I just realized that I haven't made an official ruling on the draft order for future seasons in our keeper leagues. We're still a ways off until the UPL Basketball draft, and I'll post a list of current rosters so that people can make their keeper decisions 1 week before the draft in October. But we need to figure out this drafting thing pretty quickly.
Some options:
a) reverse order of finish (i.e., last place picks first, 2nd to last place picks 2nd,..., first place picks last,)
b) order of finish (i.e., first place picks first, 2nd place picks 2nd,..., last place picks last)
c) winner picks first, followed by reverse order of finish (i.e., winner picks first, last place picks 2nd, 2nd to last place picks 3rd,..., 2nd place picks last).
d) random order chosen by Yahoo!
e) weighted lottery with high finishers getting better odds.
f) weighted lottery with low finishers getting better odds.
Please, comment on what plan you think we should go with. If we go the lottery route, we'll have to figure out a fair way to do things, in terms of what the odds should be, and how we actually run the lottery, but I've got an idea in mind. In any case, let's get some discussion going, and I'll make a formal announcement by the end of July for both baseball and basketball.
-Chairman (aka O.N. Thugs)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
people also hate soccer.
The Revolution will not be televised. Mainly because MLS ratings suck.
Circumventing the Salary Cap
Search for the Latest Rumors
Custom Search
About the UPL
The Urbana Premier League is a group of friends, and friends of friends, and eventually friends of friends of friends, who have been waging fantasy sports (baseball, football, and basketball) wars since 2001.
Why a blog? We've had a number of interesting discussions that got lost at the end of each season (and also once other postings replace the 100 postings that Yahoo! keeps on record). And, some of our owners are in other fantasy leagues, so maybe we can use some collective group-think to help out our UPL brethren. This blog gives us a place to talk about those issues a little further.
Why a blog? We've had a number of interesting discussions that got lost at the end of each season (and also once other postings replace the 100 postings that Yahoo! keeps on record). And, some of our owners are in other fantasy leagues, so maybe we can use some collective group-think to help out our UPL brethren. This blog gives us a place to talk about those issues a little further.
Voices of the UPL
Fantasy Resources
Categories
- baseball (58)
- strategy (57)
- player evaluation (49)
- UPL History (47)
- drafting (40)
- roster management (39)
- basketball (34)
- team evaluation (28)
- metagame (25)
- Fantasy Musing (17)
- UPL Awards (12)
- trades (9)
- football (7)
- misc (7)
- Fantasy Bragging (6)
- Fantasy whining (5)
- Open Discussion (4)
- UPL Bad Breaks (2)
- UPL Baseball (2)
- endgame (2)
- inspiration (2)
- sports (2)
- Morality (1)
- UPL Drafting (1)
- statistics (1)
8 comments:
I would say a lottery with weight given to the lower ranked teams.
This matches the NBA system, which makes sense for a fantasy basketball league.
Not sure if basketball and baseball will be done the same. But here's a thought for baseball since I'm in that league...
I like the idea of giving people a reason to compete all the way to the end. Granted, I think most people do for pride, anyway. But still, an incentive can't hurt. So for that reason I'd prefer to see the draft order based on the order of finish... with one exception...
How about put the bottom five teams in a lottery with each team given an equal chance (20%) to win the first pick. That way if you're last, it's still to your advantage to try to make your way up to second from last, etc.
Example, in a 12-team league, the teams that finish 8 thru 12 would be entered in the lottery. Let's say 9th place wins the lottery... here's your draft order next year:
First pick - 9th place
Second pick - 1st place
Third pick - 2nd place, and so on...
3
4
5
6
7
8 - lost lottery
10 - lost lottery
11 - lost lottery
12 - lost lottery
Well, this is probably going to upset the apple cart, but I'm a little bit in agreement with Pauly on the message boards. I'm wondering if we do 16 teams so that everyone could conceivably keep all their "starters" except for 2. I think that would turn over the rosters just enough to give people who may have had a rough beginning a chance to get back in the running. If that's not on the table, no big deal. Just wanted to weigh in there.
In terms of a both drafts (baseball and basketball), I'm in favor of a lottery with the lower finishers having better odds.
Greg - Good God. You've even managed to confuse me :-) But it looks like you're the only one who's like the order to be in the order of finish. I have to confess, I'd vote that way too, if I was looking for my self-interest since I'm guessing that I'm much more likely to finish first than last.
But it sounds like people like the lottery component... I'll start thinking about ways to do the lottery. I'll post a proposed method soon...
C-Lauff - I think that we should keep it at 18 keepers. That was what I said at the draft. And (I feel retarded saying this), it would sort of screw Rupert if we only back to 16, given how young he went with the draft.
Greg - Good God. You've even managed to confuse me :-)
Heheh... well, my draft proposal made sense to me yesterday when I wrote it. But I was kinda sleep-deprived at the time.
I'll be curious to see what you come up with for the draft.
16 is a lot more reasonable to keep imo. I never saw any announcements at the draft saying how many players we were keeping, so (correct me if I'm wrong) the keeper number has not yet been truly established.
Reverse order draft is still what I prefer, but I dont mind the weighted lottery format -- as long as there is no David Sterning the lottery so the big market teams get the best picks.
Not sure that we need an incentive not to finish last -- especially if we are all keeping 3/4 of our rosters. The draft is almost an afterthought. I mean if you have the first pick next year and take Strasburg, you probably have to wait another year just to see him pitch for you. Or, you can take a low- to mid-level player that goes back into the pool.
Hmmm... Chicago is a much larger market than Champaign, so we're definitely not going with market share.
I suspect that the draft will definitely be important in basketball, and perhaps less so in baseball, given the time frame it takes prospects to make an impact. And if you look at the guys drafted in the late rounds, there are always major contributors.
I'm pretty set on the idea of 18 keepers, since that's what the initial discussion started with, and that's what I've been saying. But having more keepers lets people hang on to prospects (David Price, Tommy Hanson, Stephen Strasburg, etc.) while they develop. If someone's willing to get smacked around for a couple years so that they can develop a top-flight team 3 or 4 years later, then they should be rewarded for doing so.
However, one change that I'm open to hearing out is the total roster size. The original plan was to go with 26-man rosters. I ended up going with 24-man rosters and 2 DL slots, so that it's effectively a 26-man roster. Maybe we expand rosters to alleviate some of the pressure of injuries?
Roland,
With your sudden, recent plummet, you may want to consider being selfish and do a reverse order of finish draft for next year ;)
Post a Comment