanted a 163rd regular season game to count in NFBC stats and it's been that way since 2004 with us. I think it's happened only four times, but it's generated at least 40 times that much discussion!!
When we first started at STATS, we did not have the tools to allow lineup changes on that Monday for a 163rd game. It was part of the final week. I believe we asked for that Monday to be a separate week in 2008 or 2009 to allow owners to make starting lineup changes for that extra game and it was that way through 2020. You are right, NFBC owners did say they would want the opportunity to change their lineups if an extra game was played and that wasn't surprising. I'd want it too.
I made the push for the change for a couple of reasons, but one of them involved fairness. Nobody knows who is going to be in that play in game -- heck, this year it could have been the Yankees or the Red Sox or the Blue Jays or the Mariners or the Dodgers or the Giants -- and nobody knows if a game will be rained out and not made up that last week. Last year MLB chose not to make up two games between Detroit and St. Louis when they said they would do that on Monday. So going into that last week we're all setting our lineups for those scheduled games, take it or leave it.
I think we can all agree that it gives an edge to owners who have players in the extra game and that's where the dispute of including that game comes into play. I get it. Yes, a pitcher could get blown up in that game and actually hurt some owners, but there are also more counting stats that will help owners. So should we really give the advantage then of changing lineups for that play-in game or games? Affected players would say DEFINITELY. But from a contest fairness standpoint maybe we leave lineups as is and take the extra game during that final lineup along with the games that aren't made up like we saw in 2020.
It's a worthy discussion and I'm open to it. My feeling is that it's more fair from a contest standpoint, but I certainly understand that owners want as much control as possible over their lineups and that extends to the play-in game(s). So discuss.
Our position isn't changing on the play-in game. It's part of the regular season and part of MLB's regular season stats. We have always followed all official MLB stats and this is part of MLB's regular season totals. It would be like not including their stat changes after they happen. For our stats to coincide with MLB's, we need to include all games played. The survey showed that 55% wanted a 163rd regular season game to count in NFBC stats and it's been that way since 2004 with us. I think it's happened only four times, but it's generated at least 40 times that much discussion!!
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
When we first started at STATS, we did not have the tools to allow lineup changes on that Monday for a 163rd game. It was part of the final week. I believe we asked for that Monday to be a separate week in 2008 or 2009 to allow owners to make starting lineup changes for that extra game and it was that way through 2020. You are right, NFBC owners did say they would want the opportunity to change their lineups if an extra game was played and that wasn't surprising. I'd want it too.
I made the push for the change for a couple of reasons, but one of them involved fairness. Nobody knows who is going to be in that play in game -- heck, this year it could have been the Yankees or the Red Sox or the Blue Jays or the Mariners or the Dodgers or the Giants -- and nobody knows if a game will be rained out and not made up that last week. Last year MLB chose not to make up two games between Detroit and St. Louis when they said they would do that on Monday. So going into that last week we're all setting our lineups for those scheduled games, take it or leave it.
I think we can all agree that it gives an edge to owners who have players in the extra game and that's where the dispute of including that game comes into play. I get it. Yes, a pitcher could get blown up in that game and actually hurt some owners, but there are also more counting stats that will help owners. So should we really give the advantage then of changing lineups for that play-in game or games? Affected players would say DEFINITELY. But from a contest fairness standpoint maybe we leave lineups as is and take the extra game during that final lineup along with the games that aren't made up like we saw in 2020.
It's a worthy discussion and I'm open to it. My feeling is that it's more fair from a contest standpoint, but I certainly understand that owners want as much control as possible over their lineups and that extends to the play-in game(s). So discuss.
Greg Ambrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Hopefully, the new CBA makes this conversation moot. ![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Agree with Greg here, games should count but no lineup changes. That’s to easy of decisions, these leagues should be hard, so that prior Monday hard decisions need to be made about marginal lineup decisions factoring in possible play in Scenarios.
-
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:00 pm
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
There was already a vote so I don't know what value there is to give my opinion. However, if we're going to count the extra game(s) after the scheduled season ends, it would make sense to be consistent with allowing both roster moves and FAAB. It should either be fully part of the regular contest and treated the same as the rest of the season, or it isn't. Maybe that's just a reflection of the fact I don't think tie-breaker games should count at all in the first place.
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Here are the results of the survey conducted by the NFBC...
1) The NFBC counts any play-in 163rd game into our stats and standings because Major League Baseball counts the play-in game as part of their regular season stats and standings. Do you agree or disagree that play-in stats from a 163rd game should be counted into NFBC league and overall standings?
Agree - 53%
Disagree - 47%
2) If the NFBC continues to count play-in stats from that 163rd regular season game, should the NFBC allow owners to change their starting lineups for that Monday game (or games) or should everyone's lineup for that extra week stay the same as it was the week before?
Allow Starting Lineup Changes - 56%
Keep Starting Lineups - 44%
Greg - In 2020, your decision (after the survey results were know) was..."We are making our decision based on the current results and moving on from this subject for now. If we have to do a full survey next year we will, but it's apparent that there isn't an overwhelming majority either way, so the rule will stay as it always has (owners to change their starting lineups for those Monday play-in games)."
Sometime during 2021, NFBC decided to go against survey participants and change that rule (and disallow Monday lineup changes) and to my knowledge this was never reflected in the rules and was not relayed to participants until the final week of the season.
unfortunately, I think the NFBC has selected the worst possible path (and again, goes against the majority of survey participants). if i had known the NFBC would choose this route, i would have voted to NOT count games 163 stats.
imagine leading your league by 0.5 league points with a .001 advantage in ERA over the second place team. game 163 comes along and due to the nfbc disallowing lineup changes, chad green is stuck in your lineup and he gives up 4 runs without getting an out and you lose 1 point in ERA and finish in 2nd place. disgusting and goes against what was in place for many year. AND GOES AGAINST WHAT NFBC PARTICIPANTS VOTED FOR!
Please either allow game 163 lineup changes or scrap game 163 all together. signed 56% of survey participants
1) The NFBC counts any play-in 163rd game into our stats and standings because Major League Baseball counts the play-in game as part of their regular season stats and standings. Do you agree or disagree that play-in stats from a 163rd game should be counted into NFBC league and overall standings?
Agree - 53%
Disagree - 47%
2) If the NFBC continues to count play-in stats from that 163rd regular season game, should the NFBC allow owners to change their starting lineups for that Monday game (or games) or should everyone's lineup for that extra week stay the same as it was the week before?
Allow Starting Lineup Changes - 56%
Keep Starting Lineups - 44%
Greg - In 2020, your decision (after the survey results were know) was..."We are making our decision based on the current results and moving on from this subject for now. If we have to do a full survey next year we will, but it's apparent that there isn't an overwhelming majority either way, so the rule will stay as it always has (owners to change their starting lineups for those Monday play-in games)."
Sometime during 2021, NFBC decided to go against survey participants and change that rule (and disallow Monday lineup changes) and to my knowledge this was never reflected in the rules and was not relayed to participants until the final week of the season.
![Confused :?](./images/smilies/icon_e_confused.gif)
unfortunately, I think the NFBC has selected the worst possible path (and again, goes against the majority of survey participants). if i had known the NFBC would choose this route, i would have voted to NOT count games 163 stats.
imagine leading your league by 0.5 league points with a .001 advantage in ERA over the second place team. game 163 comes along and due to the nfbc disallowing lineup changes, chad green is stuck in your lineup and he gives up 4 runs without getting an out and you lose 1 point in ERA and finish in 2nd place. disgusting and goes against what was in place for many year. AND GOES AGAINST WHAT NFBC PARTICIPANTS VOTED FOR!
Please either allow game 163 lineup changes or scrap game 163 all together. signed 56% of survey participants
- Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 40286
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
As I stated above, I do understand why the majority of players want to make lineup changes for that play-in game. I would want as much control as possible as well.
And yes, we can continue discussing it. This is an aspect of the rule we can discuss this off-season and update before Opening Day because nobody is drafting for the 163rd game, which may not even happen once again. We can intelligently discuss here if you'd like.
And yes there were several close leagues this year that this play-in game (or games) could have affected money finishes. It didn't happen, and we're all glad for that. But yes, from a game operator's standpoint, I did feel like giving owners who had the luck of an additional game the chance to change their starting lineups gave them an extra edge. It's that extra edge that a majority of owners voted for two years ago, but one I felt could have made the game a little less fair. I stated my feelings below:
I made the push for the change for a couple of reasons, but one of them involved fairness. Nobody knows who is going to be in that play in game -- heck, this year it could have been the Yankees or the Red Sox or the Blue Jays or the Mariners or the Dodgers or the Giants -- and nobody knows if a game will be rained out and not made up that last week. Last year MLB chose not to make up two games between Detroit and St. Louis when they said they would do that on Monday. So going into that last week we're all setting our lineups for those scheduled games, take it or leave it.
I think we can all agree that it gives an edge to owners who have players in the extra game and that's where the dispute of including that game comes into play. I get it. Yes, a pitcher could get blown up in that game and actually hurt some owners, but there are also more counting stats that will help owners. So should we really give the advantage then of changing lineups for that play-in game or games? Affected players would say DEFINITELY. But from a contest fairness standpoint maybe we leave lineups as is and take the extra game during that final lineup along with the games that aren't made up like we saw in 2020.
Feel free to discuss. We are launching the 2022 site next week with this rule the same as it was in 2021, but again I'm open for discussion. It's part of MLB's regular season and thus part of the seasonal stats, so is it fair to give owners a chance to change their starting lineups for that play-in game or not? I know how the majority of you feel on this subject, so am I wrong to feel it's more fair to make that game part of Week 27's lineup or not? I guess that's the question.
And yes, we can continue discussing it. This is an aspect of the rule we can discuss this off-season and update before Opening Day because nobody is drafting for the 163rd game, which may not even happen once again. We can intelligently discuss here if you'd like.
And yes there were several close leagues this year that this play-in game (or games) could have affected money finishes. It didn't happen, and we're all glad for that. But yes, from a game operator's standpoint, I did feel like giving owners who had the luck of an additional game the chance to change their starting lineups gave them an extra edge. It's that extra edge that a majority of owners voted for two years ago, but one I felt could have made the game a little less fair. I stated my feelings below:
I made the push for the change for a couple of reasons, but one of them involved fairness. Nobody knows who is going to be in that play in game -- heck, this year it could have been the Yankees or the Red Sox or the Blue Jays or the Mariners or the Dodgers or the Giants -- and nobody knows if a game will be rained out and not made up that last week. Last year MLB chose not to make up two games between Detroit and St. Louis when they said they would do that on Monday. So going into that last week we're all setting our lineups for those scheduled games, take it or leave it.
I think we can all agree that it gives an edge to owners who have players in the extra game and that's where the dispute of including that game comes into play. I get it. Yes, a pitcher could get blown up in that game and actually hurt some owners, but there are also more counting stats that will help owners. So should we really give the advantage then of changing lineups for that play-in game or games? Affected players would say DEFINITELY. But from a contest fairness standpoint maybe we leave lineups as is and take the extra game during that final lineup along with the games that aren't made up like we saw in 2020.
Feel free to discuss. We are launching the 2022 site next week with this rule the same as it was in 2021, but again I'm open for discussion. It's part of MLB's regular season and thus part of the seasonal stats, so is it fair to give owners a chance to change their starting lineups for that play-in game or not? I know how the majority of you feel on this subject, so am I wrong to feel it's more fair to make that game part of Week 27's lineup or not? I guess that's the question.
Greg Ambrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
The issue for me from a player point-of-view is at the time we set line-ups on Monday and then Friday of the final week any tie-breaker or make-up games are UNSCHEDULED, they don't exist, they are hypothetical. We don't know who will play who, where they play, who the scheduled pitchers will be, etc. It is all unknown until late Sunday afternoon on the final day after all the games have been played. For 26 weeks we have control and get to decide within 5 minutes of game-time who we place in our starting line-ups and who we get to bench which is no small thing. Many of the top players are religious about checking posted starting line-ups, injury news, twitter reports, late scratches, etc. up to the last minute before setting line-ups to maintain an edge on the margins. Amongst the thousands of little decisions we make throughout the year from the KDS, the draft, FAAB, setting line-ups, everything about the NFBC is about giving the players control over their fate, or at the least a perception of control. Setting our starting line-ups and letting the NFBC-player decide which players will be in their starting line-ups is amongst the most important of those decisions. And often what colors those decisions week in & week out is where we stand in certain categories. Assessing player strengths & weaknesses, pitching match-ups, where the game is played, etc. are all factors to be taken into account in setting one's line-up. To tie our hands & take away that all important player control over starting line-ups on the final day after 26 scoring periods of no restrictions, especially for games that were theretofore unknown & unscheduled at the time we originally set-line-ups & to not be able to make those all important line-up decisions is contrary to the philosophy which makes the NFBC great: giving the player control over their fate.Greg Ambrosius wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:40 amI made the push for the change for a couple of reasons, but one of them involved fairness. Nobody knows who is going to be in that play in game -- heck, this year it could have been the Yankees or the Red Sox or the Blue Jays or the Mariners or the Dodgers or the Giants -- and nobody knows if a game will be rained out and not made up that last week. Last year MLB chose not to make up two games between Detroit and St. Louis when they said they would do that on Monday. So going into that last week we're all setting our lineups for those scheduled games, take it or leave it.
I think we can all agree that it gives an edge to owners who have players in the extra game and that's where the dispute of including that game comes into play. I get it. Yes, a pitcher could get blown up in that game and actually hurt some owners, but there are also more counting stats that will help owners. So should we really give the advantage then of changing lineups for that play-in game or games? Affected players would say DEFINITELY. But from a contest fairness standpoint maybe we leave lineups as is and take the extra game during that final lineup along with the games that aren't made up like we saw in 2020.
What if, for example, a Game 163 or make-up game is scheduled in Colorado? At the time we set line-ups the Monday before it is not known there will even be a game played because it is UNSCHEDULED at the time we set our line-up. Now, it is generally accepted conventional wisdom to bench a starting pitcher in Colorado. But there are also certain scenarios namely your team's specific category rankings where it may make sense to start a pitcher in Colorado. It is a team specific decision and it is these very decisions that we make week in week out. And late in the season where team categories are more solidified, these decisions become even more important in "chasing" category points. To change how things have been done for the prior 26 weeks, at a time where player control is all-important, is inconsistent with how things are done for the 26 prior scoring periods. If we're going to count Game 163, then once we finally know who will play in those games and where and who the scheduled pitchers will be, the player should have control up until 5 minutes before game time to decide who will be in his starting line-up or who will not be, just the same as is done every other scoring period during the year. To do otherwise is not fair, at least from the player-point-of-view.
COZ
"Baseball has it share of myths, things that blur the line between fact & fiction....Abner Doubleday inventing the game, Babe Ruth's Called Shot, Sid Finch's Fastball, the 2017 Astros...Barry Bonds's 762 HR's" -- Tom Verducci
"Baseball has it share of myths, things that blur the line between fact & fiction....Abner Doubleday inventing the game, Babe Ruth's Called Shot, Sid Finch's Fastball, the 2017 Astros...Barry Bonds's 762 HR's" -- Tom Verducci
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
I think Greg’s post is dead on regarding fairness AnD if we are all proud high stakes players then we should forecast the possibility of play in games when setting our pitcher on Monday and hitters that Friday.
- Navel Lint
- Posts: 1720
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Sorry. I'm not interested in More discussion. This topic has been debated. This topic has been voted on.Greg Ambrosius wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:40 am
Feel free to discuss. We are launching the 2022 site next week with this rule the same as it was in 2021, but again I'm open for discussion. It's part of MLB's regular season and thus part of the seasonal stats, so is it fair to give owners a chance to change their starting lineups for that play-in game or not? I know how the majority of you feel on this subject, so am I wrong to feel it's more fair to make that game part of Week 27's lineup or not? I guess that's the question.
The site is going to open up next week, that's awesome. But lets not open up with one rule in place with the possibility of changing that rule after drafts start. That is one of the issues that NFBC players had this past end of season, the seeming changing of rules post draft.
Tell me that the rule will be what a majority of NFBC players have already voted on and want (changing lineup for gm 163), or tell me that the rule is what you think is best Greg. Whichever it is.....time for discussion has passed in my opinion.
Russel -Navel Lint
"Fans don't boo nobodies"
-Reggie Jackson
"Fans don't boo nobodies"
-Reggie Jackson
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Why provide a survey to your customers, initially agree with the majority of respondents to allow lineup changes and then go ahead and change it after the fact? Very, very bizarre how this all went down
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
Prior to 2018 - I don't remember.
In 2018 we could set a new lineup for game 163.
In 2019 and 2020 the rules allowed the same.
Furthermore in 2020 you took a survey and the survey overwhelmingly favored a new period if you were to count a game 163 (higher amount voted in favor of this than the first question about including game 163).
In 2021 we signed up with the following rules in place:
If there is an MLB tie-breaker game or games at the start of a new week, NFBC owners are allowed to reset their starting lineups for that game or games.
Then despite previous years' practice, despite the rule as written, despite the survey, you changed it 96.2% (25/26) of the way through the season. Why have a survey? The one survey that you agree with holds merit but the other doesn't? Bizarre is right. Please reconsider.
Coz point about players wanting control - spot on. NFBC does an awesome job of this in so many ways:
1) KDS - we can have some control over the area where we draft from. Great system. If random is better than control then just pull names out of a hat and assign spots that way.
2) Contest choices - we can choose 12 team, 15 team, faab leagues, draft and hold, point leagues, and more! Beautiful. We can match our skill and time to a wide range of options. Control of type of contest we participate in is great.
3) Slow Drafts - used to be just 8 hour option. Now 4 hour, 2 hour, 1 hour, 30 minute, express, MTM express, etc. Another wonderful addition by NFBC to give players more control. Why not spin a wheel and see what time period we get?
4) Draft Room - now we get to auto-pick and can even auto-pick multiple rounds with different queues for each. Superb. It gives the drafter control as to who he / she gets in the current round and can differentiate the queue for the subsequent round.
5) FAAB - there is no competing contest that has a better FAAB system in my opinion. What Darik and crew have tweaked here is so great. The time period sorts, the category sorts, the date added sorts, the watch list, the copy bid feature, the waterfall feature - it all gives the player great control and information as to whom they are going to hopefully acquire via FAAB. Nothing I have played comes close (Yahoo, ESPN, CBS, Fantrax, FFPC).
I could go and on. I will stop with two further points:
* From the rules - The Contest is a game of skill. From all entries received, winners are those individuals who use their skill and knowledge of relevant professional baseball information and fantasy baseball rules to accumulate the highest point totals during the Contest according to the official Contest rules. If we are having a game 163 and if it falls in a new week - then certainly being able to set that lineup falls in line with this.
* Finally - MLB goes to great length to end the season on the final Sunday in grand fashion. All the games start at the same time. What a great day and what a fitting way to end the fantasy baseball season.
John
In 2018 we could set a new lineup for game 163.
In 2019 and 2020 the rules allowed the same.
Furthermore in 2020 you took a survey and the survey overwhelmingly favored a new period if you were to count a game 163 (higher amount voted in favor of this than the first question about including game 163).
In 2021 we signed up with the following rules in place:
If there is an MLB tie-breaker game or games at the start of a new week, NFBC owners are allowed to reset their starting lineups for that game or games.
Then despite previous years' practice, despite the rule as written, despite the survey, you changed it 96.2% (25/26) of the way through the season. Why have a survey? The one survey that you agree with holds merit but the other doesn't? Bizarre is right. Please reconsider.
Coz point about players wanting control - spot on. NFBC does an awesome job of this in so many ways:
1) KDS - we can have some control over the area where we draft from. Great system. If random is better than control then just pull names out of a hat and assign spots that way.
2) Contest choices - we can choose 12 team, 15 team, faab leagues, draft and hold, point leagues, and more! Beautiful. We can match our skill and time to a wide range of options. Control of type of contest we participate in is great.
3) Slow Drafts - used to be just 8 hour option. Now 4 hour, 2 hour, 1 hour, 30 minute, express, MTM express, etc. Another wonderful addition by NFBC to give players more control. Why not spin a wheel and see what time period we get?
4) Draft Room - now we get to auto-pick and can even auto-pick multiple rounds with different queues for each. Superb. It gives the drafter control as to who he / she gets in the current round and can differentiate the queue for the subsequent round.
5) FAAB - there is no competing contest that has a better FAAB system in my opinion. What Darik and crew have tweaked here is so great. The time period sorts, the category sorts, the date added sorts, the watch list, the copy bid feature, the waterfall feature - it all gives the player great control and information as to whom they are going to hopefully acquire via FAAB. Nothing I have played comes close (Yahoo, ESPN, CBS, Fantrax, FFPC).
I could go and on. I will stop with two further points:
* From the rules - The Contest is a game of skill. From all entries received, winners are those individuals who use their skill and knowledge of relevant professional baseball information and fantasy baseball rules to accumulate the highest point totals during the Contest according to the official Contest rules. If we are having a game 163 and if it falls in a new week - then certainly being able to set that lineup falls in line with this.
* Finally - MLB goes to great length to end the season on the final Sunday in grand fashion. All the games start at the same time. What a great day and what a fitting way to end the fantasy baseball season.
John
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
John and Coz…great posts!
-
- Posts: 1238
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:16 pm
Re: This Is The Final Scoring Period Of 2021 NFBC Season
If the survey results and rules are being reexamined again on these issues, then I can't resist pointing out that the entire debate whether or not to allow lineup changes for Game 163 can be avoided simply by not counting extra play-in/tie-breaker games. I understand the arguments for and against counting Game(s) 163, and there's some merit to all sides of this debate. I prefer not to have a league or contest title come down to the luck of whether one owner does or does not have players from the teams getting extra games. I can live with whatever is decided, and that decision will not stop me from continuing to join way too many NFBC leagues going forward.
Just a few additional observations:
1. Greg, in your last post, you state: "And yes there were several close leagues this year that this play-in game (or games) could have affected money finishes. It didn't happen, and we're all glad for that" (emphasis added). If you're glad that no league titles changed hands due to play-in games, the best way to ensure that never happens is to simply not count those games.
2. In justifying the decision to disallow lineup changes, you state: "I made the push for the change for a couple of reasons, but one of them involved fairness. Nobody knows who is going to be in that play in game - heck, this year it could have been the Yankees or the Red Sox or the Blue Jays or the Mariners or the Dodgers or the Giants ...." That same justification could be used for excluding extra games. Nobody knows when drafting teams which teams or players, if any, might get extra games. Counting such games introduces another measure of luck in a skills-based contest. To be sure, some savvy owners may be able to pick up a player or two in FAAB that last week, or perhaps the week prior, in anticipation of a possible play-in game, but those pickups likely are limited to fringy players for fantasy purposes - all of the key players responsible for teams remaining in contention after 162 games almost assuredly were drafted or acquired in FAAB months prior to the end of the season.
3. There are arguments on all sides of these issues. For every extreme example of someone potentially "unfairly" losing a league because lineup changes were allowed, or not allowed, for Game 163, there are similar examples of "unfairness" of someone potentially losing a league because Game 163 stats are counted in the first place.
4. Let's recognize that the dispute over whether or not to allow lineup changes for Game 163 arguably is due to happenstance in that MLB likes to conclude its regular seasons on a Sunday every year. For instance, if teams played Game 161 on a Monday and Game 162 on a Tuesday, would there be the same debate to allow lineup changes for Game 163 on the Wednesday? Lineup changes are never allowed on a Wednesday. If you want to argue that, no matter what day of the week it is played, Game 163 should count as its own week for scoring purposes, then why isn't FAAB run the night before like every other scoring week? In other words, if you can change lineups on Monday solely for Game 163, then why don't you get a similar opportunity to pickup and drop players for that game? I'm not looking for any more FAAB, but the "luck" associated with having FAAB left at the end of regular season to acquire players for an unscheduled play-in game does not seem all that much different than the luck associated with having players in that game rostered or getting to take advantage of an unscheduled lineup change just for that game.
Like I said, I'm fine with whatever is decided, but I'd just as soon get rid of Game 163 for purposes of our contests. Interesting debate as I definitely can see all sides. Whatever ultimately is decided, please announce that decision and incorporate it explicitly into the rules for all contests. Thanks.
Mike
Just a few additional observations:
1. Greg, in your last post, you state: "And yes there were several close leagues this year that this play-in game (or games) could have affected money finishes. It didn't happen, and we're all glad for that" (emphasis added). If you're glad that no league titles changed hands due to play-in games, the best way to ensure that never happens is to simply not count those games.
2. In justifying the decision to disallow lineup changes, you state: "I made the push for the change for a couple of reasons, but one of them involved fairness. Nobody knows who is going to be in that play in game - heck, this year it could have been the Yankees or the Red Sox or the Blue Jays or the Mariners or the Dodgers or the Giants ...." That same justification could be used for excluding extra games. Nobody knows when drafting teams which teams or players, if any, might get extra games. Counting such games introduces another measure of luck in a skills-based contest. To be sure, some savvy owners may be able to pick up a player or two in FAAB that last week, or perhaps the week prior, in anticipation of a possible play-in game, but those pickups likely are limited to fringy players for fantasy purposes - all of the key players responsible for teams remaining in contention after 162 games almost assuredly were drafted or acquired in FAAB months prior to the end of the season.
3. There are arguments on all sides of these issues. For every extreme example of someone potentially "unfairly" losing a league because lineup changes were allowed, or not allowed, for Game 163, there are similar examples of "unfairness" of someone potentially losing a league because Game 163 stats are counted in the first place.
4. Let's recognize that the dispute over whether or not to allow lineup changes for Game 163 arguably is due to happenstance in that MLB likes to conclude its regular seasons on a Sunday every year. For instance, if teams played Game 161 on a Monday and Game 162 on a Tuesday, would there be the same debate to allow lineup changes for Game 163 on the Wednesday? Lineup changes are never allowed on a Wednesday. If you want to argue that, no matter what day of the week it is played, Game 163 should count as its own week for scoring purposes, then why isn't FAAB run the night before like every other scoring week? In other words, if you can change lineups on Monday solely for Game 163, then why don't you get a similar opportunity to pickup and drop players for that game? I'm not looking for any more FAAB, but the "luck" associated with having FAAB left at the end of regular season to acquire players for an unscheduled play-in game does not seem all that much different than the luck associated with having players in that game rostered or getting to take advantage of an unscheduled lineup change just for that game.
Like I said, I'm fine with whatever is decided, but I'd just as soon get rid of Game 163 for purposes of our contests. Interesting debate as I definitely can see all sides. Whatever ultimately is decided, please announce that decision and incorporate it explicitly into the rules for all contests. Thanks.
Mike
Mike Mager
"Bronx Yankees"
"Bronx Yankees"