« Reply #363 on: May 19, 2015, 08:41:24 AM »
Also, something is whacky with your table. Using 25.4 as the average would make very minimal difference. A couple teams swap places (I move from 4 to 3. Lovetotrade moves from 2 to 1. Juggs stays 3rd, but BARELY... since he's still receiving a penalty) WEbskins is picking 7th either way. http://i.imgur.com/IAudwOA.png
No there's nothing whacky with my table. I've zeroed out all penalties for teams missing fewer than 50 games b/c I don't think they should be penalized (as I've laid out). This rewards teams --- from 1st to 20th place -- for not missing more than 50 games.
(the first 2 columns are flipped from your table... sorry for making that more confusing)
That Bellevue (missing 53 games) and #Lovetotrade (missing 38) move up -- b/c teams missing 174(!) and 164(!) each dropped a spot -- is logical and a good outcome, because the 2 more active teams benefitted -- by staying relatively still points-wise while the other teams moved alot.
But you're right, the reality is that teams fared about as well in either system. Teams missing 75+ games lost the following draft slots:
Team-based adj.: 0, 1, -2 (actually moved up), 0, 1, 5
League-based adj: 1, 2, -2 (actually moved up), 0, 1, 5
We can't control year-to-year what totals teams end up with --- there's some luck and variance in whether teams lose 1 or 4 spots (based on how bunched up a group of teams will be). all we can do is create a system that makes internally logical sense.
But like i said above,... At the end of the day maybe none of this matters. Teams who miss a lot of games are always gonna be bad and will have less opportunity to get good than active teams.
que sera, sera....
Probably none of it will matter. Also the lotto can wreck plans. I've actively tanked to try to get two top 4 picks... I have the #1 and #4 projected picks... but come next week, I could be looking at the #4 and #7 picks. Last year the team with the 9th worst record won the draft. So yeah... ultimately it might not make a difference.
I will say, I disagree with you on the idea that only teams who miss "excessive" games should be penalized. Whether it's 1 game or 174 games, I think adjusting the standings for draft purposes is a good idea. I think most of the teams that missed under 30 games could have reached 902 if they wanted to... the teams towards the top deliberately leave bad players on their bench so not to taint their average player score. The thought is that they want to make the most of their 902 games... but if they inadvertently fall short by gaming the system like that, it's perfectly reasonable for them to be slightly adjusted based on the missed games. And really we're talkin about the difference between #18 and #19. Really don't think that makes a difference.
Thinking out scenarios in my head, I will say that changing the multiplier to be league-wide average player score does make some logical sense. That would theoretically close the Russell Westbrook loophole where a team benches their best players to keep their average player score low. As-is, it does indeed incentivize teams towards the bottom to fill their roster with terrible players to keep their average player score low. But here's the thing... even if you switch the multiplier to league-wide average, it isn't going to stop teams towards the bottom from playing bad players. I guess it would add them a little more motivation to fill out their roster and keep their missed games lower, but they'd still be incentivized to fill out their roster with bad players. Interestingly enough, I'll use myself as an example. This year, I came very close to exceeding 75 missed games and I owned my pick. In-fact, I was so concerned about exceeding 75 missed games, that I offered up my own pick + another pick to Kevin for the MMSB pick he owed. MMSB and myself were pretty close to each other... My thought was that Kevin could get a free pick out of my suffering... since the 75 missed games wouldn't carry over to him if he owned the Bellevue pick. Kevin turned me down... I tried my best to cycle in bad players daily and ultimately got under 75 missed games, but in the process I ended up raising my average player score higher than MMSB. I finished with 19.95 as my average player score. MMSB finished with 19.62. My pick is projected 4th. The MMSB pick is projected 3rd. What's interesting is that if we used the league average (24.5) as the multiplier, my pick would be projected 3rd and MMSB's would be projected 4th. So the point is, a rule that would be put in place to stifle gamesmanship like my own (purposely trying to keep my average player score low) would actually have helped me in this instance. Lol.
Counterpoint to all of this... obsessive players will always find a way to game the system. I'm fine with it. I've seen a couple players actively make use of loopholes. If they are putting in that kind of effort, so be it. Good for them. I love the competitive spirit.
I believe you are referring to the Andrew Wiggins loophole
Logged
CB Draft LA Lakers: Lamarcus Aldridge, Carmelo Anthony,Jrue Holiday, Wes Matthews 6.11, 7.16, 8.14, 8.15, 9.16, 11.5, 11.16
Topic: Lucky17's Yahoo! Points Hoops League: 2014 Offseason: Post Lottery (Read 326542 times)