Dynasty

[TREFF]

I like Barilko's idea with the randomizer/choose your spot in year one.

Can't for the life of me understand why Milk would want #7 having the #1 pick though, especially when earlier the concern was bad teams not having a chance to improve. ..why oh why penalize #14??

The ONLY reason it makes sense is to keep teams from tanking late in the season. And anyone who would consider such a thing. .PLEASE, leave now

 

[SteelersPride]

it should be random in year 1, let the chips fall where they may

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I like Barilko's idea with the randomizer/choose your spot in year one.

Can't for the life of me understand why Milk would want #7 having the #1 pick though, especially when earlier the concern was bad teams not having a chance to improve. ..why oh why penalize #14??

The ONLY reason it makes sense is to keep teams from tanking late in the season. And anyone who would consider such a thing. .PLEASE, leave now

Treff, you can't do that!!! don't take my VALID points for one argument to question another argument... it just doesn't work with me... generally when i argue something that i want i will use reasonings that i think people want to hear, in an attempt to sell my way of thinking... But you really have to assume anything i propose i propose for the sole reason that i think it is fun...

BUT this draft order proposal, is something i have always thought was a problem in real sports... I never understood why help the bad teams, its the middle teams that are close to contending that always gets screwed...

 

[broncosmitty]

i would think if the commish saw someone doing that, they would edit their roste for them

Huh?

I'd like there to be no unauthorized editing of rosters in the future. Or count me out. Had enough of that in the past. Not interested in it again.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Huh?

I'd like there to be no unauthorized editing of rosters in the future. Or count me out. Had enough of that in the past. Not interested in it again.

Agreed, STRATEGERIE is STRATEGERIE...

 

[broncosmitty]

Agreed, STRATEGERIE is STRATEGERIE...

Only team owners should determine who they start week to week. For NO REASON should anyone other than a team owner make a roster move.

But I do agree that tanking is weak. Just not as weak as adjusting a lineup against an owners wishes.

 

[obxyankeefan]

Only team owners should determine who they start week to week. For NO REASON should anyone other than a team owner make a roster move.

But I do agree that tanking is weak. Just not as weak as adjusting a lineup against an owners wishes.

Simple answer to me is we have a vote to dismiss someone that is tanking.

 

[SteelersPride]

sounds good, and agreed on all points

 

[MilkSpiller22]

here is the thing about TANKING... the whole purpose of a dynasty is to Build a good team... Some owners get lucky and they start of with a good team... For those who really have to build, tanking might be a valid strategy... You can't penalize an owner for playing the cards dealt to them...

If a team thinks they need to tank, then isn't it just as valid of a strategy as trading all your veterans for youngsters?? The goal is not to prevent tanking, it is to prevent inactive owners... those are not necessarily the same thing...

 

[SteelersPride]

r

here is the thing about TANKING... the whole purpose of a dynasty is to Build a good team... Some owners get lucky and they start of with a good team... For those who really have to build, tanking might be a valid strategy... You can't penalize an owner for playing the cards dealt to them...

If a team thinks they need to tank, then isn't it just as valid of a strategy as trading all your veterans for youngsters?? The goal is not to prevent tanking, it is to prevent inactive owners... those are not necessarily the same thing...

well said

 

[TREFF]

r

well said

Not well said at all imho...and I wholeheartedly disagree. There is a moral, ethical, fundamental difference between tanking, and trading away the present for the future. One is building a team responsibly and ethically, the other is a douchebag, bush league move. If there's anyone who honestly doesn't see the difference between the two, signed up for this league right now. ..I'd like to know about it so I can bow out..right here, right now

 

[TREFF]

Treff, you can't do that!!! don't take my VALID points for one argument to question another argument...

I can. .and I did.

So where's the line? Why draw one at all? If a team misses, the playoffs via a tiebreaker, they're "rewarded" with the #1 pick? No way, there's no logic to that at all. Why do they leap a minimum of 8 spots ahead of the team they were tied with? Why does the last place team get punished even further? Maybe they had their best two guys missed the season?
I just can't see any valid argument for the reorder other than to prevent tanking. .you may call it inactive..I don't see a single inactive owner of the 14 teams were signed up with as if now. .nor do I think any of them would tank

 

[broncosmitty]

Not well said at all imho...and I wholeheartedly disagree. There is a moral, ethical, fundamental difference between tanking, and trading away the present for the future. One is building a team responsibly and ethically, the other is a douchebag, bush league move. If there's anyone who honestly doesn't see the difference between the two, signed up for this league right now. ..I'd like to know about it so I can bow out..right here, right now

I think tanking is weak, should be ridiculed and well, is weak. But it has longterm value for the tanking team, possibly. Just as trading an aging star for a handful of "prospects" does. Both hurt a team in the short run and give easy wins to those lucky enough to have the tanker/eye on the future trader on the schedule.

A draft lottery or Possible loss of picks after league vote could curb the strategy. But it can't be done by changing lineups without consent.

 

[broncosmitty]

For what it's worth, Smaller rosters can prevent tanking by reducing options. So long as it's required each team fields a complete roster weekly. (As in no holes. Injured players starting would require a rule against it.)

Tbh, I don't see tanking as a huge detriment to a league. I've seen it happen in most dynasty/large keepers I've been involved in. And it's also never swung a teams fate back to successful, that I've seen.

 

[TKOSpikes]

There are no idiot owners here. If that ever happened, they would be booted. I don't see tanking ever being a problem.

Worst last year deserves hope for the next. Simple. We are not a group of shady owners.

 

[obxyankeefan]

There are no idiot owners here. If that ever happened, they would be booted. I don't see tanking ever being a problem.

Worst last year deserves hope for the next. Simple. We are not a group of shady owners.

First off we were all BigD clones at CBS, now we are all Shady clones here.

 

[broncosmitty]

Thought about BigD earlier today, with Devin Travis ready to come the DL on Monday. Remember talking about him YEARS ago when DT was still in A ball.

He saw hope for the Tigers at second, in the future. I saw a guy we'd trade. He was right to have high praise. And I definitely didn't see Kinsler in our future.

Anyway, that was on my mind.

And for the record, despite TLance beating me 10-0 this week, I'm not actually tanking. Just sucking big time.

 

[Chef99]

I really dislike the way this conversation is going. Smitty, people really do that in dynasty leagues a lot? Tank fucking games?

Am I naive or something in thinking that is just despicable? This will be my first dynasty league, so maybe I am. Or maybe I take things too seriously.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I really dislike the way this conversation is going. Smitty, people really do that in dynasty leagues a lot? Tank fucking games?

Am I naive or something in thinking that is just despicable? This will be my first dynasty league, so maybe I am. Or maybe I take things too seriously.

I think it is the term tanking... teams won't bench their best players, but on years they know they need to do bad they may make the risks to start dangerous players... I don't fear tanking, i fear the owners that are not active... Often they are the same, but not necessarily...

I doubt anyone here will tank to the extent of benching their healthy best players...

 

[Barilko]

There had better not be anyone in this league who would even consider something so bush league