Detroit Basketball Fantasy League - 2017

[coordinator0]

I know there's a Yahoo group on here, but I was wondering if there was enough interest from those who don't play there (or even those that do!) to get an ESPN league together. It would be nice to get at least 10 teams to play, any less and it's too easy to get good players in my opinion.

It would probably be something fairly basic with general scoring categories and positions although I'm open for discussion on anything. Head to head each category style so the results at the end of the week are something like 7-2, 6-3, etc. and you accumulate those points each week for an overall record at the end of the regular season. PTS, RBS, AST, BLK, STL, 3PM, FG%, FT%, and TO (negative) as the categories. 13 roster spots, 10 starters being PG, SG, SF, PF, C, G, F, UTIL, UTIL, and UTIL. 3 BEN spots, no IR.

If there are enough who want to play I'll get the league setup fairly quickly and invites sent out so we can decide on a draft type and date.

[DBC10]

I'd be down my man. I was on the Yahoo league last year, but towards the middle of the season, I got tired of adjusting my lineups and it was a basically a scoring league which kind of took the fun out.

[coordinator0]

I'd be down my man. I was on the Yahoo league last year, but towards the middle of the season, I got tired of adjusting my lineups and it was a basically a scoring league which kind of took the fun out.

You mean like rotisserie scoring or season total points? Yeah, I like weekly results myself.

Doesn't seem to be a whole lot of interest so far. Something else to consider if we get this going is doing starting lineups like the daily fantasy site does. Not scoring, but just the positions. It's pretty much the same as the format I mentioned above but instead of three UTIL spots there's only one. So:

PG vs PG
SG SG
SF SF
PF PF
C C
G G
F F
UTIL UTIL
UTIL
UTIL

I kind of like the second one better, but would expand the bench slots from three to five so the rosters stick at thirteen.

Definitely thinking about doing free agent auction waivers instead of standard ones too. Those tend to work better for fantasy basketball in my experience.

[BadMofoPimp]

I did well last year, but liked the type of league from the year before. Anyways, I am down for another run at it.

[Han Solo]

I'm interested.

[The Penguin]

I'll play, I much prefer ESPN's interface to Yahoo's and also prefer a weekly "each cat" format compared to a points league like we did last year.

[DBC10]

I'd be down my man. I was on the Yahoo league last year, but towards the middle of the season, I got tired of adjusting my lineups and it was a basically a scoring league which kind of took the fun out.

You mean like rotisserie scoring or season total points? Yeah, I like weekly results myself.

Doesn't seem to be a whole lot of interest so far. Something else to consider if we get this going is doing starting lineups like the daily fantasy site does. Not scoring, but just the positions. It's pretty much the same as the format I mentioned above but instead of three UTIL spots there's only one. So:

PG vs PG
SG SG
SF SF
PF PF
C C
G G
F F
UTIL UTIL
UTIL
UTIL

I kind of like the second one better, but would expand the bench slots from three to five so the rosters stick at thirteen.

Definitely thinking about doing free agent auction waivers instead of standard ones too. Those tend to work better for fantasy basketball in my experience.

Yeah, season total points.

I like the format, if there's interest I'd be down.

[Pistons888]

I'm in.

[The Penguin]

I'd be down my man. I was on the Yahoo league last year, but towards the middle of the season, I got tired of adjusting my lineups and it was a basically a scoring league which kind of took the fun out.

You mean like rotisserie scoring or season total points? Yeah, I like weekly results myself.

Doesn't seem to be a whole lot of interest so far. Something else to consider if we get this going is doing starting lineups like the daily fantasy site does. Not scoring, but just the positions. It's pretty much the same as the format I mentioned above but instead of three UTIL spots there's only one. So:

PG vs PG
SG SG
SF SF
PF PF
C C
G G
F F
UTIL UTIL
UTIL
UTIL

I kind of like the second one better, but would expand the bench slots from three to five so the rosters stick at thirteen.

Definitely thinking about doing free agent auction waivers instead of standard ones too. Those tend to work better for fantasy basketball in my experience.

Just my $.02, but I run a long time fantasy league and we've had it set up like this:

PG
SG
SF
PF
C
G
F
G/F
F/C

5 bench spots
1 IR spot

The logic we used when setting it up was 5 "starters" + 4 "Rotation" guys is typically how deep a real team goes with their rotation, plus some guys you leave on the bench as well as an "inactive" to get to 15 roster spots, the max roster size of a NBA team.

[coordinator0]

Just my $.02, but I run a long time fantasy league and we've had it set up like this:

PG
SG
SF
PF
C
G
F
G/F
F/C

5 bench spots
1 IR spot

The logic we used when setting it up was 5 "starters" + 4 "Rotation" guys is typically how deep a real team goes with their rotation, plus some guys you leave on the bench as well as an "inactive" to get to 15 roster spots, the max roster size of a NBA team.

That's not bad. I've been in leagues recently where the starting lineups consisted of the standard 10 I mentioned above and also a 7-man configuration that went G - G - F - F - C - C - UTIL with 6 bench slots. The two center spot ended up being a pain and those who had two decent guys who produced actual center stats dominated the league.

I think the sweet spot is at 8 or 9 starters. Less reliance on total games/minutes played than with 10 starters, and less reliance on having top end players with 7 (or fewer) starters. Like I said before I'm open for discussion on anything and your setup fits the ideal I'm thinking of.

I do really like the scoring categories I outlined above though. Those 9 seem pretty solid.

[BadMofoPimp]

Well, there needs to be a role call as it is getting close to season start for a long draft to go through unless we do draft all in one night or day.

[coordinator0]

Well, there needs to be a role call as it is getting close to season start for a long draft to go through unless we do draft all in one night or day.

Do you guys do the draft on the forum? I didn't know that. Was thinking of a more standard online draft through the ESPN site/app. Snake or auction, doesn't matter much to me. Much faster and people only have to commit around an hour of their time instead of checking back and forth all day or over days.

This is who we have so far:

coordinator0
DBC10
BadMofoPimp
Han Solo
The Penguin
Pistons888

Still need a few more to get things going.

[BadMofoPimp]

Well, there needs to be a role call as it is getting close to season start for a long draft to go through unless we do draft all in one night or day.

Do you guys do the draft on the forum? I didn't know that. Was thinking of a more standard online draft through the ESPN site/app. Snake or auction, doesn't matter much to me. Much faster and people only have to commit around an hour of their time instead of checking back and forth all day or over days.

This is who we have so far:

coordinator0
DBC10
BadMofoPimp
Han Solo
The Penguin
Pistons888

Still need a few more to get things going.

I know enough about the players I could do a draft with 5-10 minutes time limit. Does take a couple hours out of everyones day to participate, but does make things go by faster than having to check in every 3-6 hours to see if you are up or not.

[coordinator0]

I know enough about the players I could do a draft with 5-10 minutes time limit. Does take a couple hours out of everyones day to participate, but does make things go by faster than having to check in every 3-6 hours to see if you are up or not.

How long do they usually take? I've never participated in one like that for an actual fantasy league before. I'm definitely not opposed to it, just curious. Wouldn't be a problem on my end to do an offline draft and assign players to teams when we're done/as we're doing it. If we do end up going this route then time is a problem.

[RexRyan]

If someone confirms that I only have to change my roster once a week, I'm in. The daily ones are too much of a hassle.

[Pharaoh]

I believe having 2 C spots in your starting line up forces people to be more strategic with their draft.

Especially when so many guys are available at multiple positions.

Look at Yahoo: Harden, PG13 & Giannis are available at 3 positions

And most PFs are available at C.

If you roll with 1 C it's too easy to end up with a great line up that simply tanks blocks

[coordinator0]

If someone confirms that I only have to change my roster once a week, I'm in. The daily ones are too much of a hassle.

Lineups change daily. Weekly is hard to do when matching up against other teams. That's usually only for rotisserie and total points leagues.

I believe having 2 C spots in your starting line up forces people to be more strategic with their draft.

Especially when so many guys are available at multiple positions.

Look at Yahoo: Harden, PG13 & Giannis are available at 3 positions

And most PFs are available at C.

If you roll with 1 C it's too easy to end up with a great line up that simply tanks blocks

I was in an active league last season that featured two centers in the starting lineups. There just aren't enough guys who put up quality center stats to go around. Lots of players with power forward and center eligibility, but many of them don't put up big rebound or block numbers. Teams that do get two of those guys dominate those categories. I don't think it's a case of being more strategic, just scooping up a couple of "real" centers before they're gone.

[RexRyan]

If someone confirms that I only have to change my roster once a week, I'm in. The daily ones are too much of a hassle.

Lineups change daily. Weekly is hard to do when matching up against other teams. That's usually only for rotisserie and total points leagues.

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't you basically move the players who are playing into the lineup every day?

[Pharaoh]

If someone confirms that I only have to change my roster once a week, I'm in. The daily ones are too much of a hassle.

Lineups change daily. Weekly is hard to do when matching up against other teams. That's usually only for rotisserie and total points leagues.

I believe having 2 C spots in your starting line up forces people to be more strategic with their draft.

Especially when so many guys are available at multiple positions.

Look at Yahoo: Harden, PG13 & Giannis are available at 3 positions

And most PFs are available at C.

If you roll with 1 C it's too easy to end up with a great line up that simply tanks blocks

I was in an active league last season that featured two centers in the starting lineups. There just aren't enough guys who put up quality center stats to go around. Lots of players with power forward and center eligibility, but many of them don't put up big rebound or block numbers. Teams that do get two of those guys dominate those categories. I don't think it's a case of being more strategic, just scooping up a couple of "real" centers before they're gone.

Which forces people to be more strategic when they draft!

If there's not enough top flight bigs and PGs to go around (& there's not) then some people in each league are gonna have to be smarter than the average player.

Tanking assists or blocks or FG% or boards...because even in a 10 team league there's really not enough quality bigs or PGs

That's what makes the league interesting IMO

If you have just 1 C you're likely to find half the teams are very similar

[coordinator0]

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't you basically move the players who are playing into the lineup every day?

Yes, that's one way of doing it. ESPN allows you to set your lineups as far ahead as you want though so you don't have to check it every day if you don't want to. Just set your lineups for a week or two ahead and check in every once in awhile. I'm not sure what you're getting at otherwise.

Which forces people to be more strategic when they draft!

If there's not enough top flight bigs and PGs to go around (& there's not) then some people in each league are gonna have to be smarter than the average player.

Tanking assists or blocks or FG% or boards...because even in a 10 team league there's really not enough quality bigs or PGs

That's what makes the league interesting IMO

If you have just 1 C you're likely to find half the teams are very similar

I've played in active, 10-12 team leagues with one designated center spot for years and we never had the problem you're trying to illustrate. It was more imbalanced last season going with the format I described before. Point guards are far, far more plentiful than centers who put up the "real" center stats that are valuable for fantasy.

I get what you're saying but that's also why I like at least one utility spot. Lets you build a team how you want it without being forced to do it one way or the other. Some can draft a roster with two centers starting, and those that miss out on them aren't screwed and can build a competitive team another way.