HomeLog inRegisterFAQSearch

Share | 
 

 RW Contracts - discussion

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
New England Nineties
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5585

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:36 pm

Naperville Divine wrote:
Mike, I disagree.  Your issue is exactly what makes the format perfect.  The 120 years forces you to make tough choices on late round picks.  Every now and then, a late round pick finds good fantasy value.  Usually it is a low number contract, which causes that good player to hit the RFA quicker, which helps turn over the WBs.  I find that one of the more exciting aspects of RFA and deciding how to divide up the 120 years.

I agree with the overall idea that deciding how to allocate the 120 years is one of the best parts of the league from a strategy standpoint. But, generally speaking, because the roster limit in this league is based on contract years, and a contract year for a 5th round player costs the same as one for a 1st round player, that really depresses the value of late picks. So I don't really think this system does actually make you make "tough choices" for late round picks; the choice is pretty easy and it results in a de-emphasis on late round picks. That's fine, there's nothing "wrong" with that, but I'm in leagues where we try and prop up the value of late round picks by allowing roster cap exemptions (via a taxi squad usually) to make up for the fact that you are way, way less likely to score on a late round pick.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:42 pm

Cybertron Screamers wrote:
The minimum number of players:
A) without utilizing waivers
B) assuming perfect bye week distribution

22 starters + 10 bye week players (1 each position)
-------------
32

Why this? You don't NEED one at each position.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 21841

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Sun Aug 02, 2015 9:46 pm

I am glad there isn't a consensus opinion in this thread as that would indicate a lack of strategy IMO.

@Mike...if we were to use a TS like what your other leagues do, then the cap would have to come down otherwise everyone would have an easy time locking everyone up for more years since they don't have to concern themselves with their later rookie picks...and since I know that you know that....then I'll only say that for me when an owner is allowed to ALSO have a separate TS for those longshot players there is little penalty for sitting on them so it's basically a free lotto ticket IMO which you aren't provided here. Here you have the choice of gambling on the by doling out a longer deal or potentially having to defend them because you went short contract and they panned out better than expected. I like that dynamic more than one where you can just stash em with little consequence and (at least in one of my experiences) it was very difficult for another owner to get those stashes away from you. If I wanted to go that route I would actually just go with no contracts and everyone keeps everyone forever barring trades.

@Shawn...I think you're trolling or nuts if you think anywhere near 27 players is a good idea. If one could hand pick any 27 players they wanted and have the ability to see into the future to guarantee no injuries then fine but short of that, it's just poor planning. By all means try to prove me wrong and I love that you are allowed to in this setup but there's no way that works out.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Sun Aug 02, 2015 10:37 pm

I guess I'm just nuts then. All we are talking about with that is what you NEED. That's all I was referring to.


Back to top Go down
Cybertron Screamers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 1188

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Sun Aug 02, 2015 10:46 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Cybertron Screamers wrote:
The minimum number of players:
A) without utilizing waivers
B) assuming perfect bye week distribution

22 starters + 10 bye week players (1 each position)
-------------
32

Why this? You don't NEED one at each position.



You are correct, I neglected the fact we have flex positions. bang head on wall

Correction:
A) without utilizing waivers
B) assuming max 2 skill /2 idp players bye per week
(you have 11 starters/side and 8 bye weeks, at least 3 of them will have multiple, only one can be the kicker, so for 2 weeks you need a 2 bye week fillers / side)

22 starters + 5 bye week players (2 skill flex/1 kicker/2 idp flex)

------
27 minimum <--- like minions said first, but that was why.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Mon Aug 03, 2015 8:30 am

Cybertron Screamers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Cybertron Screamers wrote:
The minimum number of players:
A) without utilizing waivers
B) assuming perfect bye week distribution

22 starters + 10 bye week players (1 each position)
-------------
32

Why this? You don't NEED one at each position.



You are correct, I neglected the fact we have flex positions. bang head on wall

Correction:
A) without utilizing waivers
B) assuming max 2 skill /2 idp players bye per week
(you have 11 starters/side and 8 bye weeks, at least 3 of them will have multiple, only one can be the kicker, so for 2 weeks you need a 2 bye week fillers / side)

22 starters + 5 bye week players (2 skill flex/1 kicker/2 idp flex)

------
27 minimum <--- like minions said first, but that was why.

high five


Back to top Go down
Littleton SilverBallers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 3192

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Mon Aug 03, 2015 9:36 am

I could easily deal with only having 27 players on my roster.  Less of a headache deciding who to start every week.  

My max players I want on my team is 40, but I prefer only having 30-35.  Anymore and I get confused who to start from the cluster fuck of players on my roster.  Right now I have over 40 and it bugs the SHIT out of me!!  Can't wait to get my roster trimmed down to my liking after this year


Back to top Go down
Kane County Goon Squad
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7325

PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   Mon Aug 03, 2015 9:37 am

Singapore Slings wrote:
Because I was a fucking retard during free agency.

ME TOO high five

I'D LIKE TO GIVE SOME LONGER DEALS BUT BOTH THE YEARS THAT I HAVE DONE RFA HERE I DON'T KEEP TRACK WELL ENOUGH AND END UP SIGNING TOO MANY PLAYERS - HOPEFULLY I WILL LEARN SOON ENOUGH Crying or Very sad


Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: RW Contracts - discussion   

Back to top Go down
 
RW Contracts - discussion
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Roster Wars :: The Roster Wars Clubhouse :: Main RW Lobby-
Jump to: