Rules Proposals For 2008

[pizzatyme]

Originally posted by BillyWaz:
While I wouldn't mind seeing a random schedule to alleviate any potential problems forward, it is hardly something that is a priority, and IS a case of micromanaging IMO.

Like Paul said, if someone wants to gameplan around the schedule, so be it. Where one person misses LT, another may miss AP, Westbrook, and T.O for example.

Who is better off? BW, you've found the key! Avoid L.T.and also draft Westy, AP and TO.

[Shrink Attack]

Originally posted by ultimatefantasyfootballcheatsheets:
quote:Originally posted by Shrink Attack:
quote:Originally posted by ultimatefantasyfootballcheatsheets:
quote:Originally posted by Shrink Attack:
quote:Originally posted by JohnZ:
quote:Originally posted by Route C:
quote:Originally posted by JohnZ:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ultimatefantasyfootballcheatsheets:
[qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by JohnZ:
[qb] [/QUOTE]Win the league with your skill, not some fluky ass schedule manipulation.

[/QUOTE]Don't you rely on schedule manipulation when choosing RB's who have soft run schedules...dome games in Dec. etc.....what's the difference....you're still using a known schedule to manipulate your draft.

To me this is splitting hairs. Too much changes during the course of a season to think you can gain a sidnificant advantage. It is however....a nice bit of knowledge to make the draft planning more fun.

[/QUOTE]All the better if you can do both things at once. Since these 2 actions are not mutually exclusive.

Most would not set KDS just to avoid playing L.T. However, one could easily decide they prefer to avoid L.T. over say picking 4th overall by KDS preference. [/QUOTE]Well, as I said before, anyone is free to use that strategy if they wish and I defend their right to do so. But personally I can think of numerous factors that I would be considering first when setting my KDS preference that would trump the strategy of trying to avoid having to face a player.

In fact, I would place that strategy just ahead of a coin flip in terms of my own decision-making steps.

But to restate my position, the purpose of my post was to defend people's ability to use that strategy if they so choose, not to debate the merits of using it in the first place. [/QUOTE]And to clarify my position. I'm not saying that avoiding L.T. Is second on the checklist when trying to decide KDS, but it certainly can and should be one of the items.

While I'd put its signifigance a little higher than coin toss, I think we're basically saying the same thing.

[/QUOTE]I agree!

[ultimatefs]

Originally posted by ultimatefantasyfootballcheatsheets:
[QUOTE]
Most would not set KDS just to avoid playing L.T. However, one could easily decide they prefer to avoid L.T. over say picking 4th overall by KDS preference. This is what I was thinking about in all my posts...

1-2-10 this year...

After awhile, KDS lists would tend to be the same..

Get LT, get SJ, avoid LT. avoid SJ.

Why not increase your odds of winning a game or two extra through NO SKILL OF EVALUATING PLAYER TALENT?

We can agree to disagree, but the fantasy schedule should not be used as strategy. It has nothing to do with judging talent.

The NFL schedule can't be avoided, and is a factor in judging talent. All the things previously mentioned about NFL schedule player stuff DO FACTOR is some degree on what a player is projected to do, or the risk factor you give him. The NFFC schedule DOES NOT. It's not the same food group at all. LOL.

[pizzatyme]

John, I respect your opinion, but disagree.

To me, the value of KDS diminishes greatly if the NFFC schedule isn't known prior to setting your preferences.

What good is having the 6th choice, for example, and moving to the back of the draft when it is such a crapshoot on how RD 2-18 will go? Who would ever want to move to the 1.10 slot without knowing the schedule?

[ultimatefs]

Originally posted by ultimatefantasyfootballcheatsheets:
John, I respect your opinion, but disagree.

To me, the value of KDS diminishes greatly if the NFFC schedule isn't known prior to setting your preferences.

What good is having the 6th choice, for example, and moving to the back of the draft when it is such a crapshoot on how RD 2-18 will go? Who would ever want to move to the 1.10 slot without knowing the schedule? that makes sense, but when everyone starts doing this, and KDS lists all become similar, then the KDS value becomes meaningless. We're really talking about different values here. Yours from player side, mine from more of the commish side.

If everyone puts down 1-2-10-(12,SJ bye team this year), then less people are going to get what they want. It just shouldn't be that way. That's reverting back to the random ways of old, not what KDS was intended to do IMO, and has nothing to with judging player talent.

To answer you moving back question, many, many, including myself like the back end certain years.

I try to do at least 3-5 live and 15-20 computer generated mocks at every draft spot to get a feel for which draft slots will come out best using my projections. And that's how I make my KDS list.

I just looked it up in an old excel file..
1 2 8 9 10 14 13 12 11 7 6 5 4 3


I won drafting 1st and (9th,UFS 14-team high $ league with 98% same rules) this year. Finished a close 3rd to Bauler and Jules in mid-season drafting 8th (by 45 points drafting S.Smith-Brady-R.Brown-S.Jackson first four), and 6th drafting 12th in $250 DC.

All I have to say is that if you perceive the back end to be a huge disadvantage, then you are right.

This debate is for sure at the bottom of the totem pole. Have enjoyed seeing both sides.

[ December 29, 2007, 01:26 AM: Message edited by: JohnZ ]

[dcc1973]

I am against -2 for an INT. I don't see any reason to remove points from a position that rarely gets taken in the first round. If 30% of the first round becomes QBs in a majority of drafts for 3+ years, I would not have opposition to this idea.

[dcc1973]

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
quote:Originally posted by Ted's Cracked Head:

Another one to add as was mentioned by FantasyFreakinFootball.com earlier this year and debated much further back is the change to have the FA bidding go to an EBay like version where you get the player for one dollar more than the highest lesser bid.
It's no accident Rob won in 06! He must struggle to keep all those brains in! This is how bidding works in the real world. All you luck guess mongers who want to see guys waist money or be caught underbidding should just go play the lotto or go watch a train wreck.

We should get a guy for what we are willing to bid as if it were happening in real life. Why should Rob be penalized for the rest of his league being too stupid to bid on his guy or lose a guy because of one other smart player in his league ... outguesses him and bids a dollar more? Great suggestion Rob. This should happen! Best improvement that could happen in 08! [/QUOTE]We've used this system in one of my local leagues for years, and there is actually much more strategy in this system than the current one. The astute owners will begin to price enforce on players that they don't really want, but that they feel shouldn't go for less than $xxx.

Unfortunately, I don't think it's viable to move to this strategy in this format, because of circular bids. What I mean by this is that with bids and conditional bids, you can have an infinate bidding situation where there is no resolution. It's a rare event (it's happened once in the 9 years that the league has used this bidding system), but with this many bids each week, it's bound to happen and there's no good way to resolve this issue.

[King of Queens]

Originally posted by David Comings:
I am against -2 for an INT. I don't see any reason to remove points from a position that rarely gets taken in the first round. If 30% of the first round becomes QBs in a majority of drafts for 3+ years, I would not have opposition to this idea. I guess the big problem is that a quarterback can still have a good NFFC scoring day, even though he had a crappy game in real life.

See Tony Romo (vs. Buffalo) and Peyton Manning (vs. San Diego) for reference.

[Coltsfan]

I want to give a real life example of how selecting your kds preferences based on who you are most likely to play can be a huge part of your draft strategy.

When I put together my draft sheet I tend to tier my players. Here are the preseason tiers for 07.

1. LT
2. SJ
3. Addai

These were pretty much set. My next set of players included 4 players that I pretty much felt the same way about.

4-7. Gore, LJ, Westy, and SA

I didn't really care which player I got from this group because I (mistakenly) had them rated as equal.

8-10. Bush, Henry, Parker

Once again I had these players rated equal. Our strategy was to get a WR with our second pick and we wanted one of the preseason studs. The 5 WR's we had tiered as the top 5 were CJ, Smith, Marvin, Reggie, and TO. We figured Manning would go in the top 18 picks so that one of those WR's would definitely be available at the 19th pick.

What we did then was look at which draft positions were most likely to have the easist schedule with each tier. We noticed that the 10th spot missed LT, possibly LJ, Bush, and SA. Plus at the 10th spot we were locked into getting one of the 5 WR's that we considered the (preseason!) studs. Had we picked 8th we would have had a much tougher schedule plus likely missed out on one of the 5 wideouts we wanted, plus we would have had to make a tough decision on one of the 3 Rb's that we had rated virtually the same.

Our KDS started 1,2,3 but after that we felt that going 10th next locked us into a good RB, a top 5 WR, and it possibly gave us an advantage with our schedule. (In the end Westy feel to us at 10th and we were smiling big!)

We worked very hard on our KDS this year and yes the schedule could play a significant role in which positions you request first. We spent hours working on this. Now if some of you think I'm the village idiot for doing this then that's fine, but we did have a less than average points against despite some teams putting up huge numbers against us early in the year. To me this is another component of the NFFC that makes it so much fun. I love looking for an angle. There is no harm in knowing what the schedule is going to be from day one and all it does is possibly reward those who are better prepared. I think that would include most anyone who posts here. (If you're still here post season you are hard core!)

For me 2007 was a dream year. Assuming I wasn't lucky enough to draw a top 3 spot, the 10th spot offered a top 10 RB (and we had a huge dropoff on our cheatsheet after 10th), one of the top 5 stud WR's (with a dropoff at number 6), and a potential advantage with the schedule. Dream world situation.


Wayne

[pizzatyme]

Originally posted by Coltsfan:
I want to give a real life example of how selecting your kds preferences based on who you are most likely to play can be a huge part of your draft strategy.

When I put together my draft sheet I tend to tier my players. Here are the preseason tiers for 07.

1. LT
2. SJ
3. Addai

These were pretty much set. My next set of players included 4 players that I pretty much felt the same way about.

4-7. Gore, LJ, Westy, and SA

I didn't really care which player I got from this group because I (mistakenly) had them rated as equal.

8-10. Bush, Henry, Parker

Once again I had these players rated equal. Our strategy was to get a WR with our second pick and we wanted one of the preseason studs. The 5 WR's we had tiered as the top 5 were CJ, Smith, Marvin, Reggie, and TO. We figured Manning would go in the top 18 picks so that one of those WR's would definitely be available at the 19th pick.

What we did then was look at which draft positions were most likely to have the easist schedule with each tier. We noticed that the 10th spot missed LT, possibly LJ, Bush, and SA. Plus at the 10th spot we were locked into getting one of the 5 WR's that we considered the (preseason!) studs. Had we picked 8th we would have had a much tougher schedule plus likely missed out on one of the 5 wideouts we wanted, plus we would have had to make a tough decision on one of the 3 Rb's that we had rated virtually the same.

Our KDS started 1,2,3 but after that we felt that going 10th next locked us into a good RB, a top 5 WR, and it possibly gave us an advantage with our schedule. (In the end Westy feel to us at 10th and we were smiling big!)

We worked very hard on our KDS this year and yes the schedule could play a significant role in which positions you request first. We spent hours working on this. Now if some of you think I'm the village idiot for doing this then that's fine, but we did have a less than average points against despite some teams putting up huge numbers against us early in the year. To me this is another component of the NFFC that makes it so much fun. I love looking for an angle. There is no harm in knowing what the schedule is going to be from day one and all it does is possibly reward those who are better prepared. I think that would include most anyone who posts here. (If you're still here post season you are hard core!)

For me 2007 was a dream year. Assuming I wasn't lucky enough to draw a top 3 spot, the 10th spot offered a top 10 RB (and we had a huge dropoff on our cheatsheet after 10th), one of the top 5 stud WR's (with a dropoff at number 6), and a potential advantage with the schedule. Dream world situation.


Wayne Good post Wayne. I recall you and I have discussions about the "advantages" of the 1.10 slot.

The schedule definitely worked in your favor this year. I wish I would have followed my own inclination here. I happened to slightly prefer the 1.13 slot, but that was based on Rudi not stinking it up this season.