- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
TDBBL Voting Referendums
Posted on 9/18/14 at 5:18 am
Posted on 9/18/14 at 5:18 am
Consolidating things into one thread, i think the interesting proposals were for:
(let me know if there's any other things we should be voting on/discussing and I'll addend)
1) a consolation bracket for non-playoff teams to determine draft position to discourage outright tanking, and encourage continued competition throughout the season
2) limiting of trades
a. number of picks allowed to be traded/acquired.
b. 1 for 1 proposal - player for player, player for pick
c. no offseason trading of picks.
3) expanding/decreasing number of keepers
4) redraft after this year, and then three year cyclical redrafts.
5)
6)
personal thoughts:
I think #1 should be a slam dunk, should do. There's no downside to me. and we should put this one to a vote asap.
for #2, people have expressed how much they enjoy they trading aspect of this league, and think that limiting the trading would
3 and 4 i have mixed feelings about. this league, other than the tanking/trade deadline is pretty damn fun.
(let me know if there's any other things we should be voting on/discussing and I'll addend)
1) a consolation bracket for non-playoff teams to determine draft position to discourage outright tanking, and encourage continued competition throughout the season
2) limiting of trades
a. number of picks allowed to be traded/acquired.
b. 1 for 1 proposal - player for player, player for pick
c. no offseason trading of picks.
3) expanding/decreasing number of keepers
4) redraft after this year, and then three year cyclical redrafts.
5)
6)
personal thoughts:
I think #1 should be a slam dunk, should do. There's no downside to me. and we should put this one to a vote asap.
for #2, people have expressed how much they enjoy they trading aspect of this league, and think that limiting the trading would
3 and 4 i have mixed feelings about. this league, other than the tanking/trade deadline is pretty damn fun.
2
Posted on 9/18/14 at 7:16 am to LSU Fan 90812
quote:
I think #1 should be a slam dunk, should do. There's no downside to me. and we should put this one to a vote asap.
The downside is that it's advantageous to draft later many times and get back to back picks at end of first/beginning of second rd.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 7:39 am to dnm3305
Any more awesome thoughts?
Posted on 9/18/14 at 7:51 am to LSU Fan 90812
I actually prefer the lottery and don't see a consolation bracket deterring teams from acquiring draft picks. Who cares if you're pickings 1st or 6th when you have 10 picks in the 1st 4 rounds. Besides, some prefer a middle of the round draft slot.
If we want to limit selling out let's just decide on a hard cap of picks you can trade for. For ex. you can only upgrade 5 of your 10 picks.
If we want to go to a dynasty I suggest adding 2 keepers next year, 3 in 2016 and 2 in 2017 and stop at 12. I'm fine with no changes tho.
If we want to limit selling out let's just decide on a hard cap of picks you can trade for. For ex. you can only upgrade 5 of your 10 picks.
If we want to go to a dynasty I suggest adding 2 keepers next year, 3 in 2016 and 2 in 2017 and stop at 12. I'm fine with no changes tho.
This post was edited on 9/18/14 at 7:52 am
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:06 am to Honkus
quote:
I actually prefer the lottery and don't see a consolation bracket deterring teams from acquiring draft picks. Who cares if you're pickings 1st or 6th when you have 10 picks in the 1st 4 rounds
It might make those fringe teams reconsider selling out and making a run instead. I'd prefer 9 competetive teams as to 5-6, and there would actually be a reward for coming up short but still going for it.
quote:
Besides, some prefer a middle of the round draft slot
No one is going to take pick 6 over pick one in a keeper league.
Like I have said all along, the problem with the league is that after 2 months there's usually only 6 teams worth anything. In a 12 team league there is something wrong with that.
Another fix that might be the easiest would be to go to 7 or 8 playoff teams. I know people will bitch at the idea without thinking about it, but in the NBA more than half of each conference makes the playoffs. I think adding one or two extra teams could work for us.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:12 am to PortCityTiger24
quote:
No one is going to take pick 6 over pick one in a keeper league.
True but people aren't tanking to get the 1st pick, they are tanking to acquire picks. If we want to fix the problem of tanking we need address the root of it. The most direct way to do that is put a limit on how many picks they can upgrade.
quote:
Another fix that might be the easiest would be to go to 7 or 8 playoff teams
I like this idea. Wonder if we could have a "play-in" game w/ 5v8 & 6v7 the last week of the regular season?
This post was edited on 9/18/14 at 8:14 am
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:14 am to Honkus
I am open for suggestions on how to do that.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:15 am to PortCityTiger24
Do we agree that only 5-6 teams are competitive because the rules incentivise people to sell early?
If you could only be the giver or receiver of say 2 pick upgrades, not only will pick trading be less frequent, it'll be more strategic.
Also could incorporate NBA rule, can't trade back to back 1st Rd picks.
Also like Jakes idea to an extent, if you trade a 1st or 2nd Rd pick, you are forced to keep the player coming back.
If you could only be the giver or receiver of say 2 pick upgrades, not only will pick trading be less frequent, it'll be more strategic.
Also could incorporate NBA rule, can't trade back to back 1st Rd picks.
Also like Jakes idea to an extent, if you trade a 1st or 2nd Rd pick, you are forced to keep the player coming back.
This post was edited on 9/18/14 at 8:17 am
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:37 am to Toula
quote:
Also like Jakes idea to an extent, if you trade a 1st or 2nd Rd pick, you are forced to keep the player coming back.
I am way opposed to this...you should be able to keep whoever the frick you want to keep.
This hurts the guy that is giving up the pick....so he is hurt twice? GTFO.
I still say we need to just eliminate owners that suck or are absentee owners with no plan.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:39 am to PortCityTiger24
quote:
Another fix that might be the easiest would be to go to 7 or 8 playoff teams
gross
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:41 am to Toula
quote:
Do we agree that only 5-6 teams are competitive because the rules incentivise people to sell early?
not really, but it's the eazy lazy answer to say yes.
If you were to look at TDBL you'd see that only half the teams are competitive before the season even starts and that's with keeping over half your team and no one seems to care.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 8:52 am to gadknot
quote:
not really, but it's the eazy lazy answer to say yes
No, the lazy thing to do would be to act like we haven't had this conversation before and just go on, business as usual. This league is very stail as is. I really don't care about your TDBL comparrison or saying "that league is worse so let's keep things here as is."
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:06 am to PortCityTiger24
We can have the conversation 10,000 times doesn't mean that A) everyone feels we need a major overhaul or B) there is a problem with 6 different teams being competitive in a given year.
If it were the same 6 teams with the other teams having no hope of getting better than yes I would agree we need a change. Eliminating "selling out" and adding keepers will only make it harder for teams with injuries or other circumstances to ever compete.
If it were the same 6 teams with the other teams having no hope of getting better than yes I would agree we need a change. Eliminating "selling out" and adding keepers will only make it harder for teams with injuries or other circumstances to ever compete.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:16 am to gadknot
quote:
If it were the same 6 teams with the other teams having no hope of getting better than yes I would agree we need a change
That's not the issue, it's that every year, there are usually only 6 teams at the most competing. The games most weeks mean nothing after 2 months.
quote:
Eliminating "selling out" and adding keepers will only make it harder for teams with injuries or other circumstances to ever compete.
I'm not saying you need to eliminate it. There are still teams that will do it and I don't think it's a bad thing, but when half of the leage does it there's a problem.
As of right now, there is not much interest in our draft and most of our regular season. These things can be better. That's why we are having these conversations. Not everyone is going to agree, but most disagree with you that the league is good as is.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:23 am to PortCityTiger24
I think Port's assessment of the problem is dead on.
we need to incentivize competition towards the end. last year, teams sold out full months before the deadline, because they saw no hope.
another way we could do it would be to limit the trading of picks to one pick per month til the trade deadline.
so people would be forced to wait to play their hand a little bit longer...
we need to incentivize competition towards the end. last year, teams sold out full months before the deadline, because they saw no hope.
another way we could do it would be to limit the trading of picks to one pick per month til the trade deadline.
so people would be forced to wait to play their hand a little bit longer...
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:25 am to LSU Fan 90812
quote:
another way we could do it would be to limit the trading of picks to one pick per month til the trade deadline.
I like that idea
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:27 am to PortCityTiger24
quote:
That's not the issue, it's that every year, there are usually only 6 teams at the most competing. The games most weeks mean nothing after 2 months
could it be that's just how fantasy basketball is? Does anyone have experience in another fantasy basketball league to compare this to? I don't. Just asking
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:33 am to LSU Fan 90812
quote:
another way we could do it would be to limit the trading of picks to one pick per month til the trade deadline. so people would be forced to wait to play their hand a little bit longer...
on the flip side of this argument if you lose two studs in the 1st week of the season and have no shot to win this year you would want to start trading when most of the teams are still in it and not be forced to wait until your trading partners are limited to the inevitable 6 teams who are competing still.
I guess my question is other than Port and maybe one other person who really has an issue with the league? Where is this all coming from? I think we are being shortsighted by looking at one year in a vacuum and saying only 6 teams can win. If we look at the overall history of the league everyone at a point has a had a shot to win. Which I think is the point of a keeper league, to look at the overall history of competitiveness
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:39 am to gadknot
I'm with Knat on this one. Last year was an abberation. Most years I think 8-10 teams will be competing down the stretch.
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:54 am to Honkus
There's never been more than 6 teams in it. If there has been 8, it's been 3 sellout teams fighting for the 6th spot out of default.
Page 1 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News