Semi-Keeper League -Draft Set For Friday 9pm PST

[bww78]

Well, the whole point of this league was to put a premium on the best players in the league by limiting roster sizes. It's a league made entirely of NBA starters, which is so different from the other leagues on this forum. That, in my opinion, is what makes this league fun. It's different.

Option one is fine, but I'm not sure it differs greatly from my idea, which was to allow you to "keep" or reserve your rookies for a period of 3 years after they're drafted as a 6th keeper. That it is unfair to those who didn't get a higher draft pick is kind of the whole point. The teams with lower draft picks don't need the rookies, that's why they were better already. But they still have the option available to them.

The only problem I can foresee would be that teams that are perpetually in the lottery will have a problem in about 3 years, when they have three keeper rookies on their teams to go with their 5 normal keepers. That will only leave one spot open on their teams. Maybe that isn't a problem, just something to consider strategically.

If we go with the "you keep your rookie for 3 years" rule, we probably need to also state that if you drop one of your five keepers are any point, your rookie automatically loses its protected status and becomes one of your 5 keepers. Does that make sense?

[writersblock]

I think the idea is a good one, but policing it is going to be hard, especially the extra "if you drop one of your 5 keepers" part. It's going to make things a bit complex...

I'll also throw this out there: This whole thing might be moot if we're going strictly on the "best players in the league" focus you mentioned. If you think your rookie will be a best player (a la Wiggins, Noel, etc.), then you have to sacrifice a top 5 spot for him. Plain and simple. Frankly, there really aren't that many rookies worth holding onto in a league this small, and so with so few rookies worth doing that for, it shouldn't be that big of a deal.

[Breakdown777]

Here's my suggestion:

Draft player rights.

Someone make a google doc spreadsheet for each team.
Each team sheet lists the 5 keepers and owned player rights.
Rights only last a given number of years (2 or 3 IMO), after that point they are one of your 5 keepers or off your team.
These players don't have to be on your 9 man roster, but cannot be added by anyone else.
Policing would not be hard because all you have to do is check the google doc to see if some young guy who started blowing up is owned or not.

*the next problem arises from constant add/drop of the players only you have the rights too...I'm not sure how to solve this but if I'm spit-balling we could
A- once added/on your roster for the year (barring injury)
B- weekly lineups
C- adopting some sort of d-league rule where players dropped cannot be re-added for a given timeframe (this requires too much policing, but I'm just brainstorming here so don't get too upset )
D- more suggestions appreciated

assuming no trades took place, the most "player rights" players you would have is 6 (under my 3 year suggestion).
We could even cap it at something like 8 total before you have to release someone, which would prevent stocking up on young talent (OR keep it unlimited and This would make tanking a viable strategy; trade for a bunch of picks, and clean house in a few years.)

I know this drums up a lot of the issues with the IR list we've had in the past, but if we can all be honest and take the time to search a google doc (not that difficult), it shouldn't be an issue...plus we can always punish cheaters/mistakes by taking away draft picks.

[sabonis]

I came up with a "deeper league" suggestion because right now the league is really, extremely shallow. there are literally 50 serviceable players on the waiver wire.

[fraanciiscoo]

and suddenly I write something and the forum comes alive. What's new?

I think that the worst fantastic teams have not had the idea to protect their assets and most important now everyone realizes we have 50 serviceable players on the waiver wire.

No wonder i won this last year.

ok you want ideas to fix what´s is wrong with this list here it goes.

A) add a two new bench spot
A.1 ) we now would have 11 players roster
A.2) why 2 ? simple we have 1 1st and 1 2nd and this will add more value to the draft cause it might be fun if you are rebuilding to get other #1st
A.3) None of the two new bench spot is obliged to be filled by rookies to give the option to win for now and to rebuild


B) you have the draft right to the player for 2 year ( the year you draft him + the next year he can go w/ our rookie protection )
B.1) of course the only option to protect is : he got to be on your 11 man roster if you droop him you lose the protection and he can be picked

C) if we do A) and B) we will have next year 5 keepers+ 2 rookie protections and 11 players roster pg,sg,g, sf,pf,f c, b,b,b,b

D) I would do the action draft for sure like it is but I would add 1 important twist - bird rights on every player
Imaging Hibbert is droop by me to the action draft and he got a 4$ bid the previous owner ( in this case me ) got the option to match and if the player is matched he can keep him
D.1) how fun could this be ? like in the real nba you would need to overpay players and you should know how important money is in this league

E) add two new gms NEXT season
E.1) this two new gm would had #1 and #2 pick in the draft ( we would made a lotto between the two of them)
E.2) this season the rookie draft is on his way + we had some **** teams remember that guy who only drafted utha guys ? and its unfair to someone that team + no draft benefits

what you think about this

[sabonis]

this is my first ever keeper league but I think we should increase rosters to 13, with 14 teams. and we should also keep 7 players. so that there will be merit to tanking and rebuilding. right now with almost every player serviceable, it's just plain stupid to tank.

I might be totally wrong about this but this seems very reasonable to me.

[bww78]

I'm guessing none of you guys play fantasy football.

[insfo]

this is my first ever keeper league but I think we should increase rosters to 13, with 14 teams. and we should also keep 7 players. so that there will be merit to tanking and rebuilding. right now with almost every player serviceable, it's just plain stupid to tank.

I might be totally wrong about this but this seems very reasonable to me.

Isn't that a good thing? This way there is no team that is out of it from the start of the season and all teams have a chance of building a contender through the draft.

[sabonis]

this is my first ever keeper league but I think we should increase rosters to 13, with 14 teams. and we should also keep 7 players. so that there will be merit to tanking and rebuilding. right now with almost every player serviceable, it's just plain stupid to tank.

I might be totally wrong about this but this seems very reasonable to me.

Isn't that a good thing? This way there is no team that is out of it from the start of the season and all teams have a chance of building a contender through the draft.

what's the point of running a keeper league then? I don't see the point. you have to think long term. young players should be valued significantly more etc. which isn't true for our league.

[OldNo7]

If its a league for best of the best players, you need to make tough calls. If you think your rookie will be one of the top players, you have to keep him at the expense of another vet then draft/action well. I think this needs to stay at 5 tops.

[jfrost]

Can someone email Tiny Kukoc to let him know it is his pick?

[sabonis]

If its a league for best of the best players, you need to make tough calls. If you think your rookie will be one of the top players, you have to keep him at the expense of another vet then draft/action well. I think this needs to stay at 5 tops.

that's exactly our problem right now. There is no tough call in this league. Unless you picked in the top 5 or so, it's most likely better to let go of your rookie and pick a FA, just because the pool is soooooo deep. Any veteran player is better than 90% of the rookies. Even in the next 3 years, you can always find a top 100 veteran instead of the rookie you let go this year...
so what's the point?

in fact the more I think about it the more likely I might opt out of the league if we do not narrow the FA pool significantly.

[bww78]

Tiny Kukoc would like to draft Nikola Mirotic.

I'm inclined to let him unless he has ever been available to pick on Yahoo. Does anyone know?

[bww78]

If its a league for best of the best players, you need to make tough calls. If you think your rookie will be one of the top players, you have to keep him at the expense of another vet then draft/action well. I think this needs to stay at 5 tops.

that's exactly our problem right now. There is no tough call in this league. Unless you picked in the top 5 or so, it's most likely better to let go of your rookie and pick a FA, just because the pool is soooooo deep. Any veteran player is better than 90% of the rookies. Even in the next 3 years, you can always find a top 100 veteran instead of the rookie you let go this year...
so what's the point?

in fact the more I think about it the more likely I might opt out of the league if we do not narrow the FA pool significantly.

I'm confused with this post, for a number of reasons.

First, you knew the rules going in, so I'm not sure why any of this seems like a surprise to you now.

Second, what do you mean narrowing the FA pool? Do you mean increasing roster sizes? To what end? Just so your rookies are more valuable? I'm not sure I understand the point here.

Third, we keep talking about the FA pool, and the number of quality guys there, while at the same time we stop to reflect on what "value" really means in a league like this. You're comparing it to the FFL. This is not the FFL. Just because a player has value in a league with 20 managers and 13 players each, doesn't mean he has value in a league of 12 managers with 9 teams each. The best 108 players in the league will be on our teams. Period. The players beneath those 108 players, by definition, do not have value in this league. Even if they have value in the FFL, the NBA, or any other fantasy league in which you might participate.

The only issue, I can see, is the concern that our rookies may not have any value because there isn't enough depth. That is a fair point. I can see that there won't be a ton of rookies in our top 108 players. But I don't understand the concern with keepers. The whole point is that you have to decide what is more important to your team next year. Do you keep a rookie who isn't a top 50 player now, but who likely will be at some point in the near future, or do you ditch him and hold on to your vets? That is EXACTLY the point of this league. It adds a whole new element of strategy regarding short term versus long term strategy.

This is the point that Fran is missing. He thinks it's obvious that everyone should play to win today because the FA pool has players available better than our rookies. Ok, that works for this year, and probably next year, but then the tables turn. What happens to his team with CP3 gets hurt and Ariza falls off the map? The team that stocked up on, and protected, young up and coming players will be stacked, and he will have a very difficult time rebuilding. He's playing to win now, and only now. If you take the long term approach, you can play to win tomorrow, and stay competitive for a very long period of time. The approach that says rookies are worthless is extremely short sided. But if that's your strategy, go for it. But don't say the league is broken just because you don't understand the long term strategy.

I'm inclined to add a couple of roster spots, pushing our teams to 11 players, which pushes our total players to 132. You are welcome to play your rookies, keep them, or drop them. It is totally up to you. The point of the rookie draft is to award those teams that stunk so they can rebuild. It wasn't to help playoff teams restock every year.

The point of the auction is to allow a shift in competitive balance more immediately. It allows teams to re aggregate talent immediately, so as to increase the speed of the rebuilding process. The rookie draft is the long term tool for rebuilding teams. Make sense? It also serves to replicate the NBA process somewhat. You get to draft rookies, and you get to buy FA's. Make sense?

The other option is to have an "inactive list" of players you can stash, like Break suggested. You can draft a player, or sign a player for that matter, and leave him on your inactive list for the year. He will be protected there for a certain number of years, on a google spreadsheet. That way, you can draft your rookie and hold on to him for 3 years or so, without him taking up a roster spot.

Those are the two options that make sense in my opinion. Thoughts?

[jfrost]

Tiny Kukoc would like to draft Nikola Mirotic.

I'm inclined to let him unless he has ever been available to pick on Yahoo. Does anyone know?

According to last seasons draft thread, Nikola Mirotic has never been drafted:
viewtopic.php?f=336&t=1271141

[bww78]

Tiny Kukoc would like to draft Nikola Mirotic.

I'm inclined to let him unless he has ever been available to pick on Yahoo. Does anyone know?

According to last seasons draft thread, Nikola Mirotic has never been drafted:
viewtopic.php?f=336&t=1271141

But was he available to be picked up as a FA on Yahoo?

[jfrost]

Not sure about Mirotic availability on Yahoo last year.

As for rules, why don't we add two roster spots and add one addition rookie keeper. This way we have additional roster spots to allow for current year rookies that are drafted, and one addition keeper which would have to be used on a rookie from the previous draft (starting at the end of this season). At the end of the season, if you have no rookies on your roster, you forfit the rookie keeper spot.

No tracking required, easy.

We keep 7 starters, and now have 4 reserves

PG
SG
G
SF
PF
F/C - changed from F
C
B
B
B
B

Thoughts?

[sabonis]

I'm confused with this post, for a number of reasons.

First, you knew the rules going in, so I'm not sure why any of this seems like a surprise to you now.

sorry if you misunderstood, I'm not leaving the league, at least not this year. that's for sure.
I actually didn't know the rules or maybe just glanced through them, or maybe did not care that much at the time. But then later I was "wtf?" when I realized the total number of players on our teams was only 100. and I was too lazy to propose changes. Now when I read someone stating the very thing I was thinking, I just wanted to back them up about it because it felt right.

I will respond to your other points when I'm not feeling too lazy =)

[Breakdown777]

Not sure about Mirotic availability on Yahoo last year.

As for rules, why don't we add two roster spots and add one addition rookie keeper. This way we have additional roster spots to allow for current year rookies that are drafted, and one addition keeper which would have to be used on a rookie from the previous draft (starting at the end of this season). At the end of the season, if you have no rookies on your roster, you forfit the rookie keeper spot.

No tracking required, easy.

We keep 7 starters, and now have 4 reserves

PG
SG
G
SF
PF
F/C - changed from F
C
B
B
B
B

Thoughts?

Unless I'm missing something, this only gives you one year to decide if your rookie is worth holding onto. As many young players don't breakout (in top 100 fantasy terms) until their 2nd or 3rd season, I feel like the choice becomes too easy.
Win now - dont risk keeping your rookie
Win later - stock up on rookies, but with only one keeper rookie slot?

Keeping your rookies and hoping they get good is a big part of the fun in a league like this, but should it be taking away the ability to win the league?

[jfrost]

Not sure about Mirotic availability on Yahoo last year.

As for rules, why don't we add two roster spots and add one addition rookie keeper. This way we have additional roster spots to allow for current year rookies that are drafted, and one addition keeper which would have to be used on a rookie from the previous draft (starting at the end of this season). At the end of the season, if you have no rookies on your roster, you forfit the rookie keeper spot.

No tracking required, easy.

We keep 7 starters, and now have 4 reserves

PG
SG
G
SF
PF
F/C - changed from F
C
B
B
B
B

Thoughts?

Unless I'm missing something, this only gives you one year to decide if your rookie is worth holding onto. As many young players don't breakout (in top 100 fantasy terms) until their 2nd or 3rd season, I feel like the choice becomes too easy.
Win now - dont risk keeping your rookie
Win later - stock up on rookies, but with only one keeper rookie slot?

Keeping your rookies and hoping they get good is a big part of the fun in a league like this, but should it be taking away the ability to win the league?

How about if we make the 6th (rookie) keeper up to 3 years in the league rather than just 1st year players?