Lucky17's Yahoo! FBB H2H League: Trading picks/Playoff roster moves

[Roy H.]

To put it differently, is there something fundamentally different between weekly regular season matchups and weekly playoff matchups that necessitates completely different roster management protocols? I don't believe so.

If we get one move per week during the regular season, I think we should have one move per week during the playoffs.

I think that there is something different.  The regular season -- much like in the "real" NBA -- is about getting your roster set for the playoffs.  Once the playoffs hit, it's all about determining the best team.  The NBA recognizes this principle by not allowing teams to sign free agents in the playoffs.  Neither the NBA nor fantasy leagues allow trading in the playoffs.

Playoffs are all about dueling to see who has the best team.  They're not about seeing who can cycle in the most players to game the system.  I'm sure we've all lost fantasy matchups because our opponent decides to cycle, and get a huge games played advantage.  That's gaming the system, and simply isn't any fun.

Is one roster move a week really "gaming" the system? I don't buy it.

One might not be, but as soon as you go to two (as has been suggested) or more, it certainly can be.  You can be talking about 4 to 6 extra games played under those circumstances, if people research their adds properly.

I don't want to see playoff series decided by roster filler, and I get the impression that most other GMs don't, either.

[mkogav]

I vote we remain the same, 50 moves per season and 1 per week during the playoffs. 1 move per week during the playoffs is reasonable. You can't cycle with 1 move per week / 320 roster league. Two or more moves per week is unnecessary.

If there was some issue from last year's playoffs that was caused by the 1 move per week then maybe we should consider it. However, I thought last year was pretty clean. Actually, all three years have been pretty good.

Mk

[Gainesville Celtic]

FWIW, i'm fine with 1 or even 2 moves in the playoffs, but would be against zero.

I guess I look at that there is a downside of moves too which is part of the fun.

I dropped James Anderson for Keith Bogans last year in my matchup with Roy to try and win. It was a gamble and -- after much deliberation -- I gave up a good rotation player to do it.

In a league this deep the best guy that *should* be available on the WW shouldn't make a huge difference... but could make a 2008-PJ Brown like difference. If the other 19 teams left that guy out there, bad on them.

[barefacedmonk]

0 or 2?..lets stick to 1..that's a nice compromise.

[hpantazo]

0 or 2?..lets stick to 1..that's a nice compromise.

agreed, 1 per week sounds good to me

[Gainesville Celtic]

To confirm:

Toine's Boys sends T.J. Ford and Ersan Ilyasova
Designated Drinkers sends right to swap own 2012 1st rounder with Make Me Some Bacon's 2012 1st rounder

Just want to make sure i have this for the draft pick trade log:

TB gets the right to swap MMSB's 1st for Des. Drinkers 1st
DD gets TJ Ford & Ersan Illyasova

We're gonna need a computer programmer to write some code to deal with (a) the 33-and-counting trades of 2012 draft picks (b) the 5-and-counting options to swap picks and (c) the implememntation of a draft lottery for picks 1-12.

After writing this tounge-in-cheek comment and the discussion in this thread, I'd like to make a formal proposal (I've mentioned this to Lucky in a PM):

That we write simple constitutions for Lucky's 2 leagues (H2h, Points) and make them a locked post here at CelticsBlog.

This will avoid any confusion for new GMs, or GMs like me who can't remember what day it is never mind how many pickups a season we get 

We could list each point in this thread as such:

1. There is a lottery for all 12 non-playoff teams

I'll volunteer to help collate them into a final post that folks would review before Lucky copies into a thread that someone then locks (Lucky should do it so he can later edit after votes).

[Roy H.]

I say go for it, GC.  There are getting to be a lot of small rules, etc., and it's always a good thing to have them codified in one place.  It eliminates confusion.

[barefacedmonk]

That's a very good idea, GC. TP for volunteering.

[The Walker Wiggle]

0 or 2?..lets stick to 1..that's a nice compromise.

Except last offseason we went from unlimited roster moves to 1.

[Roy H.]

0 or 2?..lets stick to 1..that's a nice compromise.

Except last offseason we went from unlimited roster moves to 1.

And it worked out smashingly.   

[The Walker Wiggle]

To put it differently, is there something fundamentally different between weekly regular season matchups and weekly playoff matchups that necessitates completely different roster management protocols? I don't believe so.

If we get one move per week during the regular season, I think we should have one move per week during the playoffs.

I think that there is something different.  The regular season -- much like in the "real" NBA -- is about getting your roster set for the playoffs.  Once the playoffs hit, it's all about determining the best team.  The NBA recognizes this principle by not allowing teams to sign free agents in the playoffs.  Neither the NBA nor fantasy leagues allow trading in the playoffs.

Playoffs are all about dueling to see who has the best team.  They're not about seeing who can cycle in the most players to game the system.  I'm sure we've all lost fantasy matchups because our opponent decides to cycle, and get a huge games played advantage.  That's gaming the system, and simply isn't any fun.

Is one roster move a week really "gaming" the system? I don't buy it.

I don't find the argument that persuasive with a trade deadline three weeks from the start of the postseason. Not a knock - actually I tip my cap again - but the Naturals that tore through the playoffs, Draft Dodgers included, bore little resemblance to the regular season team that was grinding it out for a seventh seed.

And anyway, a large part of fantasy league appeal is working the wire, no? Ok, I'm biased since I like the speculative add more than anybody, Mkgoav excepted, but I still believe 1-2 more roster moves per week is more fun, would add to postseason activity, give eliminated managers something to do, and still a low enough cap to ensure against abuse.

Because bottom line in a 20 team league with 16 man rosters, cycling players can't even really tip the scales the way it can in a more traditional league. And that same league and roster depth makes it much harder to find anyone other than flash in the pans F.A.s during the final weeks of the season.

[barefacedmonk]

0 or 2?..lets stick to 1..that's a nice compromise.

Except last offseason we went from unlimited roster moves to 1.

Unlimited moves during the playoffs?!? And here I am, calling for no moves at all...1 move per week seems fine then.

[The Walker Wiggle]

0 or 2?..lets stick to 1..that's a nice compromise.

Except last offseason we went from unlimited roster moves to 1.

Unlimited moves during the playoffs?!? And here I am, calling for no moves at all...1 move per week seems fine then.

No I'd like to see a compromise of 2-3 moves per postseason week.

[barefacedmonk]

0 or 2?..lets stick to 1..that's a nice compromise.

Except last offseason we went from unlimited roster moves to 1.

Unlimited moves during the playoffs?!? And here I am, calling for no moves at all...1 move per week seems fine then.

No I'd like to see a compromise of 2-3 moves per postseason week.

And I'll continue to protest it.

EDIT: 2 moves per week during the regular season and no moves during the playoffs. Is that better?

[Roy H.]

I don't find the argument that persuasive with a trade deadline three weeks from the start of the postseason. Not a knock - actually I tip my cap again - but the Naturals that tore through the playoffs, Draft Dodgers included, bore little resemblance to the regular season team that was grinding it out for a seventh seed.

And anyway, a large part of fantasy league appeal is working the wire, no? Ok, I'm biased since I like the speculative add more than anybody, Mkgoav excepted, but I still believe 1-2 more roster moves per week is more fun, would add to postseason activity, give eliminated managers something to do, and still a low enough cap to ensure against abuse.

Because bottom line in a 20 team league with 16 man rosters, cycling players can't even really tip the scales the way it can in a more traditional league. And that same league and roster depth makes it much harder to find anyone other than flash in the pans F.A.s during the final weeks of the season.

Allowing cycling in the playoffs punishes deep teams that have players they don't want to put on waivers.  You may not think cycling is a big deal (which is strange, since you've done it consistently the last several years), but for every move per week you allow, you're talking about potentially a 2 or 3 game advantage over your opponent.  Allow 2 moves, and it's 4 to 6 games; 3, and it's 6 to 9.  At that point, you're talking about a major advantage.  Even a scrub who adds one three pointer or one block is enough to swing a playoff series, especially when multiplied over 4 to 6 games.

There's nothing "fun" about losing a playoff series because your opponent decided to bring in various scrubs to tilt a playoff series in his favor.  One roster move per week allows people to mitigate a situation where a player is benched or injured, while still preserving the integrity of the playoffs.