Chum
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010
Sand$: 26.00
Hi Sharks,

Wanted to get your guys' input on the matter of a player in my league leaving in bye week players due to carelessness, or not managing his line-up, etc. on a consistent basis.

I had a debate about this with another person in the League. I think it shouldn't be done (at least on a consistent basis), and that it has an overall negative effect on the results of the league. For example, a Win here or Loss there could decide playoff seeding down the line, and a player who leaves in bye week players could swing a certain week one way. Whether this happens in Week 4 or Week 13 is irrelevant; the main point is that doing so has the potential to effect playoff seedings in a way that has NOTHING to do with fantasy football.

The other league member, however, says statistically, that it has no bearing on the W/L matters, and that it should just be considered a random incident, like everything else that occurs in fantasy football.

The reason this argument came to being is because the person guilty of consistently mismanaging his lineup (by leaving bye week players in on at least 4-5 separate occasions) was kicked out of the league. As a commissioner, I decided that this type of player management was not wanted in the league, and that it has the potential to have overall negative statistical effect on the league. However, the person I am debating with thinks that it really has no effect ("independent random occurrence") statistically on the outcome of the league, and that this just boils down to integrity rather than actual statistical effect.

I think that I'm obviously right; however the league mate is arguing this vehemently, and I didn't want to analyze the statistics too in-depth, so I'm wondering . . . am I missing something here?

Please leave any input or experience you guys have regarding this matter. Thanks for your input!
Great White Shark
Posts: 7279
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010
Sand$: 14,828.16
I think if you searched this has been discussed ad nauseum.

Some say it's strategy (prop up one opponent to take down a stronger opponent). Others disagree.


Everyone agrees if you don't want it, you should make put in your league rules, "Must field the best available players".
Chum
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010
Sand$: 26.00
jnadke wrote:I think if you searched this has been discussed ad nauseum.

Some say it's strategy (prop up one opponent to take down a stronger opponent). Others disagree.


Everyone agrees if you don't want it, you should make put in your league rules, "Must field the best available players".


Sorry if I didn't explain it better, but this is in regards to:

Leaving in bye-week players due to carelessness or mismanagement, NOT for any strategic reasons
Megalodon
Posts: 10275
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007
Sand$: 45,582.78
A dynasty league mate left his team unattended for half the season. It might have been personal issues and not strategic reasons, but does that not have an effect on the league? It sure does. His team was capable of a #4-#6 pick, but due to sheer inactivity and time to replace him, his team ended up winning the #1 spot in the draft.

If you want the best possible lineup every week (for strategic/integrity/whatever reasons), easier (not fool-proof) to enforce it via the following rule:
"Must field the best available roster players".
_______________________________________

The Raiders new solar system to power up their offense: DC to AC.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 2966
Joined: Wed Sep 1, 2010
Sand$: 9,505.92
I like employing 2 solutions to this:

1) Be a diligent commish. I like a rule along the lines of "if you are starting players known to be inactive or on bye at the time of first game start, the commish will automatically set your lineup based on the weekly rankings of website X (I've heard Fantasy Sharks is a good one).

and

2) If an owner is truly not being active, whether it by malicious intent to tank in a dyno or just by sheer laziness in a redraft or dyno, they simply need to be removed. You made the right move by removing this owner, and I wouldn't put up with it in the future from anyone else.
Chum
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012
Sand$: 2.00
Chum I agree w/ your move of booting the dead wood. A backup player is a downgrade, but better than nothing. It definitely affects the league, giving some owners easier weeks.
I like the idea of "field your best players" or whatever, it kind of goes under the general fantasy football ethic that you should always be doing your best to help your team win. Adherence to this principle precludes different types of ugliness such as collusion, tanking, etc.
My idea for reducing deadbeat owners is to make every week count financially. For example, for a 50 buy in league, you could collect 100 from everyone so that each has a positive balance of 50 going into the season. Then, the lowest scorer of each week has 5 or 10 taken from his account and added to the account of the highest scorer. Many different ways to do it, you get the idea
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 4824
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004
Sand$: 1,886.62
I agree with the strategy side of the discussion if it is a specific position on a bye week and the team chooses not to drop a good player, even a good bench player, just to pick up waiver fodder for a single week. I don't agree when the player's roster has an alternative, no matter how poor the alternative is. If your WR1 is on bye and you have to put in your WR4/5/6 or whatever else you have to cover it, that's the reason you have the bench players. If after a bye week substitution, your WR1 is sitting for three more weeks on the bench, that is poor team management as well.

Your league mate is arguing that this is just the randomness of fantasy football. The only randomness to it is who gets the opportunity to play the team when he has his whole lineup properly set vs who plays him when he doesn't replace players. It is not the same as the random luck of playing a team during the week that their star player is on a bye.

My league last year, a guy swapped out two Saints players for their week 11 bye and left them on the bench for 12 and 13. It dropped him out of the playoffs, and the low seed who was originally not going to make it came back to win 2nd place. Based on the projected matchups and the teams' weekly scoring, the entire ending of the season from 1st through 6th place was changed because of that one team not setting his lineup for two weeks.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 44420
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005
Sand$: 43,159.66
As stated, unless you have clearly defined rules on how to handle it you have to be completely hands-off as a commish. And you have to have the rules going in, not on the fly during the season.

Take it upon yourself as a commish to notify someone about their lineup ahead of time. It could be as simple as "I make a change and didn't realize I didn't hit ACCEPT".

If you have an active league use peer pressure to help curb slackers. No one should really want to have folks in a league that can't meet what's established as your minimum expectations of activity.

I'd be very careful about phrasing such as "must play best players available". You don't want to have to manage other's teams and it's really up to them who they want to start. Other owners or the commish should have no say in who they are starting as long as their players aren't on a bye or injured (and known before hand). If I wanted to start Newton over Tom Brady week 1 last year then it shouldn't be questioned from the rest of the league.

Bottom line, build a consensus among owners on what's expected. Don't spend your time trying to dictate your expectations, make the majority of the league take certain levels of true ownership. Remember, Goodell only enforces what the majority of the owners really want.
_______________________________________

34-17/ 29-7 / 34-13 / 27-17 / 31-17

2010 & 2011 Baseball National Champs

Cause if my eyes don't deceive me, there's something goin' wrong around here.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 34400
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006
Sand$: 57,404.96
I may be an outlier, but i dont think it has to be some explocitly stated rule. It is common sense that you should try and not quit on your team. I usually give one warning then they are gone. Kind of harsh, but leagues arent any fun if you have quitters... And it is contagious.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 44420
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005
Sand$: 43,159.66
unimsw wrote:I may be an outlier, but i dont think it has to be some explocitly stated rule. It is common sense that you should try and not quit on your team. I usually give one warning then they are gone. Kind of harsh, but leagues arent any fun if you have quitters... And it is contagious.


Sorry, you absolutely have to define it. If not, when as a Commish would you take over? What if they claimed to have an excuse? How would you proceed to handle it?

Situations should never be defined during the season if they can be helped.

And having a reasonable discussion with owners to determine what they expect is something that a well-prepared commish will do.
_______________________________________

34-17/ 29-7 / 34-13 / 27-17 / 31-17

2010 & 2011 Baseball National Champs

Cause if my eyes don't deceive me, there's something goin' wrong around here.
User avatar
Megalodon
Posts: 20907
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006
Sand$: 11,599.66
The key is communication. If you have an unresponsive owner that is the key issue. Messing up a line up can happen ( :oops: ) but to not set one up nor explain why you left the players in?!? Falls under dead team imo
_______________________________________

Image

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn :slug:
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 34400
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006
Sand$: 57,404.96
pwbowen wrote:
unimsw wrote:I may be an outlier, but i dont think it has to be some explocitly stated rule. It is common sense that you should try and not quit on your team. I usually give one warning then they are gone. Kind of harsh, but leagues arent any fun if you have quitters... And it is contagious.


Sorry, you absolutely have to define it. If not, when as a Commish would you take over? What if they claimed to have an excuse? How would you proceed to handle it?

Situations should never be defined during the season if they can be helped.

And having a reasonable discussion with owners to determine what they expect is something that a well-prepared commish will do.

That is why i give a warning first. If they come back and say sorry, i was out of town, then it isnt a problem. If they blow me off and do it again the next week, then that is unacceptable. It destroys the integriy of the league.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 26548
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007
Sand$: 70,003.35
unimsw wrote:
pwbowen wrote:
unimsw wrote:I may be an outlier, but i dont think it has to be some explocitly stated rule. It is common sense that you should try and not quit on your team. I usually give one warning then they are gone. Kind of harsh, but leagues arent any fun if you have quitters... And it is contagious.


Sorry, you absolutely have to define it. If not, when as a Commish would you take over? What if they claimed to have an excuse? How would you proceed to handle it?

Situations should never be defined during the season if they can be helped.

And having a reasonable discussion with owners to determine what they expect is something that a well-prepared commish will do.

That is why i give a warning first. If they come back and say sorry, i was out of town, then it isnt a problem. If they blow me off and do it again the next week, then that is unacceptable. It destroys the integriy of the league.


I've removed owners from my dyno for just this reason. I'm not having my league decay based on some slacker with a poor attitude.
_______________________________________

I heard that the Lark has died on the mountain. If I knew these words were true I would go with a group of men and arms to fetch the Lark's body home.
User avatar
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 44420
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005
Sand$: 43,159.66
unimsw wrote:
pwbowen wrote:
unimsw wrote:I may be an outlier, but i dont think it has to be some explocitly stated rule. It is common sense that you should try and not quit on your team. I usually give one warning then they are gone. Kind of harsh, but leagues arent any fun if you have quitters... And it is contagious.


Sorry, you absolutely have to define it. If not, when as a Commish would you take over? What if they claimed to have an excuse? How would you proceed to handle it?

Situations should never be defined during the season if they can be helped.

And having a reasonable discussion with owners to determine what they expect is something that a well-prepared commish will do.

That is why i give a warning first. If they come back and say sorry, i was out of town, then it isnt a problem. If they blow me off and do it again the next week, then that is unacceptable. It destroys the integriy of the league.


Since you have already put thought into it then you should have it clearly noted in your rules. Avoid the 'but but but I didn't know' silly conversation that would result otherwise.

Make it clear what is expected and what the results will be if expectations aren't met. Your expectations may seem obvious but work through predetermined consensus to avoid headaches and minimize arguments.
_______________________________________

34-17/ 29-7 / 34-13 / 27-17 / 31-17

2010 & 2011 Baseball National Champs

Cause if my eyes don't deceive me, there's something goin' wrong around here.
User avatar
Moderator
Posts: 34243
Joined: Sat Aug 1, 2009
Sand$: 732.77
God bless you guys for answering this question every single time it's posed. A bit early this year, but I'd recommend copy and paste for all of those threads that pop up just before the fantasy playoffs. :thumbright:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baron_Fel, Bing [Bot], Fighting Amish and 2 guests