Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DocJ

2015 Rotoworld Mock Real League

Recommended Posts

How about this Friday? "Like" if you're down like Charlie Brown for this. The weekend will give us a good start on things.

I could probably be ready for Friday, if you wanted to move it up to there. That would allow me enough time to slot in my rankings using the system I came up with last offseason.

darts-blindfolded.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friday it is.

It would be quite reassuring if everyone posted in this thread at least once. Just to know everyone is dialed in. There is no reason for the first 2 rounds to last longer than 2 days.

Somebody email dislimb and whoever else is picking in the top 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason I have an issue with this is because of how injury-prone the position is. We start 2 RBs + 1 FLEX. If a manager believes that their best strategy is to start 3 quality RB's, there should not be an arbitrary limit on how many RB's that manager can allot to that position, in pursuit of quality depth.

...snip...

We can start 4 running backs, not 3. As you pointed out last season your strategy was to start 4 running backs.

Everyone gets to make their own choices for their strategy.

Strategies revolve around league settings. A league where you can start 2 QBs will alter an owners strategy, as will a league where you can start 4 running backs and people roster 10+.

You don't have to get all defensive, you'll be able to play "Osama bin Robrain" and hold subpar RB's hostage for trades once again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason I have an issue with this is because of how injury-prone the position is. We start 2 RBs + 1 FLEX. If a manager believes that their best strategy is to start 3 quality RB's, there should not be an arbitrary limit on how many RB's that manager can allot to that position, in pursuit of quality depth.

...snip...

We can start 4 running backs, not 3. As you pointed out last season your strategy was to start 4 running backs.

Everyone gets to make their own choices for their strategy.

Strategies revolve around league settings. A league where you can start 2 QBs will alter an owners strategy, as will a league where you can start 4 running backs and people roster 10+.

You don't have to get all defensive, you'll be able to play "Osama bin Robrain" and hold subpar RB's hostage for trades once again.

I actually had an epic brain freeze, forgot that we implemented 2 FLEX positions for the first time in this league's history last season.

Allowing 4 RBs to be started pretty much means you need to allow for even more RB depth to be allocated on the bench. Cutting back on RB bench spots would also have the side effect of harming other teams trying to replenish their lost starting RBs - it's a double-edged sword.

Stockpiling RBs doesn't solely help teams that already have great RB depth. It's a completely valid way for teams that don't have good RB depth (...or intentionally didn't draft ANY quality starting RBs, like a couple of teams in this league last season) to fill that hole in their roster.

If you didn't have any good starting WR's, what would you do?

Stockpile WRs until you found a good one. That's one obvious answer.

It's kind of the basis of what fantasy football is. Your roster has it's strengths and weaknesses, and while you ride your strengths, you're always looking to fix your roster's weaknesses. Some managers will allocate a single roster space to fixing their weakness, and the rest of their bench towards maintaining their strength. Some managers will allocate their entire bench to fixing their weakness. Both are valid strategies, as is everything in between, and it's up to you to choose the allocation that fits your particular strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, something just came to mind - did we have anybody quit on us down the stretch? I forget if a team or two kind of threw in the towel at the end of last season and stopped setting their lineup?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm down for Friday. Proteus is taking over for me starting in round 4 so I don't hold up the draft by taking a lot of time.

We need to start thinking about a replacement in case Dislimb doesn't show up. I say if he hasn't responded by tomorrow or Wednesday morning at the latest we get another member so that they can get filled in on the details of how to draft, lineups, league rules/settings etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robrain proves once again, that he's the only poster on these forums more long winded that me, lmao.

I didn't read all of what you said, because #Robrain, but I'd like to clarify a few things that I got to, and others mentioned.

1: I don't have any issue with how many RBs you roster.

2: I don't have any issue with how often you roster churn.

3: I don't have any issue with the scoring system.

This is why I was looking for an alternative to what Yahoo currently offers.

My issue lies, within the exploitation of game mechanics, to artificially increase the amount of players you can functionally possess at any given time, or any given week.

There are no etiquette issues or conflicts with these 3 things, those are perfectly normal and I have no desire to limit them in any way. You can't just label everything a 'strategy' regardless of ethics. I can hack into your email, and change your lineup. Do I get to call that a strategy too? lol

Again, this is something I'm looking to employ in my own leagues this year, this was just a good place for the discussion as Robrain is the extreme version, so people here know what I'm talking about.

The main issues I want to focus on are

A: Picking up players with no intent to keep them, simply preventing another team from obtaining them by exploiting your K & DEF ROSTER spot. (Note I said Roster Spot, not Bench spot, this is key) This is an unfair way to prevent any team from owning the players you dropped late, and ensuring that because of how the waiver system is in place, that you never lose the opportunity to obtain that player, even the following week.

B: Similar to A, this one is simply done without malice or intent, but still holding 8 bench spots, so that you can have the full week to 'wait' on news. This is an exploit of the system and your roster. If we have 6 bench spots, then we should have 6 bench spots, not 8. This is basically just a monopoly.

C: Holding players through their games, so that you can unfairly evaluate their performance while owning them. This is exploiting your maximum amount of bench spots by owning a player from the 10am game, the 1pm game, the 7pm game, and MNF, all with a single roster spot, individually evaluating/owning 4 different players and deciding whether or not to keep them with information other owners won't have access to. This is just a blatant attempt to avoid the waiver system all together, maximizing your statistical chances to obtain a player for free, rather than have to bid for them on waivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, something just came to mind - did we have anybody quit on us down the stretch? I forget if a team or two kind of threw in the towel at the end of last season and stopped setting their lineup?

I don't think anyone mailed it in that bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issues I want to focus on are

A: Picking up players with no intent to keep them, simply preventing another team from obtaining them by exploiting your K & DEF ROSTER spot. (Note I said Roster Spot, not Bench spot, this is key) This is an unfair way to prevent any team from owning the players you dropped late, and ensuring that because of how the waiver system is in place, that you never lose the opportunity to obtain that player, even the following week.

You call it "exploiting", but I think the much more correct term is "utilizing".

What you typed there sounds a LOT like this scenario:

We're now both playing Monopoly.

I focus on locking down one full side of the board, making it ultra hard to avoid my properties as you move your piece. I build houses and hotels all along that side, you hit them every time you come around the board, quickly bankrupting you.

You then call me a cheater, saying that I "exploited" a game mechanic.

I then counter and say that the correct phrase is "utilized". I utilized a gameplay mechanic.

Heck, if we want to add a connotation to the word, we could use the word "leveraged". I leveraged a gameplay mechanic.

I think we all know that saying someone "exploited" something is tantamount to calling them a cheater, which is why I'm pointing out the difference.

If a fantasy football platform did not intend for you to be able to utilize your roster spots for any position, they could have easily programmed the game to prevent you from using your Kicker or Defense roster spots for other positions.

And calling it unfair is completely wrong in the context. It's completely fair. If I pick up Joe McKnight in exchange for my Kicker during the week, guess what? 13 other managers in our league could have done the exact same thing. That is exactly what makes it 100% fair.

13 other teams CHOSE not to drop their Kicker and roster Joe McKnight.

Likewise, 13 other teams CHOSE to continue rostering their Kicker.

Those are indisputable facts.

We all make hundreds of choices for our rosters throughout the fantasy football season. For every player you choose to roster, you're choosing not to use that roster spot on every single other player in the Free Agent Pool. You're choosing the player that you chose, over every other available player at the time. When you continue to hold onto a player for multiple weeks, you're choosing that player over every other available player for those multiple weeks.

This is the essence of choice.

So when you choose to hold onto your Kicker, instead of rostering Joe McKnight, you're making a conscious choice. You're choosing Stephen Gostkowski over Joe McKnight.

You could have chosen Joe McKnight over Stephen Gostkowski. But according to your mindset, and your particular strategy, and your roster, Stephen Gostkowski was the right choice over Joe McKnight.

------------------------------------------------------

As far as the tail end of that, every player is subject to Waivers at the end of every week. Here are two scenarios:

Scenario A:

Team A is losing to his opponent for the week, is holding onto Joe McKnight on his bench in place of his Kicker as a speculative hold, then Joe McKnight doesn't do anything / the starter in front of Joe McKnight doesn't get injured. Which means Joe McKnight's value is officially still nill. Nada. Zero.

So Team A cuts Joe McKnight, and puts in a Kicker that's playing in the 8:00 night game on Sunday.

You cry foul because...why? Because you didn't have a chance to use Joe McKnight that week? Well, the reality is that you COULD have picked him up. You had the same opportunity to do so that Team A did. You simply CHOSE not to.

Now, let's move on to Scenario B:

Team A is winning to his opponent for the week, Joe McKnight plays in the Monday night game in this scenario. Team A wants to pick up a player that's playing in the 8:00 Sunday game (Dexter McCluster) as a speculative add. He can either cut Joe McKnight, or cut his Kicker. Since he's winning, Team A chooses to cut his Kicker, Stephen Gostkowski (who hasn't played yet), so he can pick up Dexter McCluster.

Are you crying foul now? Because you didn't have a chance to use Kicker Stephen Gostkowski that week? Because it's essentially the exact same scenario, just with a different position being dropped as the end result.

If you wouldn't cry foul over Scenario B, logically, you can't cry foul over Scenario A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C: Holding players through their games, so that you can unfairly evaluate their performance while owning them. This is exploiting your maximum amount of bench spots by owning a player from the 10am game, the 1pm game, the 7pm game, and MNF, all with a single roster spot, individually evaluating/owning 4 different players and deciding whether or not to keep them with information other owners won't have access to. This is just a blatant attempt to avoid the waiver system all together, maximizing your statistical chances to obtain a player for free, rather than have to bid for them on waivers.

If everyone can do it, it isn't unfair. If I drop a player at 3:00, and pick up a different player who will be playing in the 4:00 game, guess what?

That player in the 4:00 game was sitting in the Free Agent Pool, available for everyone else to add as well.

It's exactly the same during the week. You wouldn't rail against someone who added up a player on Thursday, when you had the opportunity to add that exact same player all throughout Wednesday, right?

We all KNOW that every player in the Free Agent Pool is available to be added right up until their game starts. You can't cry foul if someone picks up a player 5 seconds before that player's game starts, because 13 other managers had from Tuesday all the way to that very moment on Sunday/Monday night, to pick up that same exact player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issues I want to focus on are

A: Picking up players with no intent to keep them, simply preventing another team from obtaining them by exploiting your K & DEF ROSTER spot. (Note I said Roster Spot, not Bench spot, this is key) This is an unfair way to prevent any team from owning the players you dropped late, and ensuring that because of how the waiver system is in place, that you never lose the opportunity to obtain that player, even the following week.

You call it "exploiting", but I think the much more correct term is "utilizing".

What you typed there sounds a LOT like this scenario:

We're now both playing Monopoly.

...

If a fantasy football platform did not intend for you to be able to utilize your roster spots for any position, they could have easily programmed the game to prevent you from using your Kicker or Defense roster spots for other positions.

It's actually more analogous to video games, where players might utilize an edge case that is overlooked when the rules are made.

The game can end up in a state where it isn't working as intended because the original developers never considered an edge case discovered by the player.

When creating fantasy football software, I would imagine the developers code around the standard settings and not things like "Well, if they make a league with two RB flex spots, an IR spot and whatever else, then someone could roster 16 running backs if they drop their defense and kicker"

Having bench spots dedicated to certain positions is sort of interesting though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quick reminder on draft etiquette:

Alright, I'll make this clear so we're not busting each others balls tomorrow while drafting. We'll delay commenting extensively on our picks until the following round so everyone's on the same page. Obviously commenting only about the player you took is 100% acceptable. For example:

:D AP: Picked at #2 because he's the Purple Jesus and Norv has a stellar track record working with elite RBs.

:angry: AP: Picked at #2 because he's the Purple Jesus and Norv has a stellar track record working with elite RBs AND [insert extensive commentary on the next 4 players on your draft board]

Sound Good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all know that saying someone "exploited" something is tantamount to calling them a cheater, which is why I'm pointing out the difference.

Not in my opinion. I use the term exploit, because it falls within the legal rules of the game. It's not illegal or against the rules, therefor not cheating in any way. As cock pointed out, you've done nothing wrong, but you(we) have exploited a weakness in the system in a way that I (personally) don't believe it was designed or intended to be used. My goal is to supercede Yahoo's short comings to correct the issue. Not to point fingers, place blame or cry foul. As long as it isn't against the rules, I have no qualms with you continuing to do it, and I likely will do so myself. My goal, is to eliminate the need, desire, temptation, or whatever to continue this process in the game for the FUTURE. Does that make sense? Like I've stated multiple times, this is for the leagues I commish, not this league, so stop being so defensive.

ex·ploit
verb
ikˈsploit/
1. make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource).
2. a software tool designed to take advantage of a flaw in a computer system, typically for malicious purposes such as installing malware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main issues I want to focus on are

A: Picking up players with no intent to keep them, simply preventing another team from obtaining them by exploiting your K & DEF ROSTER spot. (Note I said Roster Spot, not Bench spot, this is key) This is an unfair way to prevent any team from owning the players you dropped late, and ensuring that because of how the waiver system is in place, that you never lose the opportunity to obtain that player, even the following week.

You call it "exploiting", but I think the much more correct term is "utilizing".

What you typed there sounds a LOT like this scenario:

We're now both playing Monopoly.

...

If a fantasy football platform did not intend for you to be able to utilize your roster spots for any position, they could have easily programmed the game to prevent you from using your Kicker or Defense roster spots for other positions.

It's actually more analogous to video games, where players might utilize an edge case that is overlooked when the rules are made.

The game can end up in a state where it isn't working as intended because the original developers never considered an edge case discovered by the player.

When creating fantasy football software, I would imagine the developers code around the standard settings and not things like "Well, if they make a league with two RB flex spots, an IR spot and whatever else, then someone could roster 16 running backs if they drop their defense and kicker"

That may have been true when the platform was first coded, but especially after Yahoo! completely overhauled the platform over the past three years, their platform has been running now for over a decade. If this wasn't intentional, it would have been fixed by now.

Just like patches are issued for videogames nowadays. The difference is, Yahoo! Fantasy Football may be a game, but it is also an ongoing PLATFORM. Videogames after a certain point stop getting patches to fix bugs, so any remaining bugs after the final patch is issued, will be there for eternity.

A platform on the other hand will consistently receive bug-fixes for it's entire existence (think of another popular online game, World of Warcraft - as long as it's still being played online, it will continue to receive patches all the way until the day it shuts down).

So either Yahoo! never patched this "bug" in their Fantasy Football platform, after over a decade, including after the entire platform was overhauled in a massive redesign, or this was the intended functionality all along.

I know which of those two scenarios I believe is the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all know that saying someone "exploited" something is tantamount to calling them a cheater, which is why I'm pointing out the difference.

Not in my opinion. I use the term exploit, because it falls within the legal rules of the game. It's not illegal or against the rules, therefor not cheating in any way. As cock pointed out, you've done nothing wrong, but you(we) have exploited a weakness in the system in a way that I (personally) don't believe it was designed or intended to be used. My goal is to supercede Yahoo's short comings to correct the issue. Not to point fingers, place blame or cry foul. As long as it isn't against the rules, I have no qualms with you continuing to do it, and I likely will do so myself. My goal, is to eliminate the need, desire, temptation, or whatever to continue this process in the game for the FUTURE. Does that make sense? Like I've stated multiple times, this is for the leagues I commish, not this league, so stop being so defensive.

ex·ploit
verb
ikˈsploit/
1. make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource).
2. a software tool designed to take advantage of a flaw in a computer system, typically for malicious purposes such as installing malware.

I don't think anyone uses the term "exploit", in an online game, in a positive light.

See definition #2 for the context.

Also see this:

http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Cheating

Where the word "exploit" is prominent in the very first sentence, used to describe cheating in a major online game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon Gekko and Dislimb are the only ones that haven't checked in yet

Gordon isn't going to check in until the last minute d/t past *cough* "issues" with RW ;) but based on last season it concerns me that Dislimb is still MIA. I just emailed him directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may have been true when the platform was first coded, but especially after Yahoo! completely overhauled the platform over the past three years, their platform has been running now for over a decade. If this wasn't intentional, it would have been fixed by now.

Just like patches are issued for videogames nowadays. The difference is, Yahoo! Fantasy Football may be a game, but it is also an ongoing PLATFORM. Videogames after a certain point stop getting patches to fix bugs, so any remaining bugs after the final patch is issued, will be there for eternity.

A platform on the other hand will consistently receive bug-fixes for it's entire existence (think of another popular online game, World of Warcraft - as long as it's still being played online, it will continue to receive patches all the way until the day it shuts down).

So either Yahoo! never patched this "bug" in their Fantasy Football platform, after over a decade, including after the entire platform was overhauled in a massive redesign, or this was the intended functionality all along.

I know which of those two scenarios I believe is the truth.

I'm not sure why you made a point to call Yahoo Fantasy Football something other than a game ( A PLATFORRRRM!), and then proved your point wrong by citing world of warcraft.

The reality is, it's all software that can be patched/rewritten. Eventually, it will not be patched anymore.

Yahoo has their default (recommended) settings. If you play with custom settings, that doesn't mean Yahoo thinks every single permutation of custom settings that is possible is somehow "fair", "fun" or even intended.

Also, you're using the term bug, but a bug is different from an edge case.

Most games will have patches, but leave it up to the gaming community to make up what rules are optimal for enjoyment of the game and competition. Evo was this past weekend, and they have settings the community agrees to in order to keep things fair as well as competitive. FPS tournaments were often the same way.

MMO's are probably a bad example, since everyone is forced to play by the same ruleset. Due to the complexity of those games, edge cases (along with bugs and other nonsense) are constantly being found and quickly hot patched out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care what your friends on Halo think. I very clearly outlined what I meant by the word, and backed it up with the dictionary. I'm not here to argue semantics with you, I'm not interested in 10 pages of you justifying your actions. You did nothing wrong. My goal for my leagues, is not to debate whether what happened in past years was moral or not, it's to find a way to simply avoid the situation altogether and prevent these possible issues moving forward. That's my job as commissioner, to improve the league to best suit all teams involved. If you have something in mind, feel free to share. If your only goal is to try and make yourself feel better about the way you play, then I assure you it's of no relevance to the question at hand.

As for draft etiquette, I'm pretty sure I broke those rules last year, and I fully intend to break them again this year.

At least until there's a direct rule, or punishment for doing so. I'm more than willing to be 100% transparent about my strategies, and my main goal is explain each decision I make, not each player I pick. No one needs me to tell them why MegaTron is a good player, they need to know why I think he's a better decision than OBJ. I'm fairly positive none of the participators are going to alter their opinions of players, just because of something I say. Except for Too_Bad. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha yeah you have a lot of pressure. Now I won't need to PM you because I will read it in here. The rest of my draft season hinges on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for draft etiquette, I'm pretty sure I broke those rules last year, and I fully intend to break them again this year.

At least until there's a direct rule, or punishment for doing so. I'm more than willing to be 100% transparent about my strategies, and my main goal is explain each decision I make, not each player I pick. No one needs me to tell them why MegaTron is a good player, they need to know why I think he's a better decision than OBJ. I'm fairly positive none of the participators are going to alter their opinions of players, just because of something I say. Except for Too_Bad. B)

The rule is simple - don't mention players until after they've been picked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care what your friends on Halo think. I very clearly outlined what I meant by the word, and backed it up with the dictionary. I'm not here to argue semantics with you, I'm not interested in 10 pages of you justifying your actions. You did nothing wrong. My goal for my leagues, is not to debate whether what happened in past years was moral or not, it's to find a way to simply avoid the situation altogether and prevent these possible issues moving forward. That's my job as commissioner, to improve the league to best suit all teams involved. If you have something in mind, feel free to share. If your only goal is to try and make yourself feel better about the way you play, then I assure you it's of no relevance to the question at hand.

You seem to have gotten off track, and mistaken my replies for something they are not.

They are not a response toward the settings for your personal leagues that you Commish. I couldn't give two ***** about your personal leagues.

They ARE a response to your initial post, in which you propose that EXACT rule change for THIS league:

http://forums.rotoworld.com/index.php?app=forums&module=forums&section=findpost&pid=5578114

I'd also like to propose that all teams be required to roster a full/legal lineup once the season starts. No dropping Kickers and Defenses ... in order to free up roster spots for other positions

I can assure you, my responses were all QUITE "relevant to the question at hand". Since it was a proposed rule change, for this league, by you.

I hear they sell this stuff over-the-counter if you continue having trouble remembering:

Ginkgo-Smart.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule is simple - don't mention players until after they've been picked.

I don't see anything within Yahoo's PLATFORM to prevent it from happening, so I'll continue to exploit it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule is simple - don't mention players until after they've been picked.

I don't see anything within Yahoo's PLATFORM to prevent it from happening, so I'll continue to exploit it. :)

Good luck with that, since our draft is taking place on this forum, and I'm sure I'll throw a flag for people who blatantly flaunt the rules of the draft. We let these incidents slide if it's an accident, but that's simply us being lenient, not encouraging everyone to openly discuss players that have not been drafted.

Seriously though, don't start pulling bull**** like that during the draft though. You're a good manager and we have the draft set up this way for a reason. It's not meant to be the equivalent of an auction draft strategy where you bring up names of players you want to see get drafted by other people, so that the players you want fall to you.

That's the main reason for the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I think as a trade rules refresher, I believe last year we agreed that no trades would be processed until after the draft. I think trade talk is fine to do in the background via messaging while the draft is still in progress, but no trades will actually happen until the draft is 100% complete.

Likewise, because of that, nobody should hold up the draft trying to work out some kind of backdoor deal. Just talk trade about players you've already drafted. You can't trade draft spots or picks, after all.

And remember that no trade exists until you both agree to it simultaneously in public (preferably in our official Trade thread on the league's internal Yahoo! forum). Thus, anything discussed during the draft is only very preliminary, you'll both have to agree to it together, after the draft is over, before it becomes official.

Cuts out all the he-said, she-said, he told me this via email/carrier pigeon/while he was drunk/passed me a note under the bathroom stall with all the trade deets written on a napkin.

If you both can't agree to it in public, there is no trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites