|
Post by n8carnes on Jul 28, 2020 13:18:30 GMT -2
I know everyone wants to get this resolved so that we can get back to normal business. Trades, etc. So I am going to put this up for a vote to get everyone's opinion on the matter. I will add that I want to see a convincing win if I am going to make any changes to the way we always calculate this.
Disclaimer - IF the season is cut short for any reason then we will scrap this vote and figure out a different solution based on not having a full fantasy season. At that time we can get into potentially freezing the rosters or adding additional option players. So this vote is assuming that we will have a full 60 game fantasy season.
Option 1 - Treat this season as if it was a normal year and calculate option prices based off of this seasons final rankings. Option 2 - Average the last 2 seasons (2019 & 2020) rankings. The average of the 2 will determine the players option cost. Option 3 - None of the above. Think of something else.
Please make a selection of how you would like to see this work for this year. Remember this would only be a temporary rule for next years option price! Assuming next year goes back to a 162 game season we will go back to our normal rules.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2020 13:41:18 GMT -2
If we're saying 60 games is good enough for draft order, I don't see any reason it wouldn't be good enough for options.
|
|
|
Post by Mini Moguls on Jul 28, 2020 15:36:19 GMT -2
I’m assuming if they do stop this season due to Covid we would revisit this vote? If they only play a few weeks before they realize it’s a disaster, it seems that we might want to revert to 2019 stats?
|
|
|
Post by BeantownBoozers on Jul 28, 2020 22:15:04 GMT -2
I`m going to be the fly in the ointment here. A lot of these guys don`t get going until well into the season therefor their ranking change dramatically . I don`t see how we can fairly evaluate them using any of the stats from this season especially with it only being a third of the regular season. All it takes is a hot streak or a slump to skew the rankings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2020 22:50:29 GMT -2
I want to add, how can we value said players moving forward? Are we going to be back to normal next year?
|
|
|
Post by Hanging Sliders on Jul 29, 2020 9:12:10 GMT -2
Regardless of the year used for option price, teams will make a decision based on what’s the best value. So an underperforming player in 2019 or 2020 will win out if a team has a couple of good option players. Seems to me it’s just semantics and changing rules for no true league wide impact. It’s just micro level impacts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 10:03:22 GMT -2
I`m going to be the fly in the ointment here. A lot of these guys don`t get going until well into the season therefor their ranking change dramatically . I don`t see how we can fairly evaluate them using any of the stats from this season especially with it only being a third of the regular season. All it takes is a hot streak or a slump to skew the rankings. Agree with everything you're saying. That's why I didn't want to use 2020 standings alone for draft order. 8 weeks simply isn't enough time to determine a teams talent level when you have players missing 2-3 weeks for an illness, cold/hot streaks, and teams having their season suspended for a week at a time. However, it's important to me that we be consistent as a league. Nate's argument that "it's abnormal for everyone" holds true for player rankings as well.
|
|
|
Post by Hanging Sliders on Jul 29, 2020 14:06:18 GMT -2
8 weeks of 2020 results is a lot better indicator than 2019 results when a typical roster has 40-50% change year to year. So can’t see how any argument to use 2019 standing makes any sense.
|
|
|
Post by Hanging Sliders on Jul 29, 2020 14:10:07 GMT -2
Just look at my roster as an example. I was 15th place last year. So would be picking 2nd if we use those standings. Great for me.
But I’ve sense added maybe 10 players who could be top 100 ranked easily.
You saying my 2019 results better reflect my teams true talent that 8 weeks of 2020? Lol I’ve had about 80% roster turnover since Augusta last season.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 14:15:10 GMT -2
proposal was to use a blend of '19 & '20 (same as what's proposed on here). The issue is similar to the player ranking issue in that there really isn't a reliable way to compare teams talent on here this year given that teams will be adversely impacted by things like seasons being suspended (MIA & PHI), outbreaks of covid as well as players opting out.
With just 8 weeks we also have vastly different schedules, which makes win percentage less meaningful. I think we attempted to mitigate this as best we could with the AL/NL setup, but you still can't really compare standings across the 2 leagues. As you mentioned with 40-50% roster turnover, the league format is far from perfect.
Basically it's a crap situation all around and we're trying to choose the least shitty option. I get it and I'm done bitching about it. Whole thing just sucks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 14:19:35 GMT -2
Back to the matter at hand, you're saying that if a player missed significant time in '19, but plays well in '20, they should get a lower rating and cheaper option price because of an injury they'll be 2 years removed from?
|
|
|
Post by Hanging Sliders on Jul 29, 2020 16:48:29 GMT -2
I’m saying that option price should only be based on 2020 results. But your example is true if the “average” option. It will essentially deflate option prices for more players bc a 200 rank or greater in either season will automatically trigger the cheapest option price.
Player A missed 2019 due to TJ and ranked >2,000. In 2020 they were ranked #1 player overall. Avg ranking would be 1,000 thus cheapest option price. Flip the years it’s the same story.
I’m not saying that is wrong. But it seems that people want to reduce the potential of a player having a great option price if they miss most or all of 2020. My point is it will happen either way if we use an average. And all it actually does it provide cheaper options for 2019 injured players who are healthy and play a full 2020.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 19:50:00 GMT -2
Ha, I completely agree with you. Thought you were on the other side of it for some reason.
Like Nate's said before it's a weird year but it's weird for everybody. I don't see a need to change the rules to accommodate something that's impacting everyone the same way. With the exception of DL spots and roster managment because of the spike in absences, which was a nice simple fix.
|
|
|
Post by n8carnes on Jul 30, 2020 14:50:18 GMT -2
Wow...16 votes already! I haven't looked at this since I posted the poll. That was fast!
And just as I expected the vote would go. Right down the middle. Exactly the same as in the other league. The 2019-2020 average wins the vote by 1. But like in the other league I was looking for something a lot more convincing to make a change. I always feel it's better to error on the side of keeping things the way they have always worked rather than make changes just to make changes unless it's clear the league wants change! Damn, I sound like a broken record lol!
So with that said we will keep the calculation of the option price like we always do it. 2021 price will be determined by the final rankings for 2020.
Thanks to everyone for weighing in with your votes!
|
|