How About A $100,000 Grand Prize In The NFBC Cutline?

[ToddZ]

Let's at least debunk the notion it's better to draft late.

10 January drafts, 2 top-20 finishes, 20 percent of drafts had top-20, 1st, 6th
34 February drafts, 8 top-20 finishes, 24 percent of drafts had top-20, 5th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, 17th, 19th, 20th
80 March drafts, 10 top-20 finishes, 13 percent of draft had top-20, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th
15 April drafts, 0 top-20 finishes

So, half of the top-20 finishers came from January and February drafts even though more the TWICE as many drafts occurred in March and April.

Hopefully this is ample evidence there's no disadvantage to drafting early. In fact, there was an advantage -- assuming we still use FAAB.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Thanks Todd. Great stuff.

We have to use FAAB in some fashion. There are just too many injuries that create dead spots on your roster and just too many minor-league callups NOT to have FAAB. But how do we make FAAB painless twice a year and when can we make it as painless as possible. It's like you know you have to go to the dentist, but how can we make that as painless as possible and when can that be?

[KJ Duke]

Is it feasible to offer two price points, $100 with no league prize and $125 with $250 going to the league winner?

The bigger question is: Do you want league prizes or not?

I don't. I think it's silly to invest $125 to try to win $125. But apparently, others think otherwise. The suggestion was a means to appease both sides, keeping everything else the same.

Good idea eliminating league prize, but strongly prefer flatter for top few spots ... have a 50% drop from the top prize for those top spots, then create multiple flat payout tiers until you get down to $1K as the minimum prize level.

Also, love the idea of getting rid of league standings. Likewise, another idea discussed in the past would be to have all free agents in one contest-wide pool, so if one player was available in 20 different leagues the top 20 bidders from all 200+ leagues would win that player. In other words, once the draft was over your specific league of 10 is irrelevant, you're competing against everyone in the entire contest for all league prizes and free agents.

[ToddZ]

I think FAAB worked fine this season. Improvements to the mechanism are coming, making it even better.

Personally, I think we're still trying to figure out the optimal way to approach FAAB for our teams -- spend early, save it, how do we set up strings to get the players we want most efficiently, etc.

Changing the dates, or number of periods puts us all back to square one. or close to it. I'd leave FAAB as is.

[Gekko]

Likewise, another idea discussed in the past would be to have all free agents in one contest-wide pool, so if one player was available in 20 different leagues the top 20 bidders from all 200+ leagues would win that player. In other words, once the draft was over your specific league of 10 is irrelevant, you're competing against everyone in the entire contest for all league prizes and free agents.

this was a Gekko exclusive years ago.

if leagues prizes are gone, there should be universal FAAB. so if you have 210 leagues (2,100 owners) and lets say Bellinger was drafted in 10 of them. there would be 200 Bellinger's available to the 200 teams that bid the highest, even if 5 of them are in the same league. two thumbs up with this one

[Greg Ambrosius]

See, finally some unique thinking. Not sure we'd do it, but unique thinking.

That's all we're looking for here. We posted some internal thoughts which showed we are ALL IN on this Best Ball concept and now we need help in making it better. To just say no, your idea sucks, doesn't help. Keep throwing out ideas that can be easily understood, universally accepted and that makes this contest better.

I think we all want to build Best Ball in baseball. Let's keep trying to do it.

[Gekko]

See, finally some unique thinking. Not sure we'd do it, but unique thinking.

another one...
*any team that drafts before 1/1/18 gets an extra roster spot for the whole season. that would spur a heck of a lot of early signups IMO

[Packman]

The majority of this thread has been about the prize payouts and structure, with some FAAB discussion. So maybe this is a little off topic, but Greg did mention how he wanted ideas to make the Cutline better. My suggestion has to deal with the number of cuts themselves. For a contest called 'Cutline', to me, there should be more cuts. In the football contest, there is the first big cut after week 9, where 50% of the field is eliminated. Then there is the cut after week 12, then a cut every week after that. So, in all, there are 5 cut periods (after weeks 9,12,13,14 and 15) before the "final table" in week 16. For baseball, despite being a much longer season, and more weeks to work with, there are only 3 cuts (at the All-Star break, then the cuts after rounds 1 and 2). My suggestion would be to still do the initial cut at the All-Star break, that seems like a natural place to end the 'regular season' portion of the Cutline. But then, instead of having 3 three-week playoff rounds, and then having the contest end 2 weeks before the actual baseball regular season ends, my suggestion would be to have 5 two-week playoff rounds (with the half week after the All-Star break being part of Round 1, and then only have 1 dead week at the end). More cuts leads to more interest and excitement, in my opinion. And it would match the number of cuts that the football contest has as well (with cuts at the ASB, then 4 more cuts after the first 4 rounds of playoffs before the "final table" round 5). This may also help bridge the payment gap that has been discussed in this thread. If the league prizes are eliminated, maybe payments can stretch out to all those that make it to round 3, or round 4, instead of just the "final table".

[Gates]

Lots of opinions, which is what I like. Keep them coming. We appreciate all of them and I'll gladly address each point once we get more thoughts. The idea is to get a wide range of opinions to make this contest better and make it GROW.

We may not have the perfect concept now, but that's why we solicited your thoughts. If you don't agree with our new concept, it's okay. But give us solutions or better ideas. Working together we'll make it right.

Nobody else is doing a Best Ball Baseball Contest. We are trying to create something that can last a long, long time and grow. The current format and prizes didn't grow the numbers last year; we fell from 1450 teams to 1380 teams. So a tweak is coming for sure. What that tweak is, I'm hoping for input from you folks. Thanks.

Definitely a flatter pay structure is what I prefer. The structure we had this year was perfect for me. League prizes I'd keep too just for the purpose of having a shot at some money with a group that has the same setup for all, same pool of players. Taking the league money away takes away early draft appeal. The growth will mainly come from a better FAAB tool. A better tool for me probably means doubling my team amount, from 15 to 30. I started my June FAAB work early this summer, like early May, thinking it would save me time, progressively putting it together, that became chaos when new players started being called up, going back to each team to restructure all my bids, etc...
We need a tool that offers flexibility, that can copy bid list of players from team to team, etc... I think this format is a lot of fun and although I hated the FAAB time, it was much needed. Focus on the main pain and it will grow. Make the FAAB time a "fun" time and growth will come.

Gaëtan

[DOUGHBOYS]

The Cutline does not need major tinkering. Asking for ideas to radically change the format is all well and good, but the product can stand as is, and flourish.
Participation was down a bit this year. Big deal.
I don't believe that was because of any of the rules, price point, or carrot being a sticking point for players.
FAAB will always be a little too tedious and laborious.
If the contest has a drawback, it is that it needs FAAB.
FAAB will always lessen full participation in this contest from the NFBC family.
The NFBC is working on making that task a little less painstaking, a good thing.
This contest is on the right track.
I really don't believe it needs major changes.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Improving the FAAB setup is a key to growing all of our contests, but people need to see it to believe it. I'm not sure folks are buying more teams this year until they see the new FAAB system at work. But I'll do all I can to show off the new features as soon as we can because this is Priority 1 in the NFBC.

I'm not sure the same format grows this contest or better spreads the word about Best Ball Baseball. Several owners on this same thread said they wouldn't play it as long as FAAB was involved, but this contest doesn't work as just a draft 'n play. Better FAAB is needed, but it's not the only ingredient needed for growth.

If league prizes are a key part of this contest, then we'll definitely consider keeping them at the expense of the overall prize pool. Again, we raised the prizes $20,000 this year and the grand prize $10,000 and I'd hate to regress from those numbers. But we paid close to 100 percent in this contest last year and that's not feasible again in 2018. I won't create the same format again with no new changes. So keep bringing the suggestions and we'll come to a final conclusion shortly. Thanks all.

[whale4evr]

Would live FAAB auctions be feasible? Or something unique like that would be interesting.

[ToddZ]

Would live FAAB auctions be feasible? Or something unique like that would be interesting.

Not feasible for those doing multiple leagues. Nor would a free agent draft.

[ToddZ]

Spitballin' here -- would this help alleviate FAAB for those with multiple teams?

The season begins on a Thursday -- what if we ran the Cutline scoring week from Thursday-Wednesday and have the FAAB sessions on Wednesday night? Would those 48 extra hours help FAAB?

We could extend the period before the All Star break through Sunday, then pick up after the first cut on Thursday as there's one game that day in 2018.

[Gates]

How about:

1 FAAB round in June and add more rounds in the draft - 40 and maybe as high as 45 more or less draft rounds
0 FAAB round but maybe a 50 rounds draft. Considering 10 teams league per drafts, the pool of players would still be quite interesting til round 50. At 50 rounds, pretty sure we would have get to the Happ, M. Gonzalez, Bellinger of this world...relievers could be shaky ground but those hitting target would benefit from the gamble.
Not sure I like the idea, but just throwing ideas, lower by one the number of teams per league, bigger players pool.

The first few ideas though still don't address the early sign ups potentiel. Not sure the Bellinger, Happs of this world were picked in early DCs. Any drafts before Spring Training needs FAAB, especially the April FAAB period in their case. The latest you sign and draft, the June FAAB period becomes your main focus. The first one should be superficiel. I wonder if you have any stats of FAAB money spent in April by early drafts teams (pre-Spring training) vs later drafts teams. Could be totally wrong as I have no data to support, but would think that early drafters spent a lot more in April then later drafters in April which his a big desadvantage (spelling?). I have not validated but pretty sure the pre-Springs training drafts are not the majority in the top 20 finalists.
Would it be fare to all to say that if you draft before Jan 15th or 31st or whatever date we determine, you will get an extra round of FAAB March 1st let say. I know I know, an extra FAAB round...but at least you get this extra to attract more early drafts, keeping in mind you will not get extra money to spend, so you need to be careful how you spend...

Gaëtan

[Gates]

Just checked, of the 25 money winners, 6 have drafted Feb 15 or earlier. Lower than 25%

[Gates]

Let's at least debunk the notion it's better to draft late.

10 January drafts, 2 top-20 finishes, 20 percent of drafts had top-20, 1st, 6th
34 February drafts, 8 top-20 finishes, 24 percent of drafts had top-20, 5th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, 17th, 19th, 20th
80 March drafts, 10 top-20 finishes, 13 percent of draft had top-20, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th
15 April drafts, 0 top-20 finishes

So, half of the top-20 finishers came from January and February drafts even though more the TWICE as many drafts occurred in March and April.

Hopefully this is ample evidence there's no disadvantage to drafting early. In fact, there was an advantage -- assuming we still use FAAB.

Oooops, missed that post by Todd....although my "Cutline" is Spring training

[Greg Ambrosius]

Just checked, of the 25 money winners, 6 have drafted Feb 15 or earlier. Lower than 25%

From Todd above:

Let's at least debunk the notion it's better to draft late.

10 January drafts, 2 top-20 finishes, 20 percent of drafts had top-20, 1st, 6th
34 February drafts, 8 top-20 finishes, 24 percent of drafts had top-20, 5th, 9th, 11th, 13th, 15th, 17th, 19th, 20th
80 March drafts, 10 top-20 finishes, 13 percent of draft had top-20, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th
15 April drafts, 0 top-20 finishes

So, half of the top-20 finishers came from January and February drafts even though more the TWICE as many drafts occurred in March and April.

[Greg Ambrosius]

If the April FAAB and June FAAB period helped to be on a Wednesday, we could certainly do that. We're already disrupting FAAB by moving it from Sunday to Monday, so no problem if a later date in the week helped. You likely wouldn't be able to use those pickups for that week, but who knows. Maybe that could be okay, too. Anything that makes people like the Best Ball format more by tweaking FAAB is fine by me, but again I'm not sure that's the only change we need to make.

[Gates]

Funny, checked last year, exact same numbers, 6 of 25 winners (including wild card) ... Based on preSpring training drafts / I used Feb 15 as the Cutline. I know we have not seen much of Spring training by Feb 15 but still...

[rickerbockerNFBC]

I did a cutline in 2016 without reading all the rules. Love to draft. Love the price. Love the idea of not having to do anything except 2 FAAB periods. I do a bunch of leagues but last minute signed up for cutline in 2016. As I learned about the setup with playoff round and my team's season ending in July if I didn't advance was a huge problem for me. I did a football league this year for $50 or $100 (can't remember) and I absolutely LOVE it. I will do more next year. If the Cutline changed (or start another sector) where the stats are based on a weekly points system and goes through end of year with an overall prize and league prizes, I would fall in love with that format. I mean in love fully. If the cutline format stays the same for next year I will do zero leagues. If the format changes to go all season long, I will do a minimum of 5 leagues and probably closer to a dozen leagues.

[ToddZ]

If the April FAAB and June FAAB period helped to be on a Wednesday, we could certainly do that. We're already disrupting FAAB by moving it from Sunday to Monday, so no problem if a later date in the week helped. You likely wouldn't be able to use those pickups for that week, but who knows. Maybe that could be okay, too. Anything that makes people like the Best Ball format more by tweaking FAAB is fine by me, but again I'm not sure that's the only change we need to make.

You missed the part about starting the scoring week on Thursday to coincide with the start of the season. Cutline scoring would be Thursday-Wednesday, with an extended week before the ASB.

[ToddZ]

Funny, checked last year, exact same numbers, 6 of 25 winners (including wild card) ... Based on preSpring training drafts / I used Feb 15 as the Cutline. I know we have not seen much of Spring training by Feb 15 but still...

It shouldn't be the raw number of winners, but a percentage of winners to number of drafts.

[Deadheadz]

Likewise, another idea discussed in the past would be to have all free agents in one contest-wide pool, so if one player was available in 20 different leagues the top 20 bidders from all 200+ leagues would win that player.

I'm probably confused but are you suggesting a FAAB where you're competing against hundreds of other bidders?

[Catch]

If the April FAAB and June FAAB period helped to be on a Wednesday, we could certainly do that.

Definitely will help considering the Sunday night lockouts (last two years) due to other NFBC products having a Sunday 10pm eastern time FAAB deadline.