CBPL Offseason 2015 Rules Discussion

[Gainesville Celtic]

There would then be a loophole where you trade away a pick and then intentionally miss more than 75 games to sabotage it.

That's why i included (not as a joke) "Caveat Emptor".

there's not gonna be a fool proof way --- especially with so many of us fools in the league. 

If a GM did that to me I would not deal with them any more. And if a GM did that i would feel like they have some real messed up priorities... that they may want to walk outside and get some fresh air.

The rule started b/c teams were missing 100, 150 games. And being rewarded with high picks. Personally just like with PHI i am pretty sure this isn't actually gonna work for a team and seems like a miserable way to play the game, but whatever.

I'm just saying... if you're active enough to trade a pick you should be active enough to set your lineup.

What if you just couldn't trade a pick if you were on track to have missed 75 games?  And if you are holding your own you're top 3 ineligible.

The only concern I'd have is the "on track" part. I think (though can't really prove) at least one GM was manipulating the projected missed games (i.e. starting a lot of guys to get under the projecte 75 games, then delaling a pick).

What a nightmare for the commish to track. Let's make it simple. This is fantasy basketball ... not soduku.

You miss 75 games your pick is penalized... if you dealt it that's tough beans for your trade partner.... and those teams missing 100-200 games may find they have less trade partners for their picks because of that....

(like i said i think i'm much more hardline on this than others,.... which i accept.)

[Gainesville Celtic]

There would then be a loophole where you trade away a pick and then intentionally miss more than 75 games to sabotage it.

But then again, if you did that, the other person would NEVER trade with you again, and likely other teams would follow suit.  So you'd blow up your trade chances just to be a jerk. not likely.

It could be done unintentionally though. I own mmsb and brahamas picks. Both picks should end up top 5. What if they miss 75 games simply due to injuries or having rosters filled with dleague talent? 

this is also why I'm against (here and in the h2h league) allowing future draft picks to be dealt before this year's fantasy draft has even occured.

but it still IMO comes down to Caveat Emptor (buyer beware). No one is guaranteed those picks to be top 5... what if those teams finish in the top 10... should the team with their picks get compensation there too?

I think we're making this stuff harder than it needs to be.

[LarBrd33]

There will be gamesmanship regardless. If we don't close the loophole preventing pick sabotage, a more involved GM will still find a way to work the situation into their favor.

For instance,  i project brahma to finish bottom 2... Well into the season he should be at the bottom of the standings. I track projected missed games... If I see him creeping up on 75 missed games (say he's at 68 or something) I find a team to trade down with ... "Hey brahma is at the bottom of the standings. I'll trade my currently #1 projected pick for your #4 and #8 projected picks".  Flash forward a week and brahma exceeds 75 missed games. Well look at that... His pick is no longer eligible for top 3. It's 4th at best. Which means I succeeded in trading #4 for #3 and #8. Both my new picks are eligible for top 3 and could theoretically land 1 and 2... While the pick I traded away can not finish better than 4.

[Rondo2287]

I said i would put this up for a vote during last year so here it goes. 

Rule Proposal

Anti Tanking rule:

A GM shall not play inferior players over stronger players in an attempt to maximize draft position and shall be punishable by a warning for the first offense, a draft pick penalty of one spot for second offense, two draft pick spot penalty upon third offense and banishment upon 4th offense. 
1. Intentionally take a player (Player X) out of the starting lineup on the day of a game in favor of another player (Player 1) ranked 100 (per yahoo avg points per game over the previous 30 days) spots or more below player X.

Note: not placing a better player into ones starting lineup in place of an inferior player falls within inactivity rather than tanking. 

Note two: regardless of future trades involving this pick, the draft pick penalties remain attached

[LarBrd33]

I said i would put this up for a vote during last year so here it goes. 

Rule Proposal

Anti Tanking rule:

A GM shall not play inferior players over stronger players in an attempt to maximize draft position and shall be punishable by a warning for the first offense, a draft pick penalty of one spot for second offense, two draft pick spot penalty upon third offense and banishment upon 4th offense. 
1. Intentionally take a player (Player X) out of the starting lineup on the day of a game in favor of another player (Player 1) ranked 100 (per yahoo avg points per game over the previous 30 days) spots or more below player X.

Note: not placing a better player into ones starting lineup in place of an inferior player falls within inactivity rather than tanking. 

Note two: regardless of future trades involving this pick, the draft pick penalties remain attached

Yeah that's the Russell Westbrook rule where Westbrook was left to rot on the bench for two straight months during his historic statistical run last season.  I did the math and it only mildly impacted Lucky Strike's draft pick.

Problem is, it can somewhat be open for interpretation what is considered a team's "better players".   It's not always obvious.  Like for example do we watch MMSB daily to make sure he doesn't play Furkan Aldemir over MItch McGary?  Who is making that call?  And sometimes players are left on the bench, because they are managing their max games at each position or something.   

[Rondo2287]

I said i would put this up for a vote during last year so here it goes. 

Rule Proposal

Anti Tanking rule:

A GM shall not play inferior players over stronger players in an attempt to maximize draft position and shall be punishable by a warning for the first offense, a draft pick penalty of one spot for second offense, two draft pick spot penalty upon third offense and banishment upon 4th offense. 
1. Intentionally take a player (Player X) out of the starting lineup on the day of a game in favor of another player (Player 1) ranked 100 (per yahoo avg points per game over the previous 30 days) spots or more below player X.

Note: not placing a better player into ones starting lineup in place of an inferior player falls within inactivity rather than tanking. 

Note two: regardless of future trades involving this pick, the draft pick penalties remain attached

Yeah that's the Russell Westbrook rule where Westbrook was left to rot on the bench for two straight months during his historic statistical run last season.  I did the math and it only mildly impacted Lucky Strike's draft pick.

Problem is, it can somewhat be open for interpretation what is considered a team's "better players".   It's not always obvious.  Like for example do we watch MMSB daily to make sure he doesn't play Furkan Aldemir over MItch McGary?  Who is making that call?  And sometimes players are left on the bench, because they are managing their max games at each position or something.

Comon now... I refrained from posting a particular player or GM so as not to start an issue. 

To address your quantifying concern, that's why I put in ranked 100 spots below in avg points per game by yahoo over the past 30 days. 

I think that is a wide enough net that it will catch absurd benchings but give GM's some creative license. 

[yall hate]

The bottom line - there is not going to be a way to craft an anti-tanking rule that prevents all "loopholes".  But if we give the commish the power to warn/punish, this should resolve the problem.  Maybe there is ambiguity leading to a warning.  If that team doesn't fix that "ambiguity", then it's their own fault why they then get a punishment. 

This isn't a debate about Iran's nuclear weapons. It's fantasy basketball.

[Rondo2287]

The bottom line - there is not going to be a way to craft an anti-tanking rule that prevents all "loopholes".  But if we give the commish the power to warn/punish, this should resolve the problem.  Maybe there is ambiguity leading to a warning.  If that team doesn't fix that "ambiguity", then it's their own fault why they then get a punishment. 

This isn't a debate about Iran's nuclear weapons. It's fantasy basketball.

I would agree, my original suggestion in the yahoo thread during the season was much more qualitative rather than below where I tried to quantify it. 

However based on the issues we did run into last year I think it would be clear that something needs to be put in place. 

This tanking rule could then also address the 75 games missed trade of picks issue. 

[LarBrd33]

Suggestion: 

All Teams Must have Formal Names

Suggested text: "All teams must have a formal team name in the following format:  [City Name] [Mascot Name].  Examples:  Utah Flash.  Pittsburgh Pisces.  Bellevue Leprechauns.  City may be fictional.

Reason:   Let's clean up the team name riff raff.  Between Ya'll Hate and Ubuntu Ya'll... and Desiginated Drinkers and Diggles Disciples... it's like distinguishing between Seth/Steph Curry, Bojan/Bogdan Bogdanovic, and Goran/Zoran Dragic.

[LarBrd33]

Here's my suggestion for helping with both tanking and league activity:

100 Missed Game Rule

Suggested Text:   "Any team that exceeds 100 games will either be removed from the league or forfeit all owned draft picks."

Reason:

Five teams exceeded 110 missed games this year... the most having missed 174 games.  That's absurd.   In the real NBA, teams can't simply say "Oh sorry, Bryant and Randle are injured and the rest of our players are stuck in the D-League... we're only suiting up 3 guys tonight".   Even blatantly tanking teams like Philly manage to field an NBA roster nightly.   

Exceeding 100 missed games either means a team is inactive and checked out, or not making a good faith effort to compete.   I've intentionally tanked two years in a row and still had no trouble finishing with less than 75 missed games.  Last year, for instance, I had 4 injured players and a few more who spent the bulk of their time in D-League.  Despite this, I finished with only 53 missed games.   If your player is injured, trade him or cut him if necessary.  If your young guy is stuck overseas or in D-league, trade him or cut him if necessary.   There's over 100 serviceable players on the waiver wire that are getting NBA minutes.  Make space for the Steve Novaks of the world if you need to.   If you're hoarding draft picks, it means two things... #1 - You have plenty of empty roster spots for serviceable players off the waiver wire.  #2 - You can use those draft picks to trade for serviceable players.  If you're refusing to do either, you should either leave the league or forfeit your draft picks at the end of the year.  The commish should probably choose between the two solutions.  It makes sense if a GM is removed for inactivity that the new GM gets to keep the draft picks.  But if a GM insists on staying, they should forfeit all draft picks as punishment. 

[Rondo2287]

Here's my suggestion for helping with both tanking and league activity:

100 Missed Game Rule

Suggested Text:   "Any team that exceeds 100 games will either be removed from the league or forfeit all owned draft picks."

Reason:

Five teams exceeded 110 missed games this year... the most having missed 174 games.  That's absurd.   In the real NBA, teams can't simply say "Oh sorry, Bryant and Randle are injured and the rest of our players are stuck in the D-League... we're only suiting up 3 guys tonight".   Even blatantly tanking teams like Philly manage to field an NBA roster nightly.   

Exceeding 100 missed games either means a team is inactive and checked out, or not making a good faith effort to compete.   I've intentionally tanked two years in a row and still had no trouble finishing with less than 75 missed games.  Last year, for instance, I had 4 injured players and a few more who spent the bulk of their time in D-League.  Despite this, I finished with only 53 missed games.   If your player is injured, trade him or cut him if necessary.  If your young guy is stuck overseas or in D-league, trade him or cut him if necessary.   There's over 100 serviceable players on the waiver wire that are getting NBA minutes.  Make space for the Steve Novaks of the world if you need to.   If you're hoarding draft picks, it means two things... #1 - You have plenty of empty roster spots for serviceable players off the waiver wire.  #2 - You can use those draft picks to trade for serviceable players.  If you're refusing to do either, you should either leave the league or forfeit your draft picks at the end of the year.

I don't think tanking and games missed are necessarily related.  In my opinion true tanking really involves intentionally lowering your average player score which is then extrapolated over missed games through the adjusted standings. 

Also regarding your point above, the lakers did infact end a game with only 4 players last year.  It was funny. 

[LarBrd33]

Here's my suggestion for helping with both tanking and league activity:

100 Missed Game Rule

Suggested Text:   "Any team that exceeds 100 games will either be removed from the league or forfeit all owned draft picks."

Reason:

Five teams exceeded 110 missed games this year... the most having missed 174 games.  That's absurd.   In the real NBA, teams can't simply say "Oh sorry, Bryant and Randle are injured and the rest of our players are stuck in the D-League... we're only suiting up 3 guys tonight".   Even blatantly tanking teams like Philly manage to field an NBA roster nightly.   

Exceeding 100 missed games either means a team is inactive and checked out, or not making a good faith effort to compete.   I've intentionally tanked two years in a row and still had no trouble finishing with less than 75 missed games.  Last year, for instance, I had 4 injured players and a few more who spent the bulk of their time in D-League.  Despite this, I finished with only 53 missed games.   If your player is injured, trade him or cut him if necessary.  If your young guy is stuck overseas or in D-league, trade him or cut him if necessary.   There's over 100 serviceable players on the waiver wire that are getting NBA minutes.  Make space for the Steve Novaks of the world if you need to.   If you're hoarding draft picks, it means two things... #1 - You have plenty of empty roster spots for serviceable players off the waiver wire.  #2 - You can use those draft picks to trade for serviceable players.  If you're refusing to do either, you should either leave the league or forfeit your draft picks at the end of the year.  The commish should probably choose between the two solutions.  It makes sense if a GM is removed for inactivity that the new GM gets to keep the draft picks.  But if a GM insists on staying, they should forfeit all draft picks as punishment. 

I don't think tanking and games missed are necessarily related.  In my opinion true tanking really involves intentionally lowering your average player score which is then extrapolated over missed games through the adjusted standings. 

Also regarding your point above, the lakers did infact end a game with only 4 players last year.  It was funny.

So the Lakers finished with 1 missed game.   That's ok.   Once they exceed 100, their GM should be removed or they should forfeit all draft picks. 

[Rondo2287]

Suggestion: 

All Teams Must have Formal Names

Suggested text: "All teams must have a formal team name in the following format:  [City Name] [Mascot Name].  Examples:  Utah Flash.  Pittsburgh Pisces.  Bellevue Leprechauns.  City may be fictional.

Reason:   Let's clean up the team name riff raff.  Between Ya'll Hate and Ubuntu Ya'll... and Desiginated Drinkers and Diggles Disciples... it's like distinguishing between Seth/Steph Curry, Bojan/Bogdan Bogdanovic, and Goran/Zoran Dragic.

This is fantasy basketball. 

[byennie]

One solution a lot of people take:  Just ignore the offers.  It happens.  I've sent byennie probably 15 different trade offers over the past month and haven't received a response on any.  I just assume he's not interested.   

I totally and completely DISAGREE.  I find owners that ignore trades to be awful. honestly.  It takes .5 seconds to click reject.  leaving trades open is, in my opinion, somewhat rude.  In real life, if danny calls a gm and offers a trade and it is met with silence, what do you think that does to potential relations down the road? It makes no sense. 

Maybe a better system, and this would require more work for LB (and others who send lots of trades) would be that you keep a spreadsheet of sorts that lists trade offers you've sent out.  that way, you don't send the same offer 35 times.  You could even put in notes that the other owner has told you as part of trade discussions. 

LB and I have reached a couple of deals.  So we have a pretty good working relationship.  But I've probably said to you, 30-40 times, "no, I already rejected that. the price for player x is at least ___".  To me, that is the annoying part.  And I think your activity is a big plus for this league. But you should be (and others as well) better about knowing what trades you've already sent. 

By the way, this wasn't meant to be geared just to you. I have sent people the same offer multiple times, by mistake. Sometimes I'll say, I can't remember if I've previously offered X.

I tend to agree that ignoring offers is bad form, but I would clarify a couple of things:

I do think Yahoo! and offseason are at least slightly different, since there is a limit on pending deals in Yahoo (AND points are at stake on a daily basis). I would equate deliberately sitting on deals to inactivity, which is against the rules. That said, the flip-side is if someone is bombarding you. Maybe some rule of thumb would help, for example only having 1 trade offer out to any other GM that they aren't actively discussing with you. You can always throw some variations in the comments.

In some cases you are in communication with someone that just don't respond to every offer and it's understood. This is the case with LarBrd33 and I for example. We are in regular communication but every trade offer doesn't get an email response. I guess you could say we have an "understanding" so it works out. I don't mind unlimited proposals, we're in touch, and I respond to them selectively. Probably if it was during the Yahoo season I would just hit "reject" rather than ignore.

[byennie]

Here's my suggestion for helping with both tanking and league activity:

100 Missed Game Rule

Suggested Text:   "Any team that exceeds 100 games will either be removed from the league or forfeit all owned draft picks."

Reason:

Five teams exceeded 110 missed games this year... the most having missed 174 games.  That's absurd.   In the real NBA, teams can't simply say "Oh sorry, Bryant and Randle are injured and the rest of our players are stuck in the D-League... we're only suiting up 3 guys tonight".   Even blatantly tanking teams like Philly manage to field an NBA roster nightly.   

Exceeding 100 missed games either means a team is inactive and checked out, or not making a good faith effort to compete.   I've intentionally tanked two years in a row and still had no trouble finishing with less than 75 missed games.  Last year, for instance, I had 4 injured players and a few more who spent the bulk of their time in D-League.  Despite this, I finished with only 53 missed games.   If your player is injured, trade him or cut him if necessary.  If your young guy is stuck overseas or in D-league, trade him or cut him if necessary.   There's over 100 serviceable players on the waiver wire that are getting NBA minutes.  Make space for the Steve Novaks of the world if you need to.   If you're hoarding draft picks, it means two things... #1 - You have plenty of empty roster spots for serviceable players off the waiver wire.  #2 - You can use those draft picks to trade for serviceable players.  If you're refusing to do either, you should either leave the league or forfeit your draft picks at the end of the year.  The commish should probably choose between the two solutions.  It makes sense if a GM is removed for inactivity that the new GM gets to keep the draft picks.  But if a GM insists on staying, they should forfeit all draft picks as punishment.

I actually like this in general as a clear-cut inactivity rule. My twist on it would be:

Penalty is your own 1st rounder (next year's if necessary).

You may apply for an "injury exception" which would be voted on by the league for use in extenuating circumstances. You should be able to show multiple major injuries and a concerted effort. Requires 2/3rd vote to save you.

I don't see it as a tanking measure per se (as others have noted, that's a more sophisticated issue), just an activity one.