ImageImageImage

Dynasty League

Moderators: bwgood77, Qwigglez, lilfishi22, Kerrsed

User avatar
TASTIC
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,145
And1: 2,208
Joined: May 17, 2004
Location: New Zealand
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#681 » by TASTIC » Tue Sep 24, 2019 7:26 pm

MathiasPW wrote:
TASTIC wrote:
MathiasPW wrote:
I understand that, but that's why the draft is optional for last years' new managers.

It's hard to argue that this years' new teams managers are being penalized when it wasn't them who actually played last season. They are getting a blank canvas and a "random" draft spot, so it shouldn't really matter how the previous owner performed.


Agree with keeping them in their draft slots as is.

But they’re choosing to take over a team? Treat it like the real NBA, there are so few openings that (the majority) of GM candidates take the first open job.

I’m really opposed to letting anyone other than first time managers the chance to basically start over. Goes against the whole point of having a dynasty league if they’re just redrafting in their second year? My team for example - 2yr ago I was rolling with All NBA level Isiah Thomas and Boogie, now look where they both are. Also drafted well getting Sexton then dealing he and Griffin for Wall - then what happened to him? Point is, make trades and pick a route of either competing or compiling, don’t just sit on your thumbs for a season. There are enough active and knowledgeable fantasy players in here to improve your team and theirs if need be, but not through a redraft.

Also don’t like the reduction of keepers from 7/8 to 4. Why should a really good team with a core 4-5 be penalised for either nailing a late pick or grabbing 1-2 guys off the scrap heap? That’s what the warriors did with Draymond and the rest of the NBA shouldn’t penalise that, they should try and replicate it. It’s not like a top team is signing KD, they’re just keeping an investment they made during the season.

Sorry to rant but the more new tweaks we make the more difficult this will become in future years to keep consistent. This includes my own suggested tweaks which were mainly included if people got bored with the current format and more and more posters wanted to join.

This is a good, fun and competitive league with active and smart managers for the most part - keep that as the core of the league and let’s not make new rules just because some of the new managers don’t like the squad they inherited. What happens next season if they don’t like their team again and they just go back in the pool? I’ve been in dynasty leagues for 15yr in some cases and have never heard of a current manager just redrafting, that’s not a keeper league that’s a new redraft...


Jokes aside, I get (parts of) your argument. I agree most of our managers actually make very few adjustments to their teams and sit on their thumbs too much. I do not agree so much to the "it's been always done this way" types of arguments, though.

I am trying to find solutions that keep managers motivated and active. A league that has 2 or 3 managers leaving every season is troublesome.

The PARTIAL, KEEPERS ONLY re-draft is just to level the field among new managers, who've had no input in their teams other than saying "I want to play". This is very different from your situation, which is 100% self-inflicted (with a great lot of bad luck included).

Because it seems as a fair idea to be done with the new managers, I thought it could be expanded VOLUNTARILY to less-new managers since they didn't have the chance to do so when they came in, and would participate only this one time. The pool and redraft rule would continue to exist ONLY for new managers for future seasons, if more than one team changes hands, again.

This engages new managers more as they have input on their team build from day 1. It should not affect current managers that much, as you're only moving existing pieces around, much like trades would do, and none of those pieces are in your team.

Anyway, I believe the pool and redraft for new managers is pretty much a consensus. The whole point is if we do want to let bigfoot (and wheezy, if he feels like it) join, as well. This also depends if we are able to find a new manager for our 2nd vacant team. If we don't, sunskerr takes over one, we don't do any pooling, we reduce the league to 15 players, and the extinct team's players are up for grabs under normal draft rules.

But someone who owned a team for an entire season has had enough time to draft and trade who they want, or at least make in-rows into acquiring pieces.

If this was the second season of the league and not the fourth, would we give a current owner the chance to re-draft their entire team for this upcoming season because we had 2-3 new managers coming in? We wouldn't. A year is enough time to make changes. Look at my crap squad - at the very start of last season my team was (crap):

Sexton
Osman
Willie friggin Hernangomez
James WTF Ennis
Boogie
Kyle Anderson
Rozier
Blake G
JAllen
Collins
DeRozan
McCollum

As of now, only FOUR of those guys are on my roster, for better or worse moves on my part. If you've had your team for a year and don't like it, make moves.

Absolutely no problem with rookie managers coming in and drafting new squads, but really opposed to this other stuff...Sorry if that makes me the old guy on the porch! :lol:
Image
User avatar
MathiasPW
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 2,644
Joined: Jan 02, 2010
Location: Brazil
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#682 » by MathiasPW » Tue Sep 24, 2019 7:34 pm

TASTIC wrote:
MathiasPW wrote:
TASTIC wrote:
Agree with keeping them in their draft slots as is.

But they’re choosing to take over a team? Treat it like the real NBA, there are so few openings that (the majority) of GM candidates take the first open job.

I’m really opposed to letting anyone other than first time managers the chance to basically start over. Goes against the whole point of having a dynasty league if they’re just redrafting in their second year? My team for example - 2yr ago I was rolling with All NBA level Isiah Thomas and Boogie, now look where they both are. Also drafted well getting Sexton then dealing he and Griffin for Wall - then what happened to him? Point is, make trades and pick a route of either competing or compiling, don’t just sit on your thumbs for a season. There are enough active and knowledgeable fantasy players in here to improve your team and theirs if need be, but not through a redraft.

Also don’t like the reduction of keepers from 7/8 to 4. Why should a really good team with a core 4-5 be penalised for either nailing a late pick or grabbing 1-2 guys off the scrap heap? That’s what the warriors did with Draymond and the rest of the NBA shouldn’t penalise that, they should try and replicate it. It’s not like a top team is signing KD, they’re just keeping an investment they made during the season.

Sorry to rant but the more new tweaks we make the more difficult this will become in future years to keep consistent. This includes my own suggested tweaks which were mainly included if people got bored with the current format and more and more posters wanted to join.

This is a good, fun and competitive league with active and smart managers for the most part - keep that as the core of the league and let’s not make new rules just because some of the new managers don’t like the squad they inherited. What happens next season if they don’t like their team again and they just go back in the pool? I’ve been in dynasty leagues for 15yr in some cases and have never heard of a current manager just redrafting, that’s not a keeper league that’s a new redraft...


Jokes aside, I get (parts of) your argument. I agree most of our managers actually make very few adjustments to their teams and sit on their thumbs too much. I do not agree so much to the "it's been always done this way" types of arguments, though.

I am trying to find solutions that keep managers motivated and active. A league that has 2 or 3 managers leaving every season is troublesome.

The PARTIAL, KEEPERS ONLY re-draft is just to level the field among new managers, who've had no input in their teams other than saying "I want to play". This is very different from your situation, which is 100% self-inflicted (with a great lot of bad luck included).

Because it seems as a fair idea to be done with the new managers, I thought it could be expanded VOLUNTARILY to less-new managers since they didn't have the chance to do so when they came in, and would participate only this one time. The pool and redraft rule would continue to exist ONLY for new managers for future seasons, if more than one team changes hands, again.

This engages new managers more as they have input on their team build from day 1. It should not affect current managers that much, as you're only moving existing pieces around, much like trades would do, and none of those pieces are in your team.

Anyway, I believe the pool and redraft for new managers is pretty much a consensus. The whole point is if we do want to let bigfoot (and wheezy, if he feels like it) join, as well. This also depends if we are able to find a new manager for our 2nd vacant team. If we don't, sunskerr takes over one, we don't do any pooling, we reduce the league to 15 players, and the extinct team's players are up for grabs under normal draft rules.

But someone who owned a team for an entire season has had enough time to draft and trade who they want, or at least make in-rows into acquiring pieces.

If this was the second season of the league and not the fourth, would we give a current owner the chance to re-draft their entire team for this upcoming season because we had 2-3 new managers coming in? We wouldn't. A year is enough time to make changes. Look at my crap squad - at the very start of last season my team was (crap):

Sexton
Osman
Willie friggin Hernangomez
James WTF Ennis
Boogie
Kyle Anderson
Rozier
Blake G
JAllen
Collins
DeRozan
McCollum

As of now, only FOUR of those guys are on my roster, for better or worse moves on my part. If you've had your team for a year and don't like it, make moves.

Absolutely no problem with rookie managers coming in and drafting new squads, but really opposed to this other stuff...Sorry if that makes me the old guy on the porch! :lol:


Don't want to drag this much further as it's still just a possibility, but the difference to your 2nd year of our league scenario is that all those managers picked all their players, so own their teams and mistakes, while an incoming manager has not. He's stuck in a middle ground where he's had some time to adjust, but didn't have the benefit to redraft that we are giving the new managers. So to which side do we pull him?

Absolutely no problem with rookie managers coming in and drafting new squads, but really opposed to this other stuff...Sorry if that makes me the old guy on the porch! :lol:

Image
Image
User avatar
TASTIC
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,145
And1: 2,208
Joined: May 17, 2004
Location: New Zealand
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#683 » by TASTIC » Tue Sep 24, 2019 7:38 pm

MathiasPW wrote:
TASTIC wrote:
MathiasPW wrote:
Jokes aside, I get (parts of) your argument. I agree most of our managers actually make very few adjustments to their teams and sit on their thumbs too much. I do not agree so much to the "it's been always done this way" types of arguments, though.

I am trying to find solutions that keep managers motivated and active. A league that has 2 or 3 managers leaving every season is troublesome.

The PARTIAL, KEEPERS ONLY re-draft is just to level the field among new managers, who've had no input in their teams other than saying "I want to play". This is very different from your situation, which is 100% self-inflicted (with a great lot of bad luck included).

Because it seems as a fair idea to be done with the new managers, I thought it could be expanded VOLUNTARILY to less-new managers since they didn't have the chance to do so when they came in, and would participate only this one time. The pool and redraft rule would continue to exist ONLY for new managers for future seasons, if more than one team changes hands, again.

This engages new managers more as they have input on their team build from day 1. It should not affect current managers that much, as you're only moving existing pieces around, much like trades would do, and none of those pieces are in your team.

Anyway, I believe the pool and redraft for new managers is pretty much a consensus. The whole point is if we do want to let bigfoot (and wheezy, if he feels like it) join, as well. This also depends if we are able to find a new manager for our 2nd vacant team. If we don't, sunskerr takes over one, we don't do any pooling, we reduce the league to 15 players, and the extinct team's players are up for grabs under normal draft rules.

But someone who owned a team for an entire season has had enough time to draft and trade who they want, or at least make in-rows into acquiring pieces.

If this was the second season of the league and not the fourth, would we give a current owner the chance to re-draft their entire team for this upcoming season because we had 2-3 new managers coming in? We wouldn't. A year is enough time to make changes. Look at my crap squad - at the very start of last season my team was (crap):

Sexton
Osman
Willie friggin Hernangomez
James WTF Ennis
Boogie
Kyle Anderson
Rozier
Blake G
JAllen
Collins
DeRozan
McCollum

As of now, only FOUR of those guys are on my roster, for better or worse moves on my part. If you've had your team for a year and don't like it, make moves.

Absolutely no problem with rookie managers coming in and drafting new squads, but really opposed to this other stuff...Sorry if that makes me the old guy on the porch! :lol:


Don't want to drag this much further as it's still just a possibility, but the difference to your 2nd year of our league scenario is that all those managers picked all their players, so own their teams and mistakes, while an incoming manager has not. He's stuck in a middle ground where he's had some time to adjust, but didn't have the benefit to redraft that we are giving the new managers. So to which side do we pull him?

Absolutely no problem with rookie managers coming in and drafting new squads, but really opposed to this other stuff...Sorry if that makes me the old guy on the porch! :lol:

Image

Fair enough. I guess my point is - a year is long enough to trade/pick up/drop players and shape your team. Like I said, in a year the team I started with of 12 only has 4 left on it...So an overhaul - for better or worse - can be done...
Image
Golanator
Pro Prospect
Posts: 996
And1: 789
Joined: Aug 17, 2017
     

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#684 » by Golanator » Tue Sep 24, 2019 9:41 pm

All this redraft talk is TL;DR tbh but all I know is I have Nikola Jokic and Damian Lillard on my squad and am not trying to lose either unless you offer me a significant trade package :D
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 60,071
And1: 33,250
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#685 » by bwgood77 » Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:28 pm

Golanator wrote:All this redraft talk is TL;DR tbh but all I know is I have Nikola Jokic and Damian Lillard on my squad and am not trying to lose either unless you offer me a significant trade package :D


I'll give you Russell Westbrook....you can decide which guy you'd like to give me.
User avatar
bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,245
And1: 3,721
Joined: Sep 16, 2010
 

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#686 » by bigfoot » Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:38 pm

Obviously this topic has raised too many hackles and managers are reluctant to make any changes that might hurt their competitive advantage. I've suggested reducing keepers and a salary cap and now new managers not just inheriting a really good team.

It's a bummer I got unlucky and inherited a shatty team when there have been four other managers who got decently competitive teams. Then got unlucky again and came up picking 8th (worst case in the second tier) in last years draft. Guess this year I at least have a 50/50 chance of landing Zion or Morant.

Done making suggestions and will just suck it up and play the team I was handed. Carry on!!
User avatar
bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,245
And1: 3,721
Joined: Sep 16, 2010
 

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#687 » by bigfoot » Tue Sep 24, 2019 11:58 pm

TASTIC wrote:
MathiasPW wrote:
TASTIC wrote:
Agree with keeping them in their draft slots as is.

But they’re choosing to take over a team? Treat it like the real NBA, there are so few openings that (the majority) of GM candidates take the first open job.

I’m really opposed to letting anyone other than first time managers the chance to basically start over. Goes against the whole point of having a dynasty league if they’re just redrafting in their second year? My team for example - 2yr ago I was rolling with All NBA level Isiah Thomas and Boogie, now look where they both are. Also drafted well getting Sexton then dealing he and Griffin for Wall - then what happened to him? Point is, make trades and pick a route of either competing or compiling, don’t just sit on your thumbs for a season. There are enough active and knowledgeable fantasy players in here to improve your team and theirs if need be, but not through a redraft.

Also don’t like the reduction of keepers from 7/8 to 4. Why should a really good team with a core 4-5 be penalised for either nailing a late pick or grabbing 1-2 guys off the scrap heap? That’s what the warriors did with Draymond and the rest of the NBA shouldn’t penalise that, they should try and replicate it. It’s not like a top team is signing KD, they’re just keeping an investment they made during the season.

Sorry to rant but the more new tweaks we make the more difficult this will become in future years to keep consistent. This includes my own suggested tweaks which were mainly included if people got bored with the current format and more and more posters wanted to join.

This is a good, fun and competitive league with active and smart managers for the most part - keep that as the core of the league and let’s not make new rules just because some of the new managers don’t like the squad they inherited. What happens next season if they don’t like their team again and they just go back in the pool? I’ve been in dynasty leagues for 15yr in some cases and have never heard of a current manager just redrafting, that’s not a keeper league that’s a new redraft...


Jokes aside, I get (parts of) your argument. I agree most of our managers actually make very few adjustments to their teams and sit on their thumbs too much. I do not agree so much to the "it's been always done this way" types of arguments, though.

I am trying to find solutions that keep managers motivated and active. A league that has 2 or 3 managers leaving every season is troublesome.

The PARTIAL, KEEPERS ONLY re-draft is just to level the field among new managers, who've had no input in their teams other than saying "I want to play". This is very different from your situation, which is 100% self-inflicted (with a great lot of bad luck included).

Because it seems as a fair idea to be done with the new managers, I thought it could be expanded VOLUNTARILY to less-new managers since they didn't have the chance to do so when they came in, and would participate only this one time. The pool and redraft rule would continue to exist ONLY for new managers for future seasons, if more than one team changes hands, again.

This engages new managers more as they have input on their team build from day 1. It should not affect current managers that much, as you're only moving existing pieces around, much like trades would do, and none of those pieces are in your team.

Anyway, I believe the pool and redraft for new managers is pretty much a consensus. The whole point is if we do want to let bigfoot (and wheezy, if he feels like it) join, as well. This also depends if we are able to find a new manager for our 2nd vacant team. If we don't, sunskerr takes over one, we don't do any pooling, we reduce the league to 15 players, and the extinct team's players are up for grabs under normal draft rules.

But someone who owned a team for an entire season has had enough time to draft and trade who they want, or at least make in-rows into acquiring pieces.

If this was the second season of the league and not the fourth, would we give a current owner the chance to re-draft their entire team for this upcoming season because we had 2-3 new managers coming in? We wouldn't. A year is enough time to make changes. Look at my crap squad - at the very start of last season my team was (crap):

Sexton
Osman
Willie friggin Hernangomez
James WTF Ennis
Boogie
Kyle Anderson
Rozier
Blake G
JAllen
Collins
DeRozan
McCollum

As of now, only FOUR of those guys are on my roster, for better or worse moves on my part. If you've had your team for a year and don't like it, make moves.

Absolutely no problem with rookie managers coming in and drafting new squads, but really opposed to this other stuff...Sorry if that makes me the old guy on the porch! :lol:


This is just laughable (Griffin, Derozan, McCollum, Boogie, Allen, Collins, Rozier) ... try working any trades when your only assets are Curry and Covington and then hot garbage for the rest of the team. Literally I had two players that were starters for the season and the rest were bench players. I made tons of acquisitions of waived players but folks just don't drop players that are in the top 100 of the league. The offers I got for Curry last year were pathetic and any decent manager would have turned them down in a heartbeat.

And just to point out another major advantage for existing teams is the round-robin for waived players. Bad teams should always get the first shot at waived players like the real NBA. But as I pointed out existing managers don't want to lose any competitive advantage.
User avatar
TASTIC
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,145
And1: 2,208
Joined: May 17, 2004
Location: New Zealand
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#688 » by TASTIC » Wed Sep 25, 2019 12:28 am

bigfoot wrote:
TASTIC wrote:
MathiasPW wrote:
Jokes aside, I get (parts of) your argument. I agree most of our managers actually make very few adjustments to their teams and sit on their thumbs too much. I do not agree so much to the "it's been always done this way" types of arguments, though.

I am trying to find solutions that keep managers motivated and active. A league that has 2 or 3 managers leaving every season is troublesome.

The PARTIAL, KEEPERS ONLY re-draft is just to level the field among new managers, who've had no input in their teams other than saying "I want to play". This is very different from your situation, which is 100% self-inflicted (with a great lot of bad luck included).

Because it seems as a fair idea to be done with the new managers, I thought it could be expanded VOLUNTARILY to less-new managers since they didn't have the chance to do so when they came in, and would participate only this one time. The pool and redraft rule would continue to exist ONLY for new managers for future seasons, if more than one team changes hands, again.

This engages new managers more as they have input on their team build from day 1. It should not affect current managers that much, as you're only moving existing pieces around, much like trades would do, and none of those pieces are in your team.

Anyway, I believe the pool and redraft for new managers is pretty much a consensus. The whole point is if we do want to let bigfoot (and wheezy, if he feels like it) join, as well. This also depends if we are able to find a new manager for our 2nd vacant team. If we don't, sunskerr takes over one, we don't do any pooling, we reduce the league to 15 players, and the extinct team's players are up for grabs under normal draft rules.

But someone who owned a team for an entire season has had enough time to draft and trade who they want, or at least make in-rows into acquiring pieces.

If this was the second season of the league and not the fourth, would we give a current owner the chance to re-draft their entire team for this upcoming season because we had 2-3 new managers coming in? We wouldn't. A year is enough time to make changes. Look at my crap squad - at the very start of last season my team was (crap):

Sexton
Osman
Willie friggin Hernangomez
James WTF Ennis
Boogie
Kyle Anderson
Rozier
Blake G
JAllen
Collins
DeRozan
McCollum

As of now, only FOUR of those guys are on my roster, for better or worse moves on my part. If you've had your team for a year and don't like it, make moves.

Absolutely no problem with rookie managers coming in and drafting new squads, but really opposed to this other stuff...Sorry if that makes me the old guy on the porch! :lol:


This is just laughable (Griffin, Derozan, McCollum, Boogie, Allen, Collins, Rozier) ... try working any trades when your only assets are Curry and Covington and then hot garbage for the rest of the team. Literally I had two players that were starters for the season and the rest were bench players. I made tons of acquisitions of waived players but folks just don't drop players that are in the top 100 of the league. The offers I got for Curry last year were pathetic and any decent manager would have turned them down in a heartbeat.

And just to point out another major advantage for existing teams is the round-robin for waived players. Bad teams should always get the first shot at waived players like the real NBA. But as I pointed out existing managers don't want to lose any competitive advantage.

Sometimes you have to move quality to get quantity. I have no doubt you could get a massive haul for Curry - ie 1 good player, a couple of good prospects and a pick or pick swap(s).

If those are your two best players you know you're not competing and Curry's not getting younger, so do some trades.

Also, your team is far from trash going into this season. Favors is NOP's starting C and should have close to a career year; Huerter is locked in as third option for the Hawks and should be a top 100 guy; Payton you would hope is starting for the Knicks; Harris is a roto gun with those %s and 3s; Bamba/MPJ probably have some value but both are more of a stash so you might only be able to keep 1, while Bertans and Looney both look locked into starting roles for their respective teams. Bertans has some value uptick now that Brown is hurt in WAS and he should get 25-30min a game.

I think waiver order should either start as the reverse of last year's standings, or be the same order of the draft, at least initially. No argument there it needs to favour weaker teams early on.
Image
User avatar
Calvin Klein
General Manager
Posts: 9,551
And1: 1,924
Joined: May 20, 2008
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
Contact:
   

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#689 » by Calvin Klein » Wed Sep 25, 2019 12:38 am

Golanator wrote:All this redraft talk is TL;DR tbh but all I know is I have Nikola Jokic and Damian Lillard on my squad and am not trying to lose either unless you offer me a significant trade package :D


I think this is the team I originally drafted, right?
:D
Please internet, stop using "literally" so much. You're doing it wrong.
WeekapaugGroove
RealGM
Posts: 12,804
And1: 8,406
Joined: Feb 07, 2010

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#690 » by WeekapaugGroove » Wed Sep 25, 2019 2:55 am

If new and one year owns are cool redrafting I don't have a problem with it.

I would have a problem reducing the number of keepers for this year. If we want it back to 7 or whatever we should get a season notice to adjust. Also anything less than like 7 is really more of a keeper league than a dynasty league.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using RealGM mobile app
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming Wow! What a Ride!-H.S.T.
User avatar
MathiasPW
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 2,644
Joined: Jan 02, 2010
Location: Brazil
   

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#691 » by MathiasPW » Thu Sep 26, 2019 7:05 pm

Ok, looks like we have 16 teams, as Desertfox is taking over the other ownerless team.

sunskerr, I need you to PM me your e-mail so I can invite you to the league.

We will then run a re-draft for both new managers (bigfoot, I'm assuming you gave up on it, per your last post), which should be pretty fast, and then we'll start the normal draft.

Obviously, the re-draft will NOT include this years' rookies. New managers can only pick existing players.
Image
User avatar
sunskerr
Head Coach
Posts: 6,302
And1: 2,516
Joined: Feb 20, 2010
 

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#692 » by sunskerr » Thu Sep 26, 2019 9:38 pm

I think simple math would reveal that less keepers is far better for year to year parity than more keepers. I know people don’t want to give up any advantage but when you look at from this point of view:

8 keepers x 16 teams = 128 players withheld

then I really don’t think there’s an argument to be made for having 8 keepers if parity is an issue. In your standard 12 man league, a pick at 128 is the 8th pick of the tenth round, which is essentially getting into bottom of the barrel territory and massively mitigates any advantage that picking first should entail, especially for teams that are already bad- in other words they will always be bad. 8 players is already well beyond any standard idea of what a teams “core players” is as well.

But I’m just a first year manager lol so it feels odd to be bringing this up immediately after I’ve joined. But it seems like there are a lot of people who have problems with how it’s currently done, and I’ve been playing fantasy basketball for maybe 10 years now, so that’s how I’d approach the situation.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 60,071
And1: 33,250
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#693 » by bwgood77 » Fri Sep 27, 2019 1:17 am

sunskerr wrote:I think simple math would reveal that less keepers is far better for year to year parity than more keepers. I know people don’t want to give up any advantage but when you look at from this point of view:

8 keepers x 16 teams = 128 players withheld

then I really don’t think there’s an argument to be made for having 8 keepers if parity is an issue. In your standard 12 man league, a pick at 128 is the 8th pick of the tenth round, which is essentially getting into bottom of the barrel territory and massively mitigates any advantage that picking first should entail, especially for teams that are already bad- in other words they will always be bad. 8 players is already well beyond any standard idea of what a teams “core players” is as well.

But I’m just a first year manager lol so it feels odd to be bringing this up immediately after I’ve joined. But it seems like there are a lot of people who have problems with how it’s currently done, and I’ve been playing fantasy basketball for maybe 10 years now, so that’s how I’d approach the situation.


We agreed on 7 with 16 teams in the intial draft. And we voted to move it to 8, which I think is right.

Dynasty is basically more or less building just like a real NBA team. You can go all young guys (some did more of this in the initial draft) and add a bunch of rookies and build more for the future, go total win now, which some did, or try to balance it.
User avatar
wheezy
Senior
Posts: 704
And1: 315
Joined: Jun 07, 2013
Location: Phoenix

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#694 » by wheezy » Fri Sep 27, 2019 2:34 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
sunskerr wrote:I think simple math would reveal that less keepers is far better for year to year parity than more keepers. I know people don’t want to give up any advantage but when you look at from this point of view:

8 keepers x 16 teams = 128 players withheld

then I really don’t think there’s an argument to be made for having 8 keepers if parity is an issue. In your standard 12 man league, a pick at 128 is the 8th pick of the tenth round, which is essentially getting into bottom of the barrel territory and massively mitigates any advantage that picking first should entail, especially for teams that are already bad- in other words they will always be bad. 8 players is already well beyond any standard idea of what a teams “core players” is as well.

But I’m just a first year manager lol so it feels odd to be bringing this up immediately after I’ve joined. But it seems like there are a lot of people who have problems with how it’s currently done, and I’ve been playing fantasy basketball for maybe 10 years now, so that’s how I’d approach the situation.


We agreed on 7 with 16 teams in the intial draft. And we voted to move it to 8, which I think is right.

Dynasty is basically more or less building just like a real NBA team. You can go all young guys (some did more of this in the initial draft) and add a bunch of rookies and build more for the future, go total win now, which some did, or try to balance it.

Few pages back Miyagi and I traded Kris Dunn and Fultz for Jerami Grant. Can someone complete that so we can set keepers?
User avatar
MathiasPW
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 2,644
Joined: Jan 02, 2010
Location: Brazil
   

Re: Dynasty League - one open spot...anyone interested? 

Post#695 » by MathiasPW » Fri Sep 27, 2019 2:56 pm

wheezy wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
sunskerr wrote:I think simple math would reveal that less keepers is far better for year to year parity than more keepers. I know people don’t want to give up any advantage but when you look at from this point of view:

8 keepers x 16 teams = 128 players withheld

then I really don’t think there’s an argument to be made for having 8 keepers if parity is an issue. In your standard 12 man league, a pick at 128 is the 8th pick of the tenth round, which is essentially getting into bottom of the barrel territory and massively mitigates any advantage that picking first should entail, especially for teams that are already bad- in other words they will always be bad. 8 players is already well beyond any standard idea of what a teams “core players” is as well.

But I’m just a first year manager lol so it feels odd to be bringing this up immediately after I’ve joined. But it seems like there are a lot of people who have problems with how it’s currently done, and I’ve been playing fantasy basketball for maybe 10 years now, so that’s how I’d approach the situation.


We agreed on 7 with 16 teams in the intial draft. And we voted to move it to 8, which I think is right.

Dynasty is basically more or less building just like a real NBA team. You can go all young guys (some did more of this in the initial draft) and add a bunch of rookies and build more for the future, go total win now, which some did, or try to balance it.

Few pages back Miyagi and I traded Kris Dunn and Fultz for Jerami Grant. Can someone complete that so we can set keepers?



Added Jerami Grant to The Fresh Princes, added Fultz and Dunn to WaxedOn.
Image
User avatar
MathiasPW
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 2,644
Joined: Jan 02, 2010
Location: Brazil
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#696 » by MathiasPW » Fri Sep 27, 2019 3:04 pm

Also processed the TASTIC/WeekapaugGroove trade.
Image
User avatar
MathiasPW
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 2,644
Joined: Jan 02, 2010
Location: Brazil
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#697 » by MathiasPW » Tue Oct 8, 2019 4:23 pm

Okay, in order to keep track of what happens year over year in our league, I've added 3 tabs to the google sheet that has the teams, owners, keepers and most recent draft results.

https://tinyurl.com/sunsdynastyleague

The new tabs added are:

RESULTS: compiles results and owner changes for all seasons since we started this league

TRADE HISTORY: compiles trades done throughout the history of the league. I only added the recent ones and the ones I've been a part of, as these are the ones I remember. Feel free to insert any trades you've been a part of there, too.

RULE CHANGES: so we can keep track of what we are changing from one year to another. I went through the threads and I think the ones I put there are all we've done so far, but if anyone remembers anything else, just add it there.

I will at some point find bastsmasher's "per game played" comparison tool and update it there, as well.
Image
dmastro32
Sophomore
Posts: 216
And1: 45
Joined: Feb 22, 2015
         

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#698 » by dmastro32 » Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:44 pm

I don’t know if anyone is interested and I know it’s late notice but have a money league drafting to night at 8 Phoenix time pm if interested.
User avatar
MathiasPW
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,486
And1: 2,644
Joined: Jan 02, 2010
Location: Brazil
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#699 » by MathiasPW » Mon Oct 21, 2019 3:24 pm

Hi everybody. League starts tomorrow. Dont forget to set your teams.

As of this time, Kerrsed, dmastro and WeekapagGroove have not chosen their starting players (it hurts me to warn Weekapaug, while I feel the urge to let him lose some early points)
Image
User avatar
TASTIC
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,145
And1: 2,208
Joined: May 17, 2004
Location: New Zealand
   

Re: Dynasty League 

Post#700 » by TASTIC » Mon Oct 21, 2019 11:35 pm

MathiasPW wrote:Hi everybody. League starts tomorrow. Dont forget to set your teams.

As of this time, Kerrsed, dmastro and WeekapagGroove have not chosen their starting players (it hurts me to warn Weekapaug, while I feel the urge to let him lose some early points)

Image
Image

Return to Phoenix Suns