2020 Packer Forum Dynasty League (Discussion/Rules)

[squire12]

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

1) Should we implement 0.5 PPR?  

sure.  Not sure why, but if most want it.   

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

2) Superflex? (I'm open to this and I have 2 ideas of how this could be implemented fairly--- 1 being a rather rapid transition and another being a slower, more methodical transition). I want to hear the ideas/opinions from other owners before I present my two approaches (I want to avoid pushing my own concepts as commish before others have a say). My overall idea (and hope) with a transition with superflex would be an attempt to increase parity (I want to push all teams toward the middle, and do my best to reconfigure the league to establish more balance).  It could also help keep the league fresh. 

NO

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

3) Should we kill defense? 

Sure

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

4) Do we change FAAB #? (I will be upfront here and say that I think we could use another year at our current FAAB # to see if it's appropriate or not). I think most/any issues owners encountered were tied to the initial transition. 

FAAB is fine as is

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

5) Number of keepers? (Increase to 11 to reduce draft or stay the same, and when/how?---this will likely be tied to what type of decision we make with regard to superflex. 

No.   If the league is looking to go to a full dynasty with keeping all rostered players, then that should be discussed.   I don't see the significant difference between 10 vs 11 keepers.  

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

6) How we calculate draft position (in 2021 and beyond, as the current league year is already set). 

Non-playoff teams:  Max potential points for.   Playoff teams: reverse order of playoff elimination with tie breaker being max potential points for

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

7) How we draft (rookie/un-claimed vet) in 2020 (I'm thinking of Round 1 & 2 slow draft, followed by Round 3 as a fast/live draft), but I want to hear everyone's input here. 

Slow draft.  Live draft almost completely eliminated trades during the draft

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

8) I'm also looking to add a co-commish, and @chucknorris101 volunteered. I think that's something that at the very least deserves discussion among owners, and potentially a league vote (So PLEASE let me know how you feel). 

Sounds good.

10 hours ago, chucknorris101 said:

Please add any other league business/ideas that I didn't address above. 

 

[CombOver]

things being implemented immediately, but others will need to take time 

1) Should we implement 0.5 PPR?  yes

2) Superflex? (I'm open to this and I have 2 ideas of how this could be implemented fairly--- 1 being a rather rapid transition and another being a slower, more methodical transition). I want to hear the ideas/opinions from other owners before I present my two approaches (I want to avoid pushing my own concepts as commish before others have a say). My overall idea (and hope) with a transition with superflex would be an attempt to increase parity (I want to push all teams toward the middle, and do my best to reconfigure the league to establish more balance).  It could also help keep the league fresh. 
 

No superflex 

3) Should we kill defense? Kill defense 

4) Do we change FAAB #? (I will be upfront here and say that I think we could use another year at our current FAAB # to see if it's appropriate or not). I think most/any issues owners encountered were tied to the initial transition. 
 

leave the FAAB

5) Number of keepers? (Increase to 11 to reduce draft or stay the same, and when/how?---this will likely be tied to what type of decision we make with regard to superflex. 
 

Eh, leave the same amount of keepers unless superflex wins, then change to 11 next season or whenever superflex starts

6) How we calculate draft position (in 2021 and beyond, as the current league year is already set). 
 

I don’t care, I had that my pick is hit because of my finish even though I made it through the playoffs.  But I think current system is fine. 

7) How we draft (rookie/un-claimed vet) in 2020 (I'm thinking of Round 1 & 2 slow draft, followed by Round 3 as a fast/live draft), but I want to hear everyone's input here. 
 

how fast? I got kyler Murray, which kind of works out because the 1&2 I thought was fast.  I like my email drafts, where people can @ me or text me when I am on the clock.  But I think there should be a time limit. 

8) I'm also looking to add a co-commish, and @chucknorris101 volunteered. I think that's something that at the very least deserves discussion among owners, and potentially a league vote (So PLEASE let me know how you feel). 
 

why, but I don’t care.  If it’s so trades and arguments and **** gets done faster. Cool.  It doesn’t matter to me

2 Please add any other league business/ideas that I didn't address above. 

[ChaRisMa]

On 5/21/2020 at 9:04 AM, chucknorris101 said:

 @ChaRisMa @CombOver  @PandaSquadAlpha @Dwade1001  @ajdodge09 @squire12   @KingOfTheNorth

 

I believe we are still waiting for your input on questions from Cad on the previous page

 

1. No.

2. No.

3. Yes

4. 1 more year

5. No. 10 keepers has been good for keeping the league balanced.

6. Abstain.

7. Open to all. Really flexible.

8. awesome 

 

[chucknorris101]

thanks for the replies-  it appears @ajdodge09 is still around from forum activity - but the profiles for @PandaSquadAlphaand @Dwade1001 have been inactive about a year with last activity on this thread last year. They are unresponsive on sleeper as well. I know life happens but its been a few days there and with no activity here at all, is it worth finding replacements at this point? 

Or another idea would be to shrink to 12 and have a dispersal of some kind.

 

[ajdodge09]

On 4/4/2020 at 8:49 PM, Cadmus said:

1) Should we implement 0.5 PPR?  

2) Superflex? (I'm open to this and I have 2 ideas of how this could be implemented fairly--- 1 being a rather rapid transition and another being a slower, more methodical transition). I want to hear the ideas/opinions from other owners before I present my two approaches (I want to avoid pushing my own concepts as commish before others have a say). My overall idea (and hope) with a transition with superflex would be an attempt to increase parity (I want to push all teams toward the middle, and do my best to reconfigure the league to establish more balance).  It could also help keep the league fresh. 

3) Should we kill defense? 

4) Do we change FAAB #? (I will be upfront here and say that I think we could use another year at our current FAAB # to see if it's appropriate or not). I think most/any issues owners encountered were tied to the initial transition. 

5) Number of keepers? (Increase to 11 to reduce draft or stay the same, and when/how?---this will likely be tied to what type of decision we make with regard to superflex. 

6) How we calculate draft position (in 2021 and beyond, as the current league year is already set). 

7) How we draft (rookie/un-claimed vet) in 2020 (I'm thinking of Round 1 & 2 slow draft, followed by Round 3 as a fast/live draft), but I want to hear everyone's input here. 

8) I'm also looking to add a co-commish, and @chucknorris101 volunteered. I think that's something that at the very least deserves discussion among owners, and potentially a league vote (So PLEASE let me know how you feel). 

1. Sure 

2. Sure

3. Sure

4. Nah

5. I think we should reduce the number of keepers. I'd go as low as like 8.

6. Worst to best, no snake

7. I personally kind of liked the slow draft, but mainly because I'm pretty punctual and could leap ahead of people who forgot to pick. 

8. Cool

[chucknorris101]

thanks @ajdodge09 this may be moot if Cad creates a new poll with delineated options - but for #6 - i think we all agree on that, however we are debating how to determine 'worst'. Last season was based on max pf, as opposed to record or other metrics. the idea of an nba style lottery was floated to determine order, but the order of lottery would still need a definition of 'worst' - any thoughts?

[squire12]

what are the issues with using Max potential points?

[chucknorris101]

2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

what are the issues with using Max potential points?

packerraymond has provided at top of page 2 and throughout. its still my preferred way to do it, but im open

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

what are the issues with using Max potential points?

Long story short, punishes teams with depth. The two teams ahead of me in the draft both had 3 players who scored more fantasy points than my #1 player, but during the bye weeks I had a lot more max points than other lower teams because my bench players accumulated in games. I'd like to go straight points scored with a rule that intentional tanking is grounds for removal.

[squire12]

On 4/12/2020 at 9:26 PM, Packerraymond said:

Ah yes, slower draft is fine for first few rounds, trade facilitation is wanted.

I feel like all max PF does is reward teams that had injuries or lacked depth. I don't remember all my research, but I found that every single team in the league had 3 or more players on their roster that scored more points than my #1 player, yet I had higher max PFs than teams for a couple reasons. Mostly because my bench was full of players accumulating points, and many other benches had players that didn't play. When teams rebuild they trade 1 good player for multitudes of picks and players, therefore rebuilding teams have depth and lack stars, random players will go off one week and suck for 2 weeks and so on and so forth. I just think the punishment for tanking (if a top team benches top players to get a better pick) should be removal from the league, and all max PF does is punish rebuilding while rewarding teams that don't have enough depth to fill bye weeks or injuries. That's how I lost the #1 pick straight up, I always had a bench player to score points when I had injuries or bye weeks, other teams didn't.

I might be off on this, but how was the max PF calculated?

[squire12]

Just now, Packerraymond said:

Long story short, punishes teams with depth. The two teams ahead of me in the draft both had 3 players who scored more fantasy points than my #1 player, but during the bye weeks I had a lot more max points than other lower teams because my bench players accumulated in games. I'd like to go straight points scored with a rule that intentional tanking is grounds for removal.

How are you proving intentional tanking?

 

[Packerraymond]

2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

How are you proving intentional tanking?

 

Benching top 50 or so players in place of guys not accumulating stats. Like if @chucknorris101 benched Evans the last few weeks of the season to lower his point total, or playing backups with starters on the bench. Just obvious attempts to cut points.

 

[squire12]

Just now, Packerraymond said:

Benching top 50 or so players in place of guys not accumulating stats. Like if @chucknorris101 benched Evans the last few weeks of the season to lower his point total, or playing backups with starters on the bench. Just obvious attempts to cut points.

 

so why does benching the 51st, 61st etc not considered intentional tanking?

[chucknorris101]

TBH the difference in opinion here i think is that startable depth isnt a strength in dynasty, not really. Depth is actively hurting you in opportunity cost. You either want to be loaded in the starting lineup with little to no depth to optimize starters for a championship run, or you want to be near devoid of starters to tank. the middle ground is the worst place to be and you get there by sitting on startable depth. its the problem i am trying to dig my team out of. Max PF is a system that double punishes that startable depth

Edited June 8, 2020 by chucknorris101

[squire12]

34 minutes ago, chucknorris101 said:

TBH the difference in opinion here i think is that startable depth isnt a strength in dynasty, not really. Depth is actively hurting you in opportunity cost. You either want to be loaded in the starting lineup with little to no depth to optimize starters for a championship run, or you want to be near devoid of starters to tank. the middle ground is the worst place to be and you get there by sitting on startable depth. its the problem i am trying to dig my team out of. Max PF is a system that double punishes that startable depth

Having depth is not a bad thing, how that depth is utilized on a weekly basis matters.  Startable depth is an asset that needs to/can be used.  

If you are looking for depth to be universally beneficial and not hurt you, then best ball is a better league.

I am just not understanding the rational of how Team A has 1 player that scores more points than anyone on Team B, yet Team B might have 3-4 players that score better than Team A's 2nd best scoring player.   Looking at it from a top scorer on each team perspective is where I am getting lost on the rational.