2007 Rules Discussion - Weighted Lottery for the #1 pick

[Preds]

To discourage tanking, or just plain disinterest, I'd like to propose a weighted lottery for the # 1 pick each year.

The lottery would involve all 8 non-playoff participants, and would be weighted by awarding chances as follows:

16 chances - Team with the Worst Record
14 chances - Team with the 2nd Worst Record
10 chances - Team with the 3rd Worst Record
6 chances - Team with the 4th Worst Record
4 chances - Team with the 5th Worst Record
3 chances - Team with the 6th Worst Record
2 chances - Team with the 7th Worst Record
1 chance - Team with the 8th Worst Record

We could use an online dice roller or something to determine the lottery winner.

I weighted it heavier towards the worst records, reducing by 2 from worst to 2nd worst, then reducing by 4 from 2nd to 3rd and 3rd to 4th, then 2 by 4th to 5th and by 1 thereafter.

After the top pick is awarded, all the remining teams would slot in from 2-8 based on record.

Or we could use the lottery to decide the top 3 picks then go based on record.

Thoughts?

[Nittany Dodgers]

What about something like what the NBA does, but not allowing a team to move up more than 3 slots or something like that? I don't know if I like the #5 team getting even a 1 in 56 chance at the #1 overall. That could really screw up league parity. Not sure how that would work in a number generator, but it could be done I would think. We'd have to lotto off each pick starting with #1, and the bottom 4 teams elligible for it.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

What about something like what the NBA does, but not allowing a team to move up more than 3 slots or something like that? I don't know if I like the #5 team getting even a 1 in 56 chance at the #1 overall. That could really screw up league parity. Not sure how that would work in a number generator, but it could be done I would think. We'd have to lotto off each pick starting with #1, and the bottom 4 teams elligible for it.

I see your point in maybe only involving the bottom for, or saying a team can't move up more than 3 or down more than 1.

We can work on creating the system, it's more important to throw ideas out there right now and see if it's even a feasible vote. IF it is, we'll crank out a good and fair system, I'm confident of that.

Keep the input flowing!

[Philadelphia Freedom]

I am not sure how I feel about this. I understand where you are coming from but since we play in a head to head league a team could legitimately put their best line-up out there each week and still have the worst record. If they are intentionally not scoring pionts or not submitting a line-up that would be one thing but to base it off record which a person really can't control seems like a bad idea to me (at least initially).

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Philadelphia Freedom

I am not sure how I feel about this. I understand where you are coming from but since we play in a head to head league a team could legitimately put their best line-up out there each week and still have the worst record. If they are intentionally not scoring pionts or not submitting a line-up that would be one thing but to base it off record which a person really can't control seems like a bad idea to me (at least initially).

My problem is teams who do nothing to put a competitive team out on the field as the season progresses and it becomes clear they won't be competitive. They just call it in.

I hate to say it, but BDSC totally called it in after about midseason, just look at his lineups the last several weeks. It may not have been intentional, but it is definately deragotory to the league as a whole.

Nothing pisses me off more than to see guys start hurt, or bye, or out players because they refuse to make a move, or don't have the will to make a move to try and at least be competitive.

Joe is a prime example this year, but so are the Highlanders. I've seen it from a lot of other teams as well, especially late in the season. I've seen similar behavior from the Mutts, SBDC, Jersey and even your Freedom Matt over the past 3+ years.

We added 2 roster slots to create roster flexibility, we have an IR, we have Free Agent bidding the entire season, yet you still see guys fail to submit lineups, or make moves to at least have a competitive starting line each week.

Again, I've seen similar crap lineups in the past from at least 4-5 other teams over the past few years, and Joe and Steven weren't the only ones to do it. But that in no way makes it right.

I say we should discourage this, and NOT guarentee a top pick for a crap season. I support the lottery system, make it wieghted, increase the odds for teams that struggle, but make it important that EVERYONE puts out there best each week, EVERYONE.

[Nittany Dodgers]

Originally Posted by Preds

My problem is teams who do nothing to put a competitive team out on the field as the season progresses and it becomes clear they won't be competitive. They just call it in.

I hate to say it, but BDSC totally called it in after about midseason, just look at his lineups the last several weeks. It may not have been intentional, but it is definately deragotory to the league as a whole.

Nothing pisses me off more than to see guys start hurt, or bye, or out players because they refuse to make a move, or don't have the will to make a move to try and at least be competitive.

Joe is a prime example this year, but so are the Highlanders. I've seen it from a lot of other teams as well, especially late in the season. I've seen similar behavior from the Mutts, SBDC, Jersey and even your Freedom Matt over the past 3+ years.

We added 2 roster slots to create roster flexibility, we have an IR, we have Free Agent bidding the entire season, yet you still see guys fail to submit lineups, or make moves to at least have a competitive starting line each week.

Again, I've seen similar crap lineups in the past from at least 4-5 other teams over the past few years, and Joe and Steven weren't the only ones to do it. But that in no way makes it right.

I say we should discourage this, and NOT guarentee a top pick for a crap season. I support the lottery system, make it wieghted, increase the odds for teams that struggle, but make it important that EVERYONE puts out there best each week, EVERYONE.

One problem I see as a roadblock to this is the soft cap period. This happened to me in SAC'D this year, when after trying to make some moves via trade that failed, and looking at what was on the free agent wire, I knew there was nothing I could do via free agency to make much difference. I could have easily added a player here or there from the wire that would have improved my sad roster for the rest of the season, but with no real long term prospects, and a full roster, you have to start impacting your roster the following season with the cap hit spread. I realize there is a purpose for the soft cap, and you don't want people dumping salaries free and clear, but unfortunately that sword cuts both ways. I'm not sure what the solution to that would be.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

One problem I see as a roadblock to this is the soft cap period. This happened to me in SAC'D this year, when after trying to make some moves via trade that failed, and looking at what was on the free agent wire, I knew there was nothing I could do via free agency to make much difference. I could have easily added a player here or there from the wire that would have improved my sad roster for the rest of the season, but with no real long term prospects, and a full roster, you have to start impacting your roster the following season with the cap hit spread. I realize there is a purpose for the soft cap, and you don't want people dumping salaries free and clear, but unfortunately that sword cuts both ways. I'm not sure what the solution to that would be.

I see your point, but don't think the split hit is that big of an obstacle, especially for lower priced players. Joe rode out the season nearly 2g under the cap with 7 (out of 18) players under 121 cbs, and 5 of those 7 clear cut stiffs. He could have made moves with minimal impact next year, hell, he probably could have made moves that would improve him next year.

I'll also add he has 7 players who are IR eligible, many who have been eligible for several weeks. We have IR for a reason.

I'm sorry, I like Joe a lot, but he totally mailed it on on the Frenzy this year.

[Preds]

BTW, I'd also like to add that I think people let the cap penalties restrict their moves too much. Sometime active management is far more important.

My case in point, the Royal Hawaiian Opihi. Jim has made his share of cap penalty snafus, but he's also landed some FA gems in his gambles. Despite over 2g in penalties, yes 2g, twice the amount of any other team, Jim found a way to scramble to the top of the East yet again and secure yet another playoff position for his team (as the #2 seed no less). Jim's done a fantastic job of running a team, working within the system, but not letting the system restrict his activity.

[Nittany Dodgers]

Originally Posted by Preds

BTW, I'd also like to add that I think people let the cap penalties restrict their moves too much. Sometime active management is far more important.

My case in point, the Royal Hawaiian Opihi. Jim has made his share of cap penalty snafus, but he's also landed some FA gems in his gambles. Despite over 2g in penalties, yes 2g, twice the amount of any other team, Jim found a way to scramble to the top of the East yet again and secure yet another playoff position for his team (as the #2 seed no less). Jim's done a fantastic job of running a team, working within the system, but not letting the system restrict his activity.

I won't disagree there is a way to compete when taking on cap penalties. My only point is that when you are out of it, you are in the soft cap phase, and your only goal for the rest of the season is to play spoiler, taking on penalties plays into your consideration. I don't think this was Joe's issue this season (I won't speak for him) but I will speak as an owner who has had hopeless teams.

For instance, last season in SAC'D, once out of it, I made a couple of moves that I knew would be a big cap hit down the line (taking on a horid Deuce McAllister contract). I took the hit this season, and the hit amounted to the price of a decent WR (my biggest hole). After being in that situation last year, I was cautios (maybe overly so) to affect my 2007 team. Maybe for competitive sake that is the wrong way to go, but all I'm saying is it can play a role. I'm not saying there is a solution, or a fix, or even that there needs to be. "I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'."

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Originally Posted by Preds

My case in point, the Royal Hawaiian Opihi. Jim has made his share of cap penalty snafus, but he's also landed some FA gems in his gambles. Despite over 2g in penalties, yes 2g, twice the amount of any other team, Jim found a way to scramble to the top of the East yet again and secure yet another playoff position for his team (as the #2 seed no less). Jim's done a fantastic job of running a team, working within the system, but not letting the system restrict his activity.

My strategy - DON'T LOOK AT THE PENALTY LINE ON THE ROSTER APP! Seriously, every once in a while I do look at it and I say to myself, "Self, how in the world could you take such a hit with penalties? Surely that money could have been better spent on ACTUAL PLAYERS SALARIES." But fortunately, I don't listen to myself very well.

So it's full speed ahead. Always trying to improve this season... and possibly stash a player or two for the upcoming season.

[Preds]

Does anyone have a proposal that we can organize into a vote on a lottery style draw for the top pick?

[Philadelphia Freedom]

Yes, leave it like it presently is

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Philadelphia Freedom

Yes, leave it like it presently is

If the additional flex lineups pass, I'd agree, since that should help increase more competitive weekly lineups throughout the season.

[Nittany Dodgers]

Originally Posted by Preds

If the additional flex lineups pass, I'd agree, since that should help increase more competitive weekly lineups throughout the season.

Agreed, flex lineups would cancel the competitve edge worries.

Still doesn't prevent a team from tanking it, though at this point, until I see a clear cut instance of that, I'm not as worked up about it as I was at the end of the season.

[smsmith40]

Firstly, Apologies for being late to the thread, I missed it due to extreme work demands at the time.

MYself and Preds have had over the last 24hrs what statesmen politely call "a free and frank exchange of views" and have just about agreed to disagree. Needless to say I completely refute any suggestion of "tanking" games.

In any case, if the league genuinely believes that there is an issue around tanking, which I firmly believe is cheating (both yourself and your leaguemates) then we should implement specific measures to deal with suspected cases. I do not believe that messing with the draft order is the way to go about it, the reverse draft order is critical to maintaining the competitive balance of the league.

[Philadelphia Freedom]

if the league genuinely believes that there is an issue around tanking, which I firmly believe is cheating (both yourself and your leaguemates) then we should implement specific measures to deal with suspected cases. I do not believe that messing with the draft order is the way to go about it, the reverse draft order is critical to maintaining the competitive balance of the league.

I think this makes the most sense. I also would think that these rules need to be crystal clear. With injuries and game day decisions it is sometimes hard to know who to start. I would hate to see someone penalized for making a bad judgement call.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Philadelphia Freedom

I think this makes the most sense. I also would think that these rules need to be crystal clear. With injuries and game day decisions it is sometimes hard to know who to start. I would hate to see someone penalized for making a bad judgement call.

Matt, can you honestly say you've always put out and done your best in the past once your team was out of it? That you made moves to maintain at least some semblance of scoring potential at times late in the season? I remember begging you a few years ago to make a move for a FA QB when your starters were hurt, and you had nobody to plat, but you feared the cap repercussions of making a move, and thus didn't make every effort to do so.

We've had MANY instances over the years where teams started guys on bye, or that were hurt, because they failed to do anything to try and remain compettive once they were out of it.

Joe was grossly MIA for much of last year, going all the way back to the RFA period, and his team showed that. I understand it was primarily due to work, but his inactions hurt the league as a whole, not just his team. FWIW, I like Joe a lot, and have no ill will towards him or anyone else, frankly if Steve hadn't PM'd me the issue was over and forgotten on my end. Regardless, I stand by what I said back in December, but I'm not going to take any more time researching things to back something I said 3 months ago when it was fresh.

[Philadelphia Freedom]

Matt, can you honestly say you've always put out and done your best in the past once your team was out of it? That you made moves to maintain at least some semblance of scoring potential at times late in the season? I remember begging you a few years ago to make a move for a FA QB when your starters were hurt, and you had nobody to play, but you feared the cap repercussions of making a move, and thus didn't make every effort to do so.

Though I don’t remember the specifics I do remember the general scenario and I guess that this is my point. Just because I choose to handle my team differently then someone else I don’t think it constitutes tanking. I have certainly had my share of losses and have held “firesales” but I don’t think that someone should be punished for realizing that they have no chance at a title at some point during a season and making plans for the future. This is a dynasty league and though I have yet to have much success I am always hopeful that next year might be the year. I thinking weighting a lottery could limit that. I am not super opposed (since hopefully I will not be in the running for a top pick in the SAC’d or Frenzy for a while) but I would hate to have injuries and other things hurt me in a given year and than not get the top pick because I lost a lottery.

[Popes]

I have mixed feelings about a lottery draft. I can see the benefits, but I'm not sure they outweigh the negatives.

After following the NBA draft a few minutes ago, I'm leaning against:

The #6 team got the #1 pick with their 5.3% chance and the #5 team got the #2 pick with 8.8%. And the two truly horrible teams (Memphis and Boston) get squat. That just sucks, big time.

[Amish]

Case and point!!! I agree!

Originally Posted by Popes

I have mixed feelings about a lottery draft. I can see the benefits, but I'm not sure they outweigh the negatives.

After following the NBA draft a few minutes ago, I'm leaning against:

The #6 team got the #1 pick with their 5.3% chance and the #5 team got the #2 pick with 8.8%. And the two truly horrible teams (Memphis and Boston) get squat. That just sucks, big time.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Popes

I have mixed feelings about a lottery draft. I can see the benefits, but I'm not sure they outweigh the negatives.

After following the NBA draft a few minutes ago, I'm leaning against:

The #6 team got the #1 pick with their 5.3% chance and the #5 team got the #2 pick with 8.8%. And the two truly horrible teams (Memphis and Boston) get squat. That just sucks, big time.

IMO, you just don't allow 1 team to slide more than 1 spot or climb more than 3.

Or just restrict it to the bottom 3.

[Popes]

Agreed. If we do it, that has to be an integral component.

I'll think about it more when I'm not in "pissed off T-Wolves fan" mode. In our 19 years of existence we've NEVER moved up in the lottery. So watching Portland, who had the same record as us, move from 6 to 1 is hard to swallow.

Oh yeah, as if we weren't already destined to bottom-feeder status for next year, the two awesome guys are coming to our division. Awesome.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Popes

Agreed. If we do it, that has to be an integral component.

I'll think about it more when I'm not in "pissed off T-Wolves fan" mode. In our 19 years of existence we've NEVER moved up in the lottery. So watching Portland, who had the same record as us, move from 6 to 1 is hard to swallow.

Oh yeah, as if we weren't already destined to bottom-feeder status for next year, the two awesome guys are coming to our division. Awesome.

A 5 spot jump and 2 spot drop is ridiculous. should be no more than 3 and 1 in any league IMO.

[Nittany Dodgers]

Originally Posted by Popes

And the two truly horrible teams (Memphis and Boston) get squat. That just sucks, big time.

Well, this isn't totally accurate. Mephis and Boston aren't necessarily a whole lot worse than the rest of the bottom feeders, they just were better at throwing games than the rest. I don't know about Memphis, but it was pretty obvious Boston was trying pretty hard not to win. They don't deserve Odom or Durant (this just goes to feed my NBA conspiracy theory, the Commish didn't give them the pick as punishment. Yeah, that's the ticket).

[smsmith40]

As I've said before, if I thought we had a problem I might be persuaded by this idea but I've seen no evidence that teams were deliberately throwing games.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Originally Posted by smsmith40

As I've said before, if I thought we had a problem I might be persuaded by this idea but I've seen no evidence that teams were deliberately throwing games.

This is probably where I stand right now, too. "If it ain't broke..."

[Nittany Dodgers]

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Agreed, flex lineups would cancel the competitve edge worries.

Still doesn't prevent a team from tanking it, though at this point, until I see a clear cut instance of that, I'm not as worked up about it as I was at the end of the season.

I'm bumping this thread, and my post in particular. I now feel we have a clear cut instance of tanking.

I'm getting extremely frustrated with the way seasons are ending up around here. Last year, due to the activities of a certain owner no longer with us, we had lengthy discussions about ways to adjust the rookie draft due to perceived "tanking." I know I was one of the owners, who after time had passed, no longer felt a tinkering was necessary. Well, I now deeply regret that change of heart. This year, in my opinion, is setting up to be worse than last year with apparently two teams trying to secure themselves the #1 pick, while games are still being played that will affect teams in the playoffs, as well as the seeding.

I greatly hesitate to call teams out, but I am starting to feel obligated for the sake of the league. I really think the Frenzy is starting to slide downhill, and I love the league setup, and enjoy the comraderie of many of the league members so much I feel something needs to be done, or at least needs to be said. There are two teams in particular I felt made decisions this past week that cannot be contrued as being competitive, and can only be interpreted as trying to secure the #1 overall pick for themselves: The Bay Area Bloodsucking Insects and the Amish Rake Fighters. The lineup decisions I cannot understand:

Insects:

Eli Manning over Matt Hasselbeck. This is not the most egregious decision, but I would think most owners would start Hasselbeck over Manning. This one by itself isn't all that bad, but taken in the full context, it is highly questionable.

Warrick Dunn and Kevin Jones over Derrick Ward and Shaun Alexander. Warrick Dunn has been ineffective almost all season. Jones has never had success against Minnesota, and Minnesota has shut down just about every running back this season. Derrick Ward was the announced starter. Shaun Alexander was known to be coming back from injury.

Brandon Jones over Donald Driver. While some of the other decisions may be defender, this one to me is the most blatent that Frank is apparently trying to throw the game. Driver is Franks best receiver by far. If he wants to get Jones in the lineup, why not at the expense of Curry? Doesn't make sense to me.

Some of these calls can be defended (though I think if you look at the whole picture it is pretty obvious), but it is nothing compared to the Amish Rake Fighters:

David Garrard over Peyton Manning. Huh? This is indefendable. You're out of it, fine. At least put your best lineup forward, and your best lineup included the best quarterback in the game over the last several years.

Ron Dayne and Lamont Jordan over Ernest Graham and Willie Parker. Ron Dayne? Fine, he was the announced starter, but at the expense of Ernest Graham and Willie Parker? OK, so the field conditions in Pittsburgh might be bad, but then Ernest Graham? AND Lamont Jordan?

Marvin Harrison over Jeremy Shockey and Calvin Johnson. While neither Shockey or Johnson were great options, it was well known that Harrison was not going to play. OK, lets say for the sake of argument Joel thought Harrison would play. Doesn't that make Manning a good start then? He's getting his #1 back? Nope, I guess not.

This is just rediculous for a free league. My enjoyment of this league seem to decline every year with the antics that seem to be increasing each year. Absentee owners, disinterested owners from day one, and now cheating. Yes, I'll call this cheating. This, in my book, really sucks.

If this is the way teams out of contention play, I really think the rookie draft order should start with the highest rated teams not to make the playoffs and go down. Teams shouldn't be rewarded with Adrian Petersons pulling crap like this.

[Urza's Ragers]

Believe it or not, I was looking at the exact same thing this weekend!!!! I was fustrated as well and thinking to myself - hey I'm down there why am I submitting such a good lineup, maybe this week I'm put in Michael Bennet!!! I couldn't bring myself to do it as I'm a very competitive guy, I want to win every week no matter what and what I looked at this weekend disturbed me. I'm glad you brought this up Brian!!!

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Let's hear from the individual owners and see if they have anything to say about this. Since they're not in my division, I hadn't been noticing.

[Preds]

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

I'm bumping this thread, and my post in particular. I now feel we have a clear cut instance of tanking.

I'm getting extremely frustrated with the way seasons are ending up around here. Last year, due to the activities of a certain owner no longer with us, we had lengthy discussions about ways to adjust the rookie draft due to perceived "tanking." I know I was one of the owners, who after time had passed, no longer felt a tinkering was necessary. Well, I now deeply regret that change of heart. This year, in my opinion, is setting up to be worse than last year with apparently two teams trying to secure themselves the #1 pick, while games are still being played that will affect teams in the playoffs, as well as the seeding.

I greatly hesitate to call teams out, but I am starting to feel obligated for the sake of the league. I really think the Frenzy is starting to slide downhill, and I love the league setup, and enjoy the comraderie of many of the league members so much I feel something needs to be done, or at least needs to be said. There are two teams in particular I felt made decisions this past week that cannot be contrued as being competitive, and can only be interpreted as trying to secure the #1 overall pick for themselves: The Bay Area Bloodsucking Insects and the Amish Rake Fighters. The lineup decisions I cannot understand:

Insects:

Eli Manning over Matt Hasselbeck. This is not the most egregious decision, but I would think most owners would start Hasselbeck over Manning. This one by itself isn't all that bad, but taken in the full context, it is highly questionable.

Warrick Dunn and Kevin Jones over Derrick Ward and Shaun Alexander. Warrick Dunn has been ineffective almost all season. Jones has never had success against Minnesota, and Minnesota has shut down just about every running back this season. Derrick Ward was the announced starter. Shaun Alexander was known to be coming back from injury.

Brandon Jones over Donald Driver. While some of the other decisions may be defender, this one to me is the most blatent that Frank is apparently trying to throw the game. Driver is Franks best receiver by far. If he wants to get Jones in the lineup, why not at the expense of Curry? Doesn't make sense to me.

Some of these calls can be defended (though I think if you look at the whole picture it is pretty obvious), but it is nothing compared to the Amish Rake Fighters:

David Garrard over Peyton Manning. Huh? This is indefendable. You're out of it, fine. At least put your best lineup forward, and your best lineup included the best quarterback in the game over the last several years.

Ron Dayne and Lamont Jordan over Ernest Graham and Willie Parker. Ron Dayne? Fine, he was the announced starter, but at the expense of Ernest Graham and Willie Parker? OK, so the field conditions in Pittsburgh might be bad, but then Ernest Graham? AND Lamont Jordan?

Marvin Harrison over Jeremy Shockey and Calvin Johnson. While neither Shockey or Johnson were great options, it was well known that Harrison was not going to play. OK, lets say for the sake of argument Joel thought Harrison would play. Doesn't that make Manning a good start then? He's getting his #1 back? Nope, I guess not.

This is just rediculous for a free league. My enjoyment of this league seem to decline every year with the antics that seem to be increasing each year. Absentee owners, disinterested owners from day one, and now cheating. Yes, I'll call this cheating. This, in my book, really sucks.

If this is the way teams out of contention play, I really think the rookie draft order should start with the highest rated teams not to make the playoffs and go down. Teams should be rewarded with Adrian Petersons pulling crap like this.

Well, I won't go near so far as you on this Brian, but I do agree there were certainly some questionable decisions. That said, I'd rather we have Frank and Joel explain themselves on this 1st, before letting things get out of hand.

I believe I was in support of a weighted lottery last year, and I remain that way today. To me I'd prefer to see a system like the NHL or NBA, where all non-playoff teams have a % shot at moving up, but no team can move up more than say 3-5 spots (depending on their rank). Additionally, you weight the percentages to greatly increase the chances of the teams with the worse records to move up.

With this system, no team drops more than 1 spot, but the 8th worst team can jump as many as 5 spots into the top 3 if they get drawn, the 7th could also jump 5 spots to to the 2nd pick, the 6th best team could jump say 4 spots, also to the 2nd, the 5th best team could jump 3 spots (again to the 2nd), and teams 4 to 2 can move up to the 1 seed.

Basically, if their name is drawn:
8th worst team moves up to #3, teams 3-7 drop 1 spot.
7th, 6th and 5th worst teams move up to #2, teams 2-7 drop 1 spot.
4th, 3rd, 2nd worst teams move to #1, while team 1 drops to 2, and 2 and 3 drop as necessary.