Sign in to follow this  
MJ10162

Feedback on Waiver Wire threads

Recommended Posts

There should obviously be some sort of threshold for ownership percentage in this thread, that's pretty standard for waiver wire threads and discussions across the entirety of the internet. Me touting Jordan Howard doesn't do anybody any good. 50% ownership is standard for those other resources. If you're touting players that are owned in most leagues then this thread becomes useless.

Edited by MJ10162
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Moved from waiver thread to feedback forum so as not to derail the former.]

 

There has never (as far as I'm aware) been a firm threshold for touts.  Here is the guidance that has been posted to previous waiver threads:

 

Quote

As for your touts, there are no specifics - but as a guide, as we're talking the WW, feel free to look at the CBS/Yahoo/ESPN ownership rates - it will give a great idea if a guy is really a WW tout or not. As the WW varies, if you have deep league touts, feel free to post - qualifying them for deep leagues has helped in the past. Also, you can stipulate if you think it's a great 1-week play, a streamer, a great long-term play, or whatever...

 

Percent owned stats are calculated across "standard" provider leagues, which tend to skew toward whatever the platform's default settings are.  An arbitrary threshold leaves out people who might be helped by suggestions that are above that threshold but still available in a nontrivial number of leagues.  We've never really had a problem with people touting players who are universally owned, so a firm threshold is a solution in search of a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tonycpsu said:

Percent owned stats are calculated across "standard" provider leagues, which tend to skew toward whatever the platform's default settings are.  An arbitrary threshold leaves out people who might be helped by suggestions that are above that threshold but still available in a nontrivial number of leagues.  We've never really had a problem with people touting players who are universally owned, so a firm threshold is a solution in search of a problem.

An arbitrary threshold is still a reasonable guideline for who to tout. I've been complaining about nonsensical touts like George Kittle for a few weeks now, and I wasn't the only one annoyed by it today.

 

The standard provider leagues don't skew much at all, they vary from standard to PPR, which are both extremely commonplace leagues and don't really affect any position's ownership rates outside of RBs.

 

The waiver thread is intended to help people, right? You'll notice that the most-liked posts in a lot of these threads (besides trolling, gifs and other nonsense that shouldn't be there in the first place) are people's lists of things that they identify ahead of time as deep-league adds. People certainly don't need to be told to pick up Dalvin Cook if some idiot drops him. That's especially clear when it appears that the thread wants suggestions that are even more esoteric than the ones they're already getting.

 

And obviously, anything that doesn't contain a tout (or in my opinion, even a single reply stating that a guy like, say, Nick Vannett, isn't a standard league tout and is more of a deep leaguer, without some long deraily discussion resulting) should be deleted. Same goes for the injury thread. If you're not posting injuries then your posts belong, I don't need that thread bumped any time people want to argue about whether an injury was or wasn't non-contact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MJ10162 said:

The waiver thread is intended to help people, right?

 

Yes, which is why we do not impose a strict threshold.  A 70% owned player is, by definition, going to be available in a fair number of leagues that people play in -- some of whom will be visitors to this site.  Maybe that player was a deep league flier in week N, became a viable "standard" league add after a big game in week N+1, and now it's week N+2, so some people will be hearing about the player for the third week in a row and the player isn't available in any of their leagues.  So what?  The flip side is that some people will be hearing about them for the first time, because not everyone who visits follows the weekly waiver thread religiously, and shallow leaguers probably didn't have any use for the guy in week N when he was only 25% owned or whatever, but they do now.  The minute we set the threshold to 50% to make your experience better, we're turning off another group of people who want to know about the 60% owned guys.

 

Our position (I talked about this with the staff earlier) is that people play in enough different formats and league depths that a threshold doesn't make sense.  The downside of a little bit of duplication of guys who you already added a week or two ago is less than the downside of people not getting information that helps them because someone else deemed their league not worthy of inclusion.  If someone's trolling and touting a 95% owned player, we'll remove it.  Otherwise, just skip past the touts that don't apply to you.

 

1 hour ago, MJ10162 said:

And obviously, anything that doesn't contain a tout (or in my opinion, even a single reply stating that a guy like, say, Nick Vannett, isn't a standard league tout and is more of a deep leaguer, without some long deraily discussion resulting) should be deleted. Same goes for the injury thread. If you're not posting injuries then your posts belong, I don't need that thread bumped any time people want to argue about whether an injury was or wasn't non-contact.

 

We generally do kill long derails, but some limited discussion of touts has always been allowed.  These are judgement calls, but if you think a particular topic is derailing the thread, feel free to report it to us.  Some users tried to invent a similar "touts only" rule over in the MiLB forum for the call-up watch thread, but that's not how we do things here.  This is a discussion forum.  There are many places you can sign up for alerts when guys are called up, or emails with the best waiver picks for the week.  We do heavily moderate the waiver thread -- some 40% of posts in this week's thread have been deleted so far -- but we're not going to delete anything that's not a tout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People aren't going to get information if the thread is cluttered with things that aren't of use to anybody, which is exactly why I brought up the injury thread. That thread could be useful, but it ends up on a 5th or 6th page every week. There aren't 100+ injuries and injury updates every week. If those posts are useless to the majority of posters, they shouldn't be in there. Thankfully the waiver thread isn't that bad (could very easily be improved), but the injury threads are completely useless and I don't even visit them anymore. It's quality control.

 

I don't think your 60% owned example makes sense when it's obvious, as I pointed out in my prior post, that that's not the content this site demands in general. The opposite is true, they want more deep league insight. The issue isn't duplication either, it's people saying things like "George Kittle was dropped in my league, pick him up where he's available". He's 88% owned and he was drafted in most leagues. Those posts are worthless. Kittle was the issue earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MJ10162 said:

People aren't going to get information if the thread is cluttered with things that aren't of use to anybody, which is exactly why I brought up the injury thread. That thread could be useful, but it ends up on a 5th or 6th page every week. There aren't 100+ injuries and injury updates every week. If those posts are useless to the majority of posters, they shouldn't be in there.

 

How often are you reporting these posts that are derailing the thread?  Sundays are an insanely busy time for the staff, and that's when most of the injury thread chatter is happening.  We can't get to everything without some help from the user base helping us out with reports.

 

7 hours ago, MJ10162 said:

It's quality control.

 

Yeah, and we acknowledge that quality control has been a problem in football this year, and not just in that thread.  We came into this football season woefully understaffed.  We just added two mods and are still looking to add some manpower, but until we replace what we've lost, things are going to be a little rough.  We're doing what we can with the limited volunteer resources we have.

 

7 hours ago, MJ10162 said:

 

I don't think your 60% owned example makes sense when it's obvious, as I pointed out in my prior post, that that's not the content this site demands in general. The opposite is true, they want more deep league insight. 


You pointed it out without any compelling data or logical argument why we should accept it as fact.  Using "likes" as a proxy for any sort of reliable data as to what's valuable to most users is silly due to sampling bias.  Shallow / casual leaguers may "like" a post about a deep league flier with potential even though it doesn't apply to them.  Meanwhile, a post that's never made can't be "liked", and who knows how many people don't post their touts because of the constant flood of "4 team league?" and "that guy was picked up in competitive leagues weeks ago" posts.

 

We hear from plenty of people who play in shallower / more casual / differently-configured leagues.  Today's "casual" player could be tomorrow's deep competitive league player, and we want them to feel welcome to discuss touts that apply to them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this