Draft and Trade Talk Message Board
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the posts
It's a pain in the #$%$... maintaining solid, savvy, active ownership from year to year is the hardest part. I have not managed to elevate my league to keeper status yet, and it's a good league, I;ve commished for 6 years. the keeper league I am in though is pretty great, mostly because the commish is on top of his #$%$ and manages to get replacements pretty quick for the inevitable bail-outs that come with the territory. Maybe you want to help me make my league a real keeper, perhaps co-commish or something, I dunno, just tossing ideas out. What type of league, stat, and roster config were you aiming towards?
Well here are my thoughts:
1. 25 roster spots (C, 1B, 2B, 3B, SS, 3-OF, UT, 5-SP, 4-P, & 7-BN spots). Basically like an AL team
2. Roto 7x7
3. Auction (with budget of $260)
4. Waiver Budget (with budget of $100)
5. Keep 17 players
6. Free League
7. Unlimited Transactions
8. Trade review by commish
9. NO Minor Leagues
11. Hitting settings: Batting Average, RBI, Runs, HRs, SBs, BBs, & Slugging %
12. Pitching settings: Quality Starts, Wins, ERA, WHIP, K/9, Saves, & Holds
This is what I had in mind. Sorry for the delay, but I wanted to get it right.
- 1 Reply to KYLE
Ok Kyle, you definitely have your scope tuned towards something very specific... here my thoughts off the top:
I pretty much like the structure you propOse. It's not too simple, and not too complex or redundant. I would consider some somewhat minor tweaks to this configuration if I were to try and suit it more to my own preferences: I would roll with a few less bench spots and a few more active player slots IE. a 4th OF, an extra Util in addition to the one, an extra 1 or 2 P slots, and I would dedicate about 4 of those as RP specifically. I get annoyed seeing an excess of players that can contribute sitting on benches that are like full teams in and of themselves. I say play'em if ya got'em. With Stats, I would swap out Slugging for OPS and in Pitching I would replace K/9 with straight up Ks. OPS is a less Home Run-centric stat that I feel is more indicative of a well-rounded player. K/9 while a useful measure is assessing talent is misleading in fantasy when it make a Farnsworth-type pitcher more valuable than he actually is in real life. I also like OBPA over WHIP, but that's a more minor preference that believe reduces stat redundancy. I would surrender trade review to the league majority rather than keeping it with the Commish because nobody is ever happy 100% of the time, and the objective and hope would be that the owners would all be on the same page as far has how and when to employ a veto. We play "no-mercy" in our keeper league, meaning that trades are virtually never vetoed unless the deal is grossly negligent and hurts the integrity of the league. There is no subjectivity of good deal/bad deal stuff. We don;t believe that is what the veto's purpose is for (...in theory, lol). I would increase the teams to 16, and 14 at minimum. 12 is just too small for my tastes. And that's about it I think. The budget thing, I like, but to be honest, I have not yet been in a league where it has worked completely smoothly and I still find myself trying to rap my head around aspects of it, but I am always game to make things work. Overall, I think your proposal has a good foundation. Maybe you'll find some of my thoughts to be helpful here and get you thinking about how you might proceed.
I agree, the smaller the number of keepers the easier it is to keep managers in the league and new blood coming in and inheriting a team that they can still have a good draft a make a competitor. i run a league where we keep 4 guys with no limit to years kept or draft position. If i have 2 or more managers bail on me during the off season i conduct a draft with the new managers using the two vacant teams players in a snake draft. it actually has worked fairly well. IMO