Building a better Fantasy Baseball League from scratch. [Archive]

Toddzilla

03-10-2011, 12:13 PM

For a while I've tried to get friends and colleagues to start a fantasy baseball league with me whereby we start with a basic set of rules and as the seasons go by we adapt the rules based on personal preference, likes and dislikes, or experiments we'd like to try.

In that spirit, I'd really like to create a FOFC-populated league with a committed set of owners. This would be a keeper league, we can play for a nominal amout of money even, and everyone would have input into how we found the league and how it evolves from season to season.

My only preferences from the beginning are (1) this be a draft league rather than an auction so that we can conduct it online in a reasonable amout of time, (2) a rotisserie-style league rather than head-to-head, and (3) we limit the league to the NL-only to avoid "all-star" rosters (AL-only if we have to, and entire ML only if we get enough owners).

From here we would then decide, as a group:

1 - the number of teams
2 - the number of players on each team, including reserves and farm system (if any)
3 - the categories to use
4 - rules for keepers and subsequent drafts
5 - waiver, trade, and other roster rules

I can set the league up on Yahoo, CBS, ESPN, or some other place so everyone can get to it easily.

Please respond in this thread if you'd be interested - if you have friends that would be interested in playing, that's cool, too.. If this works, we still have a few weeks to draft before the start of the season.

Suicane75

03-10-2011, 12:47 PM

Brother, I've been trying for years to make something like this go. Online, RL friends and acquaintances. The problem always comes down to money, rule uniformity and finding people who want to be in as hardcore of a league you.

My caveat is that I wanna play for money. Most people don't. At least not enough people to fill up a league from random places.

Chief Rum

03-10-2011, 01:06 PM

I am down for this. I don't mind playing for money.

Mustang

03-10-2011, 01:08 PM

My opinion, but auction >>> draft.

My NL only auction keeper league draft night is the highlight of my fantasy year for any sport. Not sure if there are any sites where you can start a draft and then pause it, but if you can swing it auction drafts are just awesome.

Oh.. I'd be interested depending on the final rule set...

1 - the number of teams - For NL only, depending on the number of players you have, the max is around 11 teams which stretches the FA pool. 10 is good solid number

2 - the number of players on each team, including reserves and farm system (if any). - We go with 1 C, 1 each of the positions, 1 CI, 1 MI, 1 U, 5 OF and 10 P. All play. There are 5 reserve spots only for NL minor leaguers and non-AL minor leaguers. Guys like Japanese baseball guys, Cuban players that just defected, Free Agents, etc... I find that having all players play is far easier to keep track of (I hate setting pitching matchups, figuring out 2 start guys.. blah blah. Plus, with a NL only league if you have bench players, you are talking about have absolutely no FAs to pick up and it is almost WYSIWYG after the draft)

3 - the categories to use - The standard 5x5 and use either OBP or AVG. Possibly if you go really deep with rosters, you might consider fielding % and holds to give extra value to some players.

4 - rules for keepers and subsequent drafts. We have a max of 15 and you can keep them a maximum of 6 years (salaries increase). If I had my say, I would go with 10 and 4 yrs.

terpkristin

03-10-2011, 05:10 PM

I'd be in. Though auctions scare me.

/tk

PackerFanatic

03-10-2011, 05:14 PM

I may be interesting in joining a fresh league. I love leagues with history and I would love to say I started in this league :)

Glengoyne

03-10-2011, 05:31 PM

I'm interested enough for this thread to pique my interest. I'd say draft over auction because of the time constraint. Not to mention, I'm a relative noob, and wouldn't function very as well in a MLB draft as I do in an NFL fantasy draft.

I don't have too much of an opinion on the finer points.

I do prefer NL over AL.
I'd only be interested if we went through a site with nice managerial tools. I use ESPN for fantasy football, and while I complain that the dummy friendly tools help even the playing field for the less prepared competition I would clearly be on the benefit receiving end of that trade off in a baseball situation.
A nominal fee would be cool.

Suicane75

03-10-2011, 05:42 PM

I prefer NL to AL but i'm cool as long as we're single league specific.

Auction or draft doesn't matter to me.

I like deeper lineups and rosters, the deeper the better.

As far as keepers go I think i'd rather have less than more but i've never been in a keeper league so it would all be new to me anyway.

stevew

03-10-2011, 07:51 PM

I'm interested possibly.

NL only sounds good. I think there should be a lock in date for the year. That way if a guy gets traded you have him for the remainder of the season.

Liking the short bench idea.
Prefer it to be for some kind of money, if only to keep interest.

Categories like 1b&OF and 2b&3b&ss are better than specific positions IMO.

Toddzilla

03-11-2011, 08:26 AM

I think having an auction is simply not possible. It would take way too long - maybe in the future we could move toward this, but I feel initially it would be a draft.

So far I have the following people showing interest:

(1) me
(2) suicane75
(3) cheif rum
(4) mustang
(5) tk
(6) packer fanatic
(7) glengoyne
(8) stevew

If I can identify 2-4 more people, we can get down to the business of nailing down the rules. So far I see a majority in favor of:

A draft, not an auction
NL only
play for money

but nothing is set in stone yet

cougarfreak

03-11-2011, 08:53 AM

Mustang

03-11-2011, 10:09 AM

I would definitely be interested as long as the money commitment isn't huge. Just put of curiosity, how would an NL only league handle a player who is in the league this yaer, but not next if he switched leagues in the off-season?

Usually in that case, the player is just off the books and lost.

During the season though, you can go one of two ways. Any player that goes from the NL to the AL is retained and stats still count. If he is dropped, then that player is lost to the league. Or, once traded to the AL, that player is lost to the league. If prefer option 1 as it doesn't penalize someone during the season for having someone traded. Yes, a player may gain value going to the AL, but they could also lose value too so, that is a wash.

Of course, that brings up waiver options which you have either - FAAB, waiver wire or first come/first serve. I prefer a $100 FAAB budget over the other 2 given that we probably won't have transaction fees and there should be some consequence/limits to pickups. (I've been in leagues where 1 or 2 teams literally make 600 transactions which isn't much fun because you don't have a 'team' at that point) First come/first serve is my least favorite just given some people have internet access more than others so it can be an unfair advantage. As for waiver I'd prefer an non-resetting list. I'm in one league that resets each week so a team that is say in 1st is always at a disadvantage because of this. Even though the team in 2nd has made 50 transactions always right ahead of them. So, because of that, I'm not a huge fan of reset waiver lists. (If that makes sense). Basically, I'm big on action/consequence with fantasy sports.

Mustang

03-11-2011, 10:14 AM

Categories like 1b&OF and 2b&3b&ss are better than specific positions IMO.

A typical roster would be

C/1B/2B/3B/SS/MI/CI/OF/OF/OF/OF/OF/U - 5 minor league reserves.

I would not go with 2B/3B/SS in a NL (or AL only) league. Stats for NL 2B/SS positions aren't even comparable to 3B and the NL is generally thin at MI.

If people wanted just straight 3 CI / 3 MI positions and you could fill it with 3 2B or 3 3B positions.. never seen it that way, but doable I guess.

With 10 teams, I would NOT go with 2 C positions. You are talking about 4 teams having to carry a backup and C positions in the NL generally suck.

stevew

03-11-2011, 10:19 AM

I agree with the cumulative waiver idea, I think it should only reset after a pickup.

If guys going into the AL can be kept for the remainder of the season, I think a guy coming from the AL(minors or otherwise) should be barred for the rest of the season.

Mustang

03-11-2011, 10:39 AM

If guys going into the AL can be kept for the remainder of the season, I think a guy coming from the AL(minors or otherwise) should be barred for the rest of the season.

That would not be advisable..

If you have a heavy influx of AL players, that severely reduces the overall pool of players. Just have 9 guys come over and it is like dropping the NL to 15 teams. (Well.. 14 since everyone knows the Pirates don't count).

Just in case Pumpy is reading...

Glengoyne

03-11-2011, 12:59 PM

I agree with the cumulative waiver idea, I think it should only reset after a pickup.

...

How would only reset after a pickup work? I kind of like the idea of a worst to first waiver wire, but do understand the player in first will have a disadvantage in grabbing new talent. Then again they're in first, so how rough can they really be having it?

So I guess I'm not opposed to the worst to first waiver, but I'm interested to see what this "reset" option is all about.

Mustang

03-11-2011, 01:46 PM

So I guess I'm not opposed to the worst to first waiver, but I'm interested to see what this "reset" option is all about.

I'm referring to not resetting the waiver wire every week from worst to first, but just rolling it based on transactions. In theory, if you drafted really well you could hold onto a waiver claim in hopes of getting towards the top as opposed to always being at the bottom every week. Helps 'reward' smart decision making rather than just happening to suck.

Although, the whole waiver wire concept is why I prefer FAAB

Glengoyne

03-11-2011, 04:02 PM

I'm referring to not resetting the waiver wire every week from worst to first, but just rolling it based on transactions. In theory, if you drafted really well you could hold onto a waiver claim in hopes of getting towards the top as opposed to always being at the bottom every week. Helps 'reward' smart decision making rather than just happening to suck.

Although, the whole waiver wire concept is why I prefer FAAB

OK, so a team's waiver wire position would be reset to the bottom, or last position, every time they made a pickup. Meaning the more weeks you go without making a move, the more likely you are to get a newly emerging player. I kind of like that, I think that is a good step in the direction of the FAAB, but a little more user friendly.

I'd vote for the transaction based waiver wire, rather than worst to first. That works for me.

Mustang

03-11-2011, 04:14 PM

OK, so a team's waiver wire position would be reset to the bottom, or last position, every time they made a pickup.

Yep.

Although, resets with waiver wire pickups (drops/AL guys coming over/just drafted guys). True free agents (usually guys that no one picks up during the waiver wire window) wouldn't reset it.

cubboyroy1826

03-11-2011, 04:39 PM

I might be interested in joining up. I would prefer an Auction league which really isn't all that much longer than a snake draft but either way is fine. I would definitely be in favor of hanging on to player the leave to the AL but if these players are not on a roster they get dropped from free agency. I think allowing players the are traded to the NL to be picked up is a must as well (this is where a FAAB - free agent budget) can help keep things pretty interesting. NL or AL is fine.

I like the following roster setup: C/1B/2B/3B/SS/MI/CI/OF/OF/OF/OF/OF/U - 5 minor league reserves (when you say minor league you do not really mean minor leaguers correct?) 5 SP 3 RP and one Flex.

Glengoyne

03-11-2011, 04:49 PM

Yep.

Although, resets with waiver wire pickups (drops/AL guys coming over/just drafted guys). True free agents (usually guys that no one picks up during the waiver wire window) wouldn't reset it.

How would pickups of these "true" free agents be handled?

Toddzilla

03-11-2011, 05:17 PM

Whether or not we use waivers depends upon how we will handle roster moves. If we just use a "first come, first served" method, then waivers will only be needed for new players added to the player pool (AL trades, minor league call ups, etc.)

However, I don't like that this method favors the people that are in front of a computer with unrestricted internet access all day and can jump on a player in a matter of seconds. Many of us - including me - only get a chance to hit the internets a few times during work hours, and that puts us at a disadvantage. I would prefer that transactions occur on a daily basis - usually taking place at midnight - in which case every roster move will be a waiver claim. This is a much more equitable process. Using this plus a FAAB is the best solution IMO.

Toddzilla

03-11-2011, 05:23 PM

My other preferences:

23-man rosters: C, C, 1B, 3B, CI, 2B, SS, MI, 5 x OF, U, and 9 x P. 5 reserved spots, no limit on DL players.

Standard 5x5 categories, but I'd replace AVG with OBP.

As for players lost to the AL, I say tough luck, but I can handle counting their stats for the remainder of the season. Once that player gets cut or reserved, then that player becomes ineligible however.

UPDATED interest list:

(1) me
(2) suicane75
(3) cheif rum
(4) mustang
(5) tk
(6) packer fanatic
(7) glengoyne
(8) stevew
(9) cougarfreak
(10) cubboyroy

2 more owners and we can light this candle

terpkristin

03-11-2011, 05:36 PM

What would the rules for keepers be?

/tk

Toddzilla

03-11-2011, 06:51 PM

Keepers is something we'd have to vote on, including how many and how that impacted the next year's draft.

For example, in a draft situation, each player would be tagged with the round in which he was drafted (or undrafted as the case may be). We would then have to decide how to handle that moving forward. Keeping a player drafted in the 10th round usually means you skip your pick in the 10th round next year - some leagues make you skip a higher pick (i.e. keeping a player kept in the 10th round means you skip your 9th round pick. This means NO players drafted in the first round may be kept the next season - which means the superstars are always available in the draft).

Another way to do it is to skip picks starting in the first round and going down depending on how many players you keep. If you keep 6 players, you skip your first 6 picks. We can also decide if we are going to require our teams to keep a specific number of players (everyone must protect 5 and only 5 players, the old ESPN format), or teams can protect between 3 and 12 players, no more than 10 players, etc.

We'll figure it out.

stevew

03-11-2011, 08:44 PM

Probably the biggest thing for me would be the ability to make every transaction from my iPhone.

PackerFanatic

03-12-2011, 10:23 AM

I would also prefer to shy away from first come, first serve. Sure, I am usually one of those that is around a computer often, but I rather like the "competition" of the waiver wire and having a budget to work with. Adds another interesting aspect to the league, for sure :)

As far as keepers go, I would prefer a set number that everyone has to keep, period. Makes the drafts go easier that way too, since you know everyone will draft the same number (and losing the round before they were taken so no 1st rounders can be taken is a really good idea)

Also - I think we should leave it at 10 teams. Especially with an NL-only roster, I think that is plenty.

PackerFanatic

03-12-2011, 10:25 AM

Johnny93g

03-12-2011, 11:08 AM

I think I'm interested if your still looking for players. I haven't signed up for any leagues this year, this one looks like it would be alot of fun

Toddzilla

03-12-2011, 12:25 PM

With 16 teams in the NL, I think 12 is definitely do-able. Making the 2nd C a U position will help with depth.

Team list so far:

(1) me
(2) suicane75
(3) cheif rum
(4) mustang
(5) tk
(6) packer fanatic
(7) glengoyne
(8) stevew
(9) cougarfreak
(10) cubboyroy
(11) johnny93g

After we get 1 more, I'll start the threads for voting on the rules.

Oilers9911

03-12-2011, 01:06 PM

I'm interested if there is room.

Toddzilla

03-12-2011, 01:26 PM

(1) me
(2) suicane75
(3) cheif rum
(4) mustang
(5) tk
(6) packer fanatic
(7) glengoyne
(8) stevew
(9) cougarfreak
(10) cubboyroy
(11) johnny93g
(12) Oilers9911

Looks like we have 12. I'll PM the list and if I get affirmative reponses from everyone, I'll start the thread for rules voting.

PackerFanatic

03-12-2011, 02:02 PM

This will definitely be a fun group :)

Danny

03-12-2011, 02:07 PM

ill be an alternate if you need one more

Chief Rum

03-12-2011, 02:44 PM

Just re-confirming I am in for this, in case it's necessary. Looks like a good group, and I am excited to give it a go.

PackerFanatic

03-12-2011, 05:07 PM

Question - will this be weekly lineups or daily? I assume weekly, but I don't think I saw anything like that yet. And where are we planning to play (or is that TBD?)

Toddzilla

03-12-2011, 06:02 PM

Basically all of it is TBD. I think daily transactions are best, especially if we run transactions once a day rather than first come first served. We'll hash all this out before the season start.

Mustang

03-12-2011, 09:46 PM

As others have stated, would it be possible to have only 1 C spot? I think our rosters are already big enough, and with NL-only, it's going to be hard to find quality 2nd catchers

Hard to find 1 quality NL only catcher.

Pumpy Tudors

03-12-2011, 10:15 PM

That would not be advisable..

If you have a heavy influx of AL players, that severely reduces the overall pool of players. Just have 9 guys come over and it is like dropping the NL to 15 teams. (Well.. 14 since everyone knows the Pirates don't count).

Just in case Pumpy is reading...
the fuck

cmgdodgers

03-12-2011, 11:49 PM

Looks like your full, but I would like to join if someones bails.

Oilers9911

03-13-2011, 09:30 AM

I have always wanted to be in a league where not only drafting current major leaguers was important, but also drafting prospects was important. I would like to have, like in the real major leagues, a draft of say, 5 rounds sometime in the summer where you could draft any player not on a major league roster. That way you could watch your prospects develop and would bring some further immersion.

I prefer draft to auction. I know auction has it's own strategy but there is less drama to me. I much prefer waiting for my pick to arrive and watching the others in front of me and praying they don't take my guy. Then if he gets selected I have to change my strategy. Plus it's faster.

Regardless of the amount of quality catchers in the NL we have to go with 2. That's part of the strategy. Do you take a second catcher early to avoid getting a total bum? It adds to the strategy.

I like lots of keepers to make the drafting of prospects more important. Say 15 keepers. Then you have to decide which players from your minor leagues to keep and it adds to the trading part of it. If you have a player you know that you're not keeping you can then trade him.

If we could find a website to run the league that employs salaries as well that would be cool. Again, if there is a cap and you know your player is going to earn more the longer you keep him it can add a lot of strategy to the game.

Anyway, those are my two cents.

cubboyroy1826

03-13-2011, 10:19 AM

I would definitely have to bow out if we go to daily lineups and transactions. Time wise the difference is quite a bit. So I would prefer the weekly transactions. As for the keepers I say go low like maybe 5 major leaguers and 2 minor depending on how deep we go with the roster.

terpkristin

03-13-2011, 11:03 AM

Sent a PM, but I'm still in!

Warning to y'all: My fantasy teams end up like me--broken. Somehow, I always manage to pick the all-DL team.

/tk

Glengoyne

03-13-2011, 11:05 AM

I'm in as well.
Definitely a weekly league gives me a better chance to not be left on the side of the road, daily management and me won't get along.

Suicane75

03-13-2011, 11:54 AM

I'm not sure how flexible ESPN and Yahoo are but one of my leagues does Monday and Friday deadlines, which may be a nice middle ground.

Oilers9911

03-13-2011, 11:55 AM

I like weekly transactions as well.

stevew

03-13-2011, 12:11 PM

I'm pretty sure I'm game for weekly transactions, or twice-weekly. I dunno about daily ones.

Can someone explain how scoring would be worked? Is it tabulated cumulatively? Or weekly?

Mustang

03-13-2011, 12:22 PM

Can someone explain how scoring would be worked? Is it tabulated cumulatively? Or weekly?

If we go with a 5x5 non-HTH, I would assume cumulative point based. #1 team in HRs gets 12 points, 2 11 pts.... 12th team 1 Pt.

Glengoyne

03-13-2011, 03:45 PM

I'm in for the waiver wire or free agent budget. I have flavor preferences for each. Mostly I favor accessibility over complexity.

I also like the idea of keeping a set number of players, that way we don't have to monkey with the draft. That format of losing picks corresponding to retained players always seems to punish you for keeping a player.

Icy

03-13-2011, 03:46 PM

If you still have spots, i'm also interested, and maybe we are enough already for a full MLB league instead of AL or NL. I prefer initial draft too.

I'm right now in a money basketball keeper league with Gary and others and it's really fun. Basically Gary has set rules/finances close to running a real NBA team, so it's like playing an online text sim, running your franchise season after season while also able to lose/earn real money.

Danny

03-13-2011, 03:47 PM

Looks like 12 signed up and 3 on waiting/alternate list.

Glengoyne

03-13-2011, 03:51 PM

If we go with a 5x5 non-HTH, I would assume cumulative point based. #1 team in HRs gets 12 points, 2 11 pts.... 12th team 1 Pt.

I like this, 5x5 non head to head.

I am curious if this format would work head to head as well? I guess i'm open to both, with a leaning to typical non-hth.

Danny

03-13-2011, 03:54 PM

A key difference between roto and head to head is you can generally more afford to ditch a category or two in head to head. In roto, I think it's more difficult to win the league if you completely ditch SB and S for example.

Mustang

03-13-2011, 06:04 PM

I also like the idea of keeping a set number of players, that way we don't have to monkey with the draft. That format of losing picks corresponding to retained players always seems to punish you for keeping a player.

This.

Although, I wouldn't say you HAVE to keep X amount of players. If you keep less, you just draft more on the back end. I'm not a big fan of "If you keep this guy, it costs a 1st round, this guy is a 9th rounder, this guy a 20th rounder.. etc, etc"

Should be a max # of years you can keep a guy, you only only have to keep track of the # of years kept and the # of years does NOT reset when a guy is dropped or traded. It is a little more admin overhead however, it avoids any shenanigans like a guy trading or dropping someone just to reset the keeper clock.

Glengoyne

03-13-2011, 09:23 PM

PackerFanatic

03-13-2011, 10:21 PM

Regardless of the amount of quality catchers in the NL we have to go with 2. That's part of the strategy. Do you take a second catcher early to avoid getting a total bum? It adds to the strategy

Sure, it's part of the strategy - but if we go NL-only, that's 16 starting catchers for 12 teams. No way everyone gets a 2nd catcher that even gets a remotely decent amount of at-bats.

In terms of the keeper discussion, I also prefer the X number of years as opposed to losing the round. As a fantasy football commissioner in a keeper league, I love this so much more. A lot less overhead, like Mustang said. We even kick up a notch more - we have 2 keepers per year and the only rule is that you cannot keep the same 2 each year. So technically, you could keep the same guy every year, but you have to change the 2nd guy each year. Probably not something that would work in this league (especially with the boatload of keeper numbers people are throwing out there, haha). I think putting it at 3 - 4 years per keeper would be plain and simple and very easy for us to monitor.

stevew

03-13-2011, 10:26 PM

If a guy is a midseason FA pickup, I'm not sure how fair it is that he would be able to be kept. Especially if an elite player gets transferred to the NL via trade or something, and whomever is #1 that week in the waivers gets blessed by the gods.

Danny

03-13-2011, 10:40 PM

For NL only, you got to use a FA budget and not a waiver order.

cubboyroy1826

03-14-2011, 12:02 AM

My vote would also be in a Roto league with a FA budget. Waiver order just becomes too random unfortunately. With budget someone might spend $40 or the their $100 budget on a guy that is traded from the AL. Heck I have seen someone spend $80 on a stud player that got traded to the NL. If you have a $1 minimum bid for free agents it makes owners think twice about picking up some guy.

Glengoyne

03-14-2011, 12:10 AM

For NL only, you got to use a FA budget and not a waiver order.

I'm not convinced. The waiver order is simpler, and more user friendly. If done with the method where making an FA move sends you to the back of the line, then I think you've provided a consequence for making a move, while rewarding those that don't. I don't think I'm opposed outright to the faab, but I lean toward a waiver system. It seems to provide a balanced mechanic, and is easier to manage and execute. This reflects more of a predisposition than a strong opinion.

How are traditional FA pick ups managed? Those that aren't cross league transfers?

Danny

03-14-2011, 12:37 AM

I'm not convinced. The waiver order is simpler, and more user friendly. If done with the method where making an FA move sends you to the back of the line, then I think you've provided a consequence for making a move, while rewarding those that don't. I don't think I'm opposed outright to the faab, but I lean toward a waiver system. It seems to provide a balanced mechanic, and is easier to manage and execute. This reflects more of a predisposition than a strong opinion.

How are traditional FA pick ups managed? Those that aren't cross league transfers?

What that leads to is the best teams sitting on their top waiver claims while the lower teams have to make moves to try and improve and have lower priority. Then when a true impact player gets traded across leagues the top teams get them.

PackerFanatic

03-14-2011, 08:32 AM

What that leads to is the best teams sitting on their top waiver claims while the lower teams have to make moves to try and improve and have lower priority. Then when a true impact player gets traded across leagues the top teams get them.

This is why I would lean toward FAAB (plus I always think the budget is a little more fun and adds another cool flavor). Then again, is using the "if an impact guy gets traded" chip in this argument really valid? Sure, there are always a few guys that get traded across leagues each year but how often is a true "impact" guy traded that someone would throw 3/4 of a budget at?

Mustang

03-14-2011, 08:48 AM

This is why I would lean toward FAAB (plus I always think the budget is a little more fun and adds another cool flavor). Then again, is using the "if an impact guy gets traded" chip in this argument really valid? Sure, there are always a few guys that get traded across leagues each year but how often is a true "impact" guy traded that someone would throw 3/4 of a budget at?

I could see throwing that much at a closer coming over. With 12 teams that means 4 teams will be fortunate to have 2 closers and 8 with 1. In theory, you get a 2nd closer you could get a huge swing in points.

If we are going this deep in an NL only league.. I'd seriously consider being a 6x6 league and adding fielding % and holds. That adds value to bench guys and 2nd catchers.

or just making a relief category and combining holds/saves That way you have 2-3 relief pitchers and a hold = save.