|
Tanking
Nov 7, 2019 14:39:47 GMT -6
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Nov 7, 2019 14:39:47 GMT -6
Thinking about this...how about a bench minimum and a paid minors cap? A bench minimum would keep players active, and a paid minors cap would minimize FA signed being sent down to stash and tank. IL players could be exempt from the cap since they can’t be played anyway. I am against roster caps. I almost quit a league that started doing that kind of thing.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 7, 2019 15:06:24 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Phillies GM (Keith) on Nov 7, 2019 15:06:24 GMT -6
I'm ok with forcing owners to play players but I don't think we can have much gray area when it comes to tanking. It can be subjectivity enforced however the standard being enforced has to be clear and sufficient.
Remember, tanking is not really a part of real life sports, because you have to fill seats attract players etc. There are rare examples of it in the NBA where they've convinced certain players to milk their injuries a little longer than they needed to, but it's the exception, not the rule.
In fantasy, you don't need to convince your players that faking an injury and riding the pine is worth doing. You don't need to convince your fanbase that a team sucking for 4 years is worth it. You don't need to worry about free agents not picking your team.
I think simply taking the reward away is probably best, but I'd be fine with enforcing a no tank policy too. We just need to make sure no one is nibbling at the edges because if team A benches good SP on a Sunday to make sure they lose Ks and team B chooses to hold off calling up the next ROY candidate, then team C should be able to bench a few star players and team D should be able to bench even more than that to compete.
The standard needs to be something like this:
If you aren't adding a called up (and good) minor league player or aren't starting good active players you own, then you better have a very compelling reason to show why you think benching/not calling up those players was supposed to help you win not make you more likely to lose. In simple terms, the burden of proof needs to rest with the teams doing the questionable benching.
If we have this kind of standard and the Admins are not going to let anything slide (other than maybe a warning or something for a first or second offense that appears possibly unintentional), then I think it can work. If we just say benching your top 4 players is fine but benching your top 8 players is too much, then it will not be a good policy imo.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 9, 2019 10:47:58 GMT -6
Post by OaklandGM on Nov 9, 2019 10:47:58 GMT -6
Without a clear rule, TAB monitoring will be useless and just piss people off. You can’t enforce a broad “no tanking” rule and simultaneously say tanking is ok, within reason. Every sport league has grappled with this issue, and there are no solutions beyond removing some of the motivation to entirely tank for the worst record. That’s the lottery option. My frustration with this thread is that quite a few owners posted they don’t want a lottery, but haven’t said why. It would be helpful to understand why a lottery is so opposed by some. We aren’t talking about the whole draft being a lottery, just reordering the really bad teams at the top of the draft.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 11, 2019 16:22:27 GMT -6
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Nov 11, 2019 16:22:27 GMT -6
Without a clear rule, TAB monitoring will be useless and just piss people off. You can’t enforce a broad “no tanking” rule and simultaneously say tanking is ok, within reason. Every sport league has grappled with this issue, and there are no solutions beyond removing some of the motivation to entirely tank for the worst record. That’s the lottery option. My frustration with this thread is that quite a few owners posted they don’t want a lottery, but haven’t said why. It would be helpful to understand why a lottery is so opposed by some. We aren’t talking about the whole draft being a lottery, just reordering the really bad teams at the top of the draft. I have been pretty clear on my stance but here it is again. Tanking is part of sports but there is also a right way and a wrong way of doing it. Taking that away is against what happens in RL. We am not trying to stop tanking but teams should have to earn their bad record not be handed it by doing nothing. How you get to that point. Guess we will find out. To me the issue isn't about whether you should be able to tank or not its about how you should have to tank. So yes I am against any sort of lottery idea because I think tanking should be allowed but the problem is I do not believe that the current way is the right way where teams are playing basically empty line-ups.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 16, 2019 7:40:59 GMT -6
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Nov 16, 2019 7:40:59 GMT -6
I probably won't begin to put anything together for possible voting until we get closer to the check-in deadline. It does seem like maybe we have come to any possible ideas that we will but I won't close that part until we get closer to the deadline for check-in.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 16, 2019 11:06:31 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by stevew (MARLINS GM) on Nov 16, 2019 11:06:31 GMT -6
The easiest way is to mandate a player (who plays in MLB) at each position. If you’re trying to mimic RL and allow tanking then that’s the way to do it. A team can’t trot out 4 games in a game. They have to roll out a full 9 and pitchers. That simple.
|
|
|
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Nov 16, 2019 11:10:40 GMT -6
The easiest way is to mandate a player (who plays in MLB) at each position. If you’re trying to mimic RL and allow tanking then that’s the way to do it. A team can’t trot out 4 games in a game. They have to roll out a full 9 and pitchers. That simple. I won't be forcing teams to start full lineup each and everday. This is still fantasy. Benching guys at times is a strategic deal.
|
|
|
Post by OaklandGM on Nov 16, 2019 11:44:10 GMT -6
The easiest way is to mandate a player (who plays in MLB) at each position. If you’re trying to mimic RL and allow tanking then that’s the way to do it. A team can’t trot out 4 games in a game. They have to roll out a full 9 and pitchers. That simple. Besides the enforcement nightmare this would be, it would be impossible to do in reality. Even when I’m trying to win I fail to make this happen regularly. I can’t actually call up real minor leaguers and have them play in real life for my fantasy teams injury depleted or shallow positions, so would violate a rule like this regularly. I still don’t see a viable proposal besides the lottery option, which would still allow for tanking to increase odds of high picks, but eliminate the silly benching of entire rosters to get the worst possible record. Seems to be a lot of opposition to that idea, so I suspect things will be the same in the future.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 16, 2019 12:35:28 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Phillies GM (Keith) on Nov 16, 2019 12:35:28 GMT -6
I think the most workable version of the "play your players" idea is this:
1. General Structure
The Admins with the help of league member opinions, should look at the benching and non-call ups skeptically. If this is a winning team benching a SP on a Sunday with a lead in ERA WHIP Wins and Ks, then it's pretty clearly not a benching for tanking purposes. Teams fighting for a playoff spot should get a lot of subjective leeway to try to win the way they think is best. If a team suddenly goes from a competitive team and benches everyone late in the year one team did this year, obviously that's not in order to win and shouldn't be allowed.
Where the enforcement really needs to come into play is with non competitive teams. If a team benches Mike Trout and plays another OF instead, there is pretty much no excuse and it is clearly excessive tanking. The same is true of benching any very good player in favor of a lousy one (again for teams unlikely to make playoffs/not doing well). When a non competitive team has a hole in the lineup or pen or wherever with a player on the bench or paid minors, that also shouldn't be allowed.
Owners of non competitive teams should also have to call up "top" prospects that are called up and playing well. This is going to be subjective, but there is no real downside to calling them up unless they are literally out of cap. I don't think we should force teams to call up everyone though as a lot of lousy or so so specs get call ups and we should let owners save some cap in the medium or long term. But the good/obvious ones need to be called up and played.
2. Worrying about teams stripping down too much (not just "benching" which is the main issue)
We could consider adding some small mins to make sure owners don't literally trade everyone away. Roster mins or AB/IP mins alone do almost nothing but as an add on could have some usefulness to protect against complete roster dumping. We could also decide to just not allow owners to leave their teams overly bare though that will be a bit tricky to determine.
3. Actual Enforcement
This is more open to discussion IMO than the first part above which I don't think has much wiggle room.
Ideally we'd just have owners that comply. But I think the easiest way to enforce the benching/call up issues is to remind owners to address the roster issue, then if the owner doesn't act, just have the commish make the roster move. If an owner repeatedly finds him/herself in violation, we can come up with a penalty, as it is a pain to keep dealing with the same owners.
This IS NOT micro managing owners. It is just making sure no one is leaving holes in their active lineup when they have salaried players to fill those holes, making sure no one is benching top players even if they have a scrub in at that position, and making sure good prospects that are doing well get called up and played in a timely manner. Furthermore, this is only affecting teams that aren't really competing for the playoffs or ones that decide to tank later in the year after judging they are good enough to keep competing.
It is a pretty low admin burden really and keeping things subjective makes the burden a lot smaller.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 16, 2019 12:36:55 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Phillies GM (Keith) on Nov 16, 2019 12:36:55 GMT -6
I do think a lottery is FAIRER and a properly designed lottery will reward the right owners best, but I can live with other ideas if they are well designed.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 16, 2019 21:19:02 GMT -6
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Nov 16, 2019 21:19:02 GMT -6
I do think a lottery is FAIRER and a properly designed lottery will reward the right owners best, but I can live with other ideas if they are well designed. Just could not help yourself huh you have to bring it up anytime you can. This is how you got your little lottery in another league you kept forcing it down peoples throats until they just caved. Your stance is very clear: Lottery amazing. IP/AB Min do nothing. Maybe you and DBacks should have just not played empty or shitty lineups last year and this wouldn't be an issue.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 17, 2019 10:03:01 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Phillies GM (Keith) on Nov 17, 2019 10:03:01 GMT -6
I do think a lottery is FAIRER and a properly designed lottery will reward the right owners best, but I can live with other ideas if they are well designed. Just could not help yourself huh you have to bring it up anytime you can. This is how you got your little lottery in another league you kept forcing it down peoples throats until they just caved. Your stance is very clear: Lottery amazing. IP/AB Min do nothing. Maybe you and DBacks should have just not played empty or shitty lineups last year and this wouldn't be an issue. You obviously misread what I said. I'm saying there are multiple ways of addressing tanking and that the answer DOESN'T have to be a lottery. Yes AB/IP won't work as a stand alone. That is true. But there are more ways to address things than just AB/IP mins or a lottery. If you bothered to read the long post before the one you just quoted, or if you bothered to read any of the FBL anti tanking discussions, you'd have known this already.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 17, 2019 10:14:15 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by Phillies GM (Keith) on Nov 17, 2019 10:14:15 GMT -6
No matter what rule we come up with, it will be one of two types or some combo:
1. Force owners to do SOMETHING (either play enough players, fill enough roster spots, play their best players, accumulate enough AB/IP, call up certain players, not sell off too many players, sign certain players, etc)
OR
2. Take away the rewards in some way (either lottery or trying to determine which organizations are in the worst medium to long term shape and reward picks that way or some other way to order the draft that isn't tied to W%)
There are lots of ways to go about either method and several reasonable ways to attack the issue from both sides. Im not pushing for anything specific, but I do think it's useful to point out certain potential issues with certain ideas as they come up.
|
|
|
Tanking
Nov 18, 2019 9:48:10 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by RoyalsGM on Nov 18, 2019 9:48:10 GMT -6
I am against a lottery system. I think if a team is caught tanking then they should lose their dispersal picks the first time. Second time they lose their FYPD 1st round pick. Acts as a warning before losing a more serious pick.
|
|
|
Post by Rockies GM (Joey) on Nov 18, 2019 10:12:09 GMT -6
I am against a lottery system. I think if a team is caught tanking then they should lose their dispersal picks the first time. Second time they lose their FYPD 1st round pick. Acts as a warning before losing a more serious pick. There still has to be guidelines.
|
|