Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 3:31:53 GMT -5
There was recent discussion about introducing an incentive for 'non-competing' teams to keep them interested in the second half of the season, but nothing conclusive was reached. I'd like to gauge general feeling about a proposal along these lines to introduce an incentive for the second half with reward being measured in the subsequent amateur draft.
The proposal would alter the amateur draft structure as so:
Am Draft Round 1 Am Draft Round 2 Am Draft Round 3 Comp Round 1 (Largest points gain non-playoff team from A/S break to end of season) Am Draft Round 4 Comp Round 2 (2nd and 3rd largest points gain non-playoff teams from A/S break to end of season) Am Draft Round 5 Comp Round 3 (In order of largest points gain, any/all other non-playoff teams achieving an improved total score from A/S break to end of season) Am Draft Round 6 Am Draft Round 7 Comp Round 4 (In order of smallest points loss, any/all other non-playoff teams)
Thoughts/comments gratefully received.
|
|
saltman
Administrator
Posts: 1,161
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by saltman on Sept 7, 2015 8:07:18 GMT -5
so basically 11 teams get an 8th pick? i appreciate the thought but personally I'm not sure the 46th pick in the draft is really going to be that much incentive to people, draft picks are such a lottery outside of the top few, and also don't pay any dividend for at least 2/3 years normally
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 9:18:53 GMT -5
so basically 11 teams get an 8th pick? i appreciate the thought but personally I'm not sure the 46th pick in the draft is really going to be that much incentive to people, draft picks are such a lottery outside of the top few, and also don't pay any dividend for at least 2/3 years normally It's a fine balancing line between something that's worth playing for, and something that's not going to have excessive value in the short or long term. Do you have any thoughts on an alternative?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 11:42:22 GMT -5
I like the comp round suggestion, but how about instead of adding a pick - you essentially trade your last round pick for an earlier comp round? That way the number of picks remains equal, while the move up is well worth the incentive.
Also, I think the comp round should be either after round 1 or 2 and it should only be an incentive for the top 3 non-playoff after A/S break teams - we can't reward middling mediocracy by extending it all the way to other non-playoff teams.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 12:36:06 GMT -5
I'm weary of restricting anything like this to a select few - the idea is to try to find some motivation that will encourage all teams lower in the standings to remain active and try to retain an element of competitiveness throughout the end of the year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2015 9:37:13 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2015 10:50:14 GMT -5
Interesting article but most of it doesn't pertain to us since it is mostly about prize money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2015 10:55:47 GMT -5
Interesting article but most of it doesn't pertain to us since it is mostly about prize money. True. It's kind of reassuring to see that this isn't a consideration just for us - although our format is more of an involved structure than the average league...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2015 11:30:10 GMT -5
Oh from that stand point I totally agree
|
|
bigfly73
Administrator
Posts: 1,366
Favorite Baseball Team: San Francisco Giants
|
Post by bigfly73 on Sept 8, 2015 17:13:25 GMT -5
I'm on the no need for any extra incentive, but being an admin I have to pay attention even when out of contention, so for others it may be different.
|
|
saltman
Administrator
Posts: 1,161
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by saltman on Sept 9, 2015 4:01:25 GMT -5
do we actually have people who have been neglecting their lineups? the changes to draft rules should mean that there is no incentive to actively tank, but if people are not bothering to set their lineups then really this is a question for them - why are they not doing it, and would an incentive like this entice them to start doing it properly?
problem is, the people who do 90% of the commenting on these threads are the most active people - the admins, me, JP etc. there is no point us agreeing on some incentives if the people who they're aimed at aren't interested in them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 6:41:06 GMT -5
I think this topic has gotten a little awry.
This isn't about people not being active / being active. It is about 2 seasons now where the outcome of the league was pared down essentially to 2 teams 2 months into the season. While I'm not saying these accomplishments shouldn't be applauded what I am saying is that I would like some incentive to keep being competitive throughout the season. It is just a discussion and not meant to discuss who is the issue or why there is an issue. More about what, if any, carrots can be created so not everyone is rushing to trade there players to the 2 or 3 competitive teams and make MEGA teams (something I've been guilty of). Any ways, again, love the league, don't want to change the foundation or anything, merely trying to explore what tweaks might be out there.
|
|
scooter1027
League GM
Posts: 813
Favorite Baseball Team: Milwaukee Brewers
|
Post by scooter1027 on Sept 9, 2015 10:15:28 GMT -5
I would vote "no" on such a concept. I understand where JP is coming from, it's not just about being active, but creating incentive to try and boost your team in a year in which you realistically don't have a chance.
But, there are always going to be different strategies in a dynasty league. I don't know that we need to give out cookies to someone for improving from one level of mediocrity to another slightly higher level, whereas someone very actively tearing it down to win in the future gets no such reward.
|
|
saltman
Administrator
Posts: 1,161
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by saltman on Sept 9, 2015 12:08:06 GMT -5
I think this topic has gotten a little awry. This isn't about people not being active / being active. It is about 2 seasons now where the outcome of the league was pared down essentially to 2 teams 2 months into the season. While I'm not saying these accomplishments shouldn't be applauded what I am saying is that I would like some incentive to keep being competitive throughout the season. It is just a discussion and not meant to discuss who is the issue or why there is an issue. More about what, if any, carrots can be created so not everyone is rushing to trade there players to the 2 or 3 competitive teams and make MEGA teams (something I've been guilty of). Any ways, again, love the league, don't want to change the foundation or anything, merely trying to explore what tweaks might be out there. I agree with what you're saying but unfortunately in a 15 team league, there are inevitably going to be a whole bunch of teams who are already out of contention by mid-year, every single year. that's just a reality of a league with 15 teams in it. the whole point of a dynasty league is that if you aren't contending in a particular year, you can still plan for the future (making trades, freeing up cap space etc) instead of just waiting for the season to end. so i don't think people should really need too much incentive to keep trying one thing i think people need to remember is that it's not just the overall title up for grabs, there are 3 divisions plus the wildcard - that's why i started posting division standings each month, to try to remind people that there is division rivalry at stake too not just the race to see who finishes #1 overall. so maybe one thing that might help is if we make a bigger deal out of the Division titles and encourage division rivalries, that might keep more teams interested rather than people just thinking "well i can't win the title, there's nothing else to play for"
|
|
saltman
Administrator
Posts: 1,161
Favorite Baseball Team: Atlanta Braves
|
Post by saltman on Sept 9, 2015 12:22:54 GMT -5
I would vote "no" on such a concept. I understand where JP is coming from, it's not just about being active, but creating incentive to try and boost your team in a year in which you realistically don't have a chance. But, there are always going to be different strategies in a dynasty league. I don't know that we need to give out cookies to someone for improving from one level of mediocrity to another slightly higher level, whereas someone very actively tearing it down to win in the future gets no such reward. I agree with this, there are all types of different strategies that teams might want to employ. some non-contending teams might actually be against an "incentive" scheme as they would prefer to spend the 2nd half trying to improve their team for future years by looking for trades which weaken their team this year but gain prospects/long-term assets. most of the trades done in July and August were of this nature, and in my opinion this strategy should be encouraged. obviously we don't want anyone properly tanking but we have things in place to discourage this already. that's why I'm keen to hear the opinions of all the teams currently towards the bottom of the standings
|
|