AGAIN, no pitchers are involved with twice a week lineups.
So the big "DL" by the players name makes it easy, but if contemplation is involved, it can't be handled.
Twice-a-week moves?
Twice-a-week moves?
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
AGAIN, no pitchers are involved with twice a week lineups.
So the big "DL" by the players name makes it easy, but if contemplation is involved, it can't be handled. Dough, in a universal sense, yes.
Even if it's just hitters, twice a week moves requires analysis of two sets of matchups every week. A DL move is generally a no-brainer, since you'll be lucky to have even one fill-in option for an injured player unless its your UT slot.
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
A DL move requires this thought process ... hey, my guy got injured, I should login and replace him! Idea to execution, about 40 seconds about once every other week per team.
AGAIN, no pitchers are involved with twice a week lineups.
So the big "DL" by the players name makes it easy, but if contemplation is involved, it can't be handled. Dough, in a universal sense, yes.
Even if it's just hitters, twice a week moves requires analysis of two sets of matchups every week. A DL move is generally a no-brainer, since you'll be lucky to have even one fill-in option for an injured player unless its your UT slot.
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
A DL move requires this thought process ... hey, my guy got injured, I should login and replace him! Idea to execution, about 40 seconds about once every other week per team.
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution? 
Twice-a-week moves?
Well, I've finally read through the whole thing and thought I would offer my opinion on this.
I think that we should go back to most of the first year rules and try to stay as close to the traditional format and rules as possible. When a rule change is made it should be made so that it gives everyone the same advantage. Like it or not, having one or two or ten change opportunities besides the original roster submission a week is a step toward daily transactions. If the majority on these boards wants to keep the Main Event a weekly transaction type league it should stay that way. Adding the Friday DL rule is obviously not enough roster management for some. Now the 2X DL rule is being proposed. If it is accepted what is to keep that from being enough the following year? The KDS system was implemented because some felt that there was not enough ability to control draft spots (which no owner should have control over in my opinion, tho' I do think KDS is great idea). Now there is discussion of wanting a better draft system using FAAB. No one is ever going to be satisfied with everything and everyone is always going to be coming up with some way to create a better advantage for themselves. Not saying that Gekko is trying to create an advantage for himself in this, but some of these suggestions totally misconstrue the nature of the game that we play.
Why are lineup changes besides the original roster submission time a bad idea? Because it adds one more factor of luck to the game. If I have a guy that I can replace a DL'ed guy with, then great. If I don't then tough. The guy that doesn't have a replacement on his bench is completely SOL and getting 0's everyday. It is not an even playing field. I know that everyone says that an owner has as much chance as anyone else in the league to replace a DL'ed player... Maybe not this time around, but maybe the next time around, therefore it is a wash. I say, "Bullcrap." It is purely luck that I have someone as a replacement. With more and more competitors joining each year, the differential between first and second place could easily be one HR, one RBI, or one K. It is getting way too easy for people to start yelling "Luck" because a person caught a break on DL Friday while the second place finisher didn't. I say take it back to the way it was. If a guy goes on the DL then you can replace him on Monday with the original roster submission. Everyone is on an even playing field because if you have a DL guy then you can use FAAB to get a replacement or you plug someone in if you already have one. With the Friday DL rule the only person who has an opportunity is someone that has a replacement.
And again I say, if we were to add another day for roster management then what is to keep everyone from asking for a third next year? If you are going to add one more, then we have to be able to get to the FA list for it to be fair for everyone. Don't even say it, I know... That is not fair in and of itself. Add one more day, might as well go to daily.
I think that we should go back to most of the first year rules and try to stay as close to the traditional format and rules as possible. When a rule change is made it should be made so that it gives everyone the same advantage. Like it or not, having one or two or ten change opportunities besides the original roster submission a week is a step toward daily transactions. If the majority on these boards wants to keep the Main Event a weekly transaction type league it should stay that way. Adding the Friday DL rule is obviously not enough roster management for some. Now the 2X DL rule is being proposed. If it is accepted what is to keep that from being enough the following year? The KDS system was implemented because some felt that there was not enough ability to control draft spots (which no owner should have control over in my opinion, tho' I do think KDS is great idea). Now there is discussion of wanting a better draft system using FAAB. No one is ever going to be satisfied with everything and everyone is always going to be coming up with some way to create a better advantage for themselves. Not saying that Gekko is trying to create an advantage for himself in this, but some of these suggestions totally misconstrue the nature of the game that we play.
Why are lineup changes besides the original roster submission time a bad idea? Because it adds one more factor of luck to the game. If I have a guy that I can replace a DL'ed guy with, then great. If I don't then tough. The guy that doesn't have a replacement on his bench is completely SOL and getting 0's everyday. It is not an even playing field. I know that everyone says that an owner has as much chance as anyone else in the league to replace a DL'ed player... Maybe not this time around, but maybe the next time around, therefore it is a wash. I say, "Bullcrap." It is purely luck that I have someone as a replacement. With more and more competitors joining each year, the differential between first and second place could easily be one HR, one RBI, or one K. It is getting way too easy for people to start yelling "Luck" because a person caught a break on DL Friday while the second place finisher didn't. I say take it back to the way it was. If a guy goes on the DL then you can replace him on Monday with the original roster submission. Everyone is on an even playing field because if you have a DL guy then you can use FAAB to get a replacement or you plug someone in if you already have one. With the Friday DL rule the only person who has an opportunity is someone that has a replacement.
And again I say, if we were to add another day for roster management then what is to keep everyone from asking for a third next year? If you are going to add one more, then we have to be able to get to the FA list for it to be fair for everyone. Don't even say it, I know... That is not fair in and of itself. Add one more day, might as well go to daily.
George
Smoky Mtn. Oysters
Chicago 4
Wildwood Weeds
Chicago 650 Mixed League Auction
Smoky Mtn. Oysters
Chicago 4
Wildwood Weeds
Chicago 650 Mixed League Auction
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
So are you saying that we set the rules to accommodate people who are in 5,10,15 leagues?
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
So are you saying that we set the rules to accommodate people who are in 5,10,15 leagues?
George
Smoky Mtn. Oysters
Chicago 4
Wildwood Weeds
Chicago 650 Mixed League Auction
Smoky Mtn. Oysters
Chicago 4
Wildwood Weeds
Chicago 650 Mixed League Auction
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by Jackstraw:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
So are you saying that we set the rules to accommodate people who are in 5,10,15 leagues? [/QUOTE]I would say that Greg should set the rules to reflect what he believes (1) is fair and appropriate, and (2) will not result in losing a chunk of his existing player base.
Personally, I could live with 2x moves, but it changes strategy and I know a LOT of people wouldn't like it.
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which (1) would have no impact on strategy, (2) provide a small boost to teams with injuries, and (3) would not result in any lost players (imo).
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
So are you saying that we set the rules to accommodate people who are in 5,10,15 leagues? [/QUOTE]I would say that Greg should set the rules to reflect what he believes (1) is fair and appropriate, and (2) will not result in losing a chunk of his existing player base.
Personally, I could live with 2x moves, but it changes strategy and I know a LOT of people wouldn't like it.
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which (1) would have no impact on strategy, (2) provide a small boost to teams with injuries, and (3) would not result in any lost players (imo).
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution? I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. 
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution?
I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
AGAIN, no pitchers are involved with twice a week lineups.
So the big "DL" by the players name makes it easy, but if contemplation is involved, it can't be handled. Dough, in a universal sense, yes.
Even if it's just hitters, twice a week moves requires analysis of two sets of matchups every week. A DL move is generally a no-brainer, since you'll be lucky to have even one fill-in option for an injured player unless its your UT slot.
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
A DL move requires this thought process ... hey, my guy got injured, I should login and replace him! Idea to execution, about 40 seconds about once every other week per team. [/QUOTE]Well put on all accounts.
When I do my hundreds of hours of pre-season research, I get to pick and choose the hours I do this research, they are not subject to the deadlines the game presents itself with and that added research time under any new rules like this being discussed would force me to cut back from 5 to one or two teams.
I simply don't have the time around a Friday (or any other weekday) deadline to do the proper research that you have pointed out it would take.
[ May 01, 2007, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: UFS ]
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
AGAIN, no pitchers are involved with twice a week lineups.
So the big "DL" by the players name makes it easy, but if contemplation is involved, it can't be handled. Dough, in a universal sense, yes.
Even if it's just hitters, twice a week moves requires analysis of two sets of matchups every week. A DL move is generally a no-brainer, since you'll be lucky to have even one fill-in option for an injured player unless its your UT slot.
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
A DL move requires this thought process ... hey, my guy got injured, I should login and replace him! Idea to execution, about 40 seconds about once every other week per team. [/QUOTE]Well put on all accounts.
When I do my hundreds of hours of pre-season research, I get to pick and choose the hours I do this research, they are not subject to the deadlines the game presents itself with and that added research time under any new rules like this being discussed would force me to cut back from 5 to one or two teams.
I simply don't have the time around a Friday (or any other weekday) deadline to do the proper research that you have pointed out it would take.
[ May 01, 2007, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: UFS ]
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 4317
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which would have no impact on strategy yes it would. healthy bench players would become more valuable.
in addition, owners would have to log in everyday to see if any of their players were DL'd. too much of a time committment for most.
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which would have no impact on strategy yes it would. healthy bench players would become more valuable.
in addition, owners would have to log in everyday to see if any of their players were DL'd. too much of a time committment for most.
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which would have no impact on strategy yes it would. healthy bench players would become more valuable.
in addition, owners would have to log in everyday to see if any of their players were DL'd. too much of a time committment for most. [/QUOTE]Gekko, time to let go of something Greg said he won't do and support something he might do, which would be good for the game.
Bench player strategy wouldn't be any different; the impact would be very marginal for getting an extra day or two out of a bench player in the event of a DL, and the time commitment would of course be very minimal as well.
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which would have no impact on strategy yes it would. healthy bench players would become more valuable.
in addition, owners would have to log in everyday to see if any of their players were DL'd. too much of a time committment for most. [/QUOTE]Gekko, time to let go of something Greg said he won't do and support something he might do, which would be good for the game.
Bench player strategy wouldn't be any different; the impact would be very marginal for getting an extra day or two out of a bench player in the event of a DL, and the time commitment would of course be very minimal as well.
-
Gordon Gekko
- Posts: 4317
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Gekko, time to let go of something Greg said he won't do and support something he might do, which would be good for the game.
Bench player strategy wouldn't be any different; the impact would be very marginal for getting an extra day or two out of a bench player in the event of a DL, and the time commitment would of course be very minimal as well. so if someone is in 10 leagues, they would have to log into ten separate leagues EACH morning to see if any players are DL'd? if they don't log in EACH morning, they run the risk of "losing out" to owners who were able to switch out their DL'd players.
for example, suppose thome went on the DL monday night. suppose all thome owners (except me) switched him out on tuesday morning. since i don't have a lot of time during the week, i don't check my team until friday morning and then i switch thome. wouldn't i lose out on potentially 3 games of stats simply because i was busy during the week?
Gekko, time to let go of something Greg said he won't do and support something he might do, which would be good for the game.
Bench player strategy wouldn't be any different; the impact would be very marginal for getting an extra day or two out of a bench player in the event of a DL, and the time commitment would of course be very minimal as well. so if someone is in 10 leagues, they would have to log into ten separate leagues EACH morning to see if any players are DL'd? if they don't log in EACH morning, they run the risk of "losing out" to owners who were able to switch out their DL'd players.
for example, suppose thome went on the DL monday night. suppose all thome owners (except me) switched him out on tuesday morning. since i don't have a lot of time during the week, i don't check my team until friday morning and then i switch thome. wouldn't i lose out on potentially 3 games of stats simply because i was busy during the week?
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
AGAIN, no pitchers are involved with twice a week lineups.
So the big "DL" by the players name makes it easy, but if contemplation is involved, it can't be handled. Dough, in a universal sense, yes.
Even if it's just hitters, twice a week moves requires analysis of two sets of matchups every week. A DL move is generally a no-brainer, since you'll be lucky to have even one fill-in option for an injured player unless its your UT slot.
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
A DL move requires this thought process ... hey, my guy got injured, I should login and replace him! Idea to execution, about 40 seconds about once every other week per team. [/QUOTE]I just couldn't disagree more. You would be spending the same amount of time and work on matchups. It would just be one series at a time instead of doing two series at the beginning of the week.
Same amount of time and work, just distributed to twice a week, instead of trying to look into a crystal ball for the whole week.
Where does more time and work come into play?
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
AGAIN, no pitchers are involved with twice a week lineups.
So the big "DL" by the players name makes it easy, but if contemplation is involved, it can't be handled. Dough, in a universal sense, yes.
Even if it's just hitters, twice a week moves requires analysis of two sets of matchups every week. A DL move is generally a no-brainer, since you'll be lucky to have even one fill-in option for an injured player unless its your UT slot.
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
A DL move requires this thought process ... hey, my guy got injured, I should login and replace him! Idea to execution, about 40 seconds about once every other week per team. [/QUOTE]I just couldn't disagree more. You would be spending the same amount of time and work on matchups. It would just be one series at a time instead of doing two series at the beginning of the week.
Same amount of time and work, just distributed to twice a week, instead of trying to look into a crystal ball for the whole week.
Where does more time and work come into play?
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives.
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 41097
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution? I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!!
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution?
I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!! 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
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 41097
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by Jackstraw:
It is getting way too easy for people to start yelling "Luck" because a person caught a break on DL Friday while the second place finisher didn't. George, I never thought I'd see the day where someone believes that having a player land on the DL during the week is good "luck". Nobody wants one of their starters landing on the DL during the week and I don't care who you have on the bench to replace that person for three days. It's not good luck when that happens.
You boys have had a nice, lively conversation about two-a-week moves, daily DL moves and the current Friday DL Rule. I've enjoyed it. But like I've said before, I'm not going down the path for the main event of daily transactions or multiple week moves and the current Friday DL Rule is being used by many owners and is a time manageable move for current players. I just don't see us going beyond that in the future and I don't see any reason to go back to the non-Friday DL rule anytime soon either. It's hard to be much clearer than that.
It is getting way too easy for people to start yelling "Luck" because a person caught a break on DL Friday while the second place finisher didn't. George, I never thought I'd see the day where someone believes that having a player land on the DL during the week is good "luck". Nobody wants one of their starters landing on the DL during the week and I don't care who you have on the bench to replace that person for three days. It's not good luck when that happens.
You boys have had a nice, lively conversation about two-a-week moves, daily DL moves and the current Friday DL Rule. I've enjoyed it. But like I've said before, I'm not going down the path for the main event of daily transactions or multiple week moves and the current Friday DL Rule is being used by many owners and is a time manageable move for current players. I just don't see us going beyond that in the future and I don't see any reason to go back to the non-Friday DL rule anytime soon either. It's hard to be much clearer than that.
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
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution? I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!! [/QUOTE]IN ! in in in
Q
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution?
I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!! [/QUOTE]IN ! in in in Q
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct.
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct.
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 41097
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by Quahogs:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution? I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!! [/QUOTE]IN ! in in in
Q [/QUOTE]George always told me that I could easily form an NFBC Keeper League, but I told him I was too busy for such a thing. I can actually list the owners who I think would join this without even soliciting them. Let me see, Quahogs, George, KJ Duke, Eddie G., Shawn, Jeff Dobies, Perry Van Hook. I better stop. I really didn't want to do this league, but it could be fun. George, I apologize for not listening to you last off-season!!
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution?
I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!! [/QUOTE]IN ! in in in Q [/QUOTE]George always told me that I could easily form an NFBC Keeper League, but I told him I was too busy for such a thing. I can actually list the owners who I think would join this without even soliciting them. Let me see, Quahogs, George, KJ Duke, Eddie G., Shawn, Jeff Dobies, Perry Van Hook. I better stop. I really didn't want to do this league, but it could be fun. George, I apologize for not listening to you last off-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
-
King of Queens
- Posts: 3602
- Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]I'm not waffling here. You suggested something two weeks ago that I told you would be too much work for myself and many others here. The "unintended consequences" of your proposal IS the extra work involved. Since that was already stated ad nauseum, I didn't feel it was necessary to repeat myself.
Next time, I'll know how to p-r-o-c-e-e-d.
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]I'm not waffling here. You suggested something two weeks ago that I told you would be too much work for myself and many others here. The "unintended consequences" of your proposal IS the extra work involved. Since that was already stated ad nauseum, I didn't feel it was necessary to repeat myself.
Next time, I'll know how to p-r-o-c-e-e-d.
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution? I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!! [/QUOTE]Nice Greg! I'm certain you don't need me for input on keeper rules, but I'd be happy to share what we've done. The format we've used is similar to the NFBC where possible, but as far as keeper-type rules, they are different from most traditional leagues in that (1) I wanted to be sure that good keepers didn't overwhelm the league such that it would be too difficult to compete without great keepers; (2) it is a no-trade league, and (3) we've employed the keeper concept into a draft league format, as well as an auction format.
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
KJD -- well said. Now, any chance we can replace the NFBC Rules with the Cannonball League Constitution?
I'd be very happy to work with Greg on a keeper league concept if he wants to go that route. [/QUOTE]You have just made George Kleemann's day!! Yes, I am going to roll out an NFBC Keeper League format soon as I think we have 15-30 great guys who would love to be in the same league each year with about five keepers per year. Let's talk about the rules you use and I'll let you know what I was thinking. In 2008, I wouldn't mind offering 1 or 2 keeper leagues for my most die-hard customers who plan on living as long as I plan on running the NFBC!!! [/QUOTE]Nice Greg! I'm certain you don't need me for input on keeper rules, but I'd be happy to share what we've done. The format we've used is similar to the NFBC where possible, but as far as keeper-type rules, they are different from most traditional leagues in that (1) I wanted to be sure that good keepers didn't overwhelm the league such that it would be too difficult to compete without great keepers; (2) it is a no-trade league, and (3) we've employed the keeper concept into a draft league format, as well as an auction format.Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]I'm not waffling here. You suggested something two weeks ago that I told you would be too much work for myself and many others here. The "unintended consequences" of your proposal IS the extra work involved. Since that was already stated ad nauseum, I didn't feel it was necessary to repeat myself.
Next time, I'll know how to p-r-o-c-e-e-d. [/QUOTE]N-o e-x-t-r-a- w-o-r-k-, just split up.
Proceed.
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]I'm not waffling here. You suggested something two weeks ago that I told you would be too much work for myself and many others here. The "unintended consequences" of your proposal IS the extra work involved. Since that was already stated ad nauseum, I didn't feel it was necessary to repeat myself.
Next time, I'll know how to p-r-o-c-e-e-d. [/QUOTE]N-o e-x-t-r-a- w-o-r-k-, just split up.
Proceed.
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]Dough, I don't see the guys on the other side of this as necessarily change-averse. I have pushed for changes each year, as have KOQ, UFS and others. I believe we just don't think its a particularly good idea.
Although, you do raise a good point, which may explain why so many seem to be against even the GOOD ideas.
[ May 01, 2007, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]Dough, I don't see the guys on the other side of this as necessarily change-averse. I have pushed for changes each year, as have KOQ, UFS and others. I believe we just don't think its a particularly good idea.
Although, you do raise a good point, which may explain why so many seem to be against even the GOOD ideas.
[ May 01, 2007, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]Dough, I don't see the guys on the other side of this as necessarily change-averse. I have pushed for changes each year, as have KOQ, UFS and others. I believe we just don't think its a particularly good idea.
Although, you do raise a good point, which may explain why so many seem to be against even the GOOD ideas. [/QUOTE]
quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
Almost any rule adjustment is going to have additional consequences beyond the original intention. For example, the Friday DL rule has allowed owners to remove the "bad" start from a pitchers getting two starts in a particular week. It also allows you to get two starts from a single spot: owners of Ricky Nolasco, Cliff Lee and Mike Mussina are able to start them for the Monday-Thursday Period, then replace them with a pitcher going this weekend. Is that the intention of the Friday DL rule? Of course not, but owners are free to manipulate the rules to their liking.
Similarly, while having two transaction periods for hitters would help teams to avoid zeroes, the unintended consequences of such a rule would -- to me anyways -- outweigh the positives. So, it's not the more work or time this time, its the "unintended consequences" of a possible change?
Seems weak.
Ad agencies tell us that the male,30-65 years of age demographic are the most adverse to change. They seem to be correct. [/QUOTE]Dough, I don't see the guys on the other side of this as necessarily change-averse. I have pushed for changes each year, as have KOQ, UFS and others. I believe we just don't think its a particularly good idea.
Although, you do raise a good point, which may explain why so many seem to be against even the GOOD ideas.
[/QUOTE] On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!
Twice-a-week moves?
For what it's worth, my hometown league is a twice a week transaction league (Mon.&Fri.).It's both more dynamic and time consuming. I like it. I like the NFBC's format just as much. Truthfully, they're similar games but require slightly different strategies, personel, and time commitments. (In the 2x league the set-up reliever gets a real boost in value as one tries to avoid the bad matchup. As well, it requires an extra pitcher or two on your roster to execute properly. The platoon position player gets a slight boost as well). I approach both type leagues accordingly. This year I've added 2 more NFBC teams to my resume and I have to agree with Gregg when he claims that 2x changes would put a drag on NFBC participation. I wouldn't play in 4 2X leagues. As it stands now I spend half my summer in baseball limbo, the other half I spend trying to convince my wife that it really doesn't take as much of my time as she thinks. (Of course, we both know that I'm lying.) Perhaps when I retire and have Friday's off, I'll reconsider. As it stands now Thurs. night changes are often not a labor of love but more of a pixel eyed matchup haze that has to be navigated before preparing for work the following day. Of course, you also have to check the wire Friday morning before work for updated info. It's important that you also take precautions not to spill your oatmeal on the keyboard, I can't stress this enough!
Yup, one 2x league is enough for me, two time changes are for those who can manage their time better than me or have much more of the spare variety. If the NFBC offered the 2x format as a satellite league, over time the braintrust would be able to determine it's popularity and whether an actual change to their business model is in order.
One final note, I agree with KJ and others who suggest an anytime DL rule. It seems pretty straight forward and provides a more timely remedy to lost time due to injury, which is what in substance is underlying this discussion.
Yup, one 2x league is enough for me, two time changes are for those who can manage their time better than me or have much more of the spare variety. If the NFBC offered the 2x format as a satellite league, over time the braintrust would be able to determine it's popularity and whether an actual change to their business model is in order.
One final note, I agree with KJ and others who suggest an anytime DL rule. It seems pretty straight forward and provides a more timely remedy to lost time due to injury, which is what in substance is underlying this discussion.
bob
Twice-a-week moves?
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by Jackstraw:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
So are you saying that we set the rules to accommodate people who are in 5,10,15 leagues? [/QUOTE]I would say that Greg should set the rules to reflect what he believes (1) is fair and appropriate, and (2) will not result in losing a chunk of his existing player base.
Personally, I could live with 2x moves, but it changes strategy and I know a LOT of people wouldn't like it.
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which (1) would have no impact on strategy, (2) provide a small boost to teams with injuries, and (3) would not result in any lost players (imo). [/QUOTE]I agree with your 1 and 2 in the first segment. As for the second segment there may be some potential for an anytime DL change. I like the sound of that better than a 2X rule. Either way, if you don't have replacements you may be at a disadvantage that could very easily be argued as bad luck.
quote:Originally posted by Jackstraw:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Thinking over strategy 2x a week would change bench, FAAB and matchup strategies, all of which would require substantially more time each week especially for owners who are in 5,10,15 leagues.
So are you saying that we set the rules to accommodate people who are in 5,10,15 leagues? [/QUOTE]I would say that Greg should set the rules to reflect what he believes (1) is fair and appropriate, and (2) will not result in losing a chunk of his existing player base.
Personally, I could live with 2x moves, but it changes strategy and I know a LOT of people wouldn't like it.
Unlike the anytime DL rule, which (1) would have no impact on strategy, (2) provide a small boost to teams with injuries, and (3) would not result in any lost players (imo). [/QUOTE]I agree with your 1 and 2 in the first segment. As for the second segment there may be some potential for an anytime DL change. I like the sound of that better than a 2X rule. Either way, if you don't have replacements you may be at a disadvantage that could very easily be argued as bad luck.
George
Smoky Mtn. Oysters
Chicago 4
Wildwood Weeds
Chicago 650 Mixed League Auction
Smoky Mtn. Oysters
Chicago 4
Wildwood Weeds
Chicago 650 Mixed League Auction