First, it unbalances fantasy football to bring in resources from another season to help this one. Everyone has a relatively equal amount of resources to bring to the table, but if a few managers decide to trade, say, next year’s 1, 2, 3 and the year after’s 1 and 2 for a stud RB or a major upgrade in several positions, it unbalances the league.
We’re all pretty good owners, but let’s say you do decide to mortgage your future for a stud this year and it doesn’t pan out. Now without good draft picks in the coming years, your incentive to stick with the league is greatly reduced.
It’s fun to draft, and now since you gave away your top draft picks a year ago a large amount of the fun has been given away. This applies regardless of how well the previous season’s trade panned out.
Nobody can foresee the future. As a real world example, nobody would have ever predicted Jimmy Chitwood dropping out of the keeper league last year. He was (and remains in other SDMB leagues) a conscientious owner of good standing. So let’s say you trade away your future picks and then drop out for whatever reason the following year. The new owner will be kinda screwed after having his draft picks traded away.
A dynasty-specific objection is what if everyone on your team ends up being decent? Now you don’t want to drop anyone, but you have to because you already traded away picks and you have to make room. Or do you? Can you make an argument that since you’re keeping everyone, you don’t have any pick to trade so you think the trade should be for picks in next year’s draft? Weak, obviously, but does anyone want to find out how this situation would pan out?
Finally, trading future draft picks is always going to be a desperation hail-mary, an ad-hoc parity mechanism. I see no compelling reason to support such measures. We already have parity mechanisms in place that should be sufficient. If anyone needs a little boost up, I do. Should I try and trade my top 3 picks in the next 3 drafts to acquire a couple decent W/Rs? It would certainly make me more competitive, but would it add to the net fun level of the league? I say no, it would actually have the opposite effect.
I’m against trading future draft picks, at least until the league is on more solid ground regarding owner turnover and draft availability. Between losing an owner last year and problems with everyone making the draft, I think it’d be a waste of time and add less parity.
And Fuck Jahvid Best. Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.
Every offseason it’s the same. I forget how damn frustrating this game can be. Things like season-ending injuries in week one, (Good Bye, Ryan Grant!), having a nice week, yet losing to the highest week, and mid game injuries that make a fantasy stud out of backups while the starter sits on the bench (I’m looking at you Jason Snelling!) just drive me fucking crazy.
I’d also vote against trading future draft picks. I’m cutting back on my leagues next year, although I won’t drop any SDMB leagues. Next September is too far away for most people to make their fantasy league plans.
That said. Anyone have a surplus or RB or WR they’d be interested in trading? I have a wide variety of quarterbacks and even though Michael Vick is going back to the bench, he’s going to start somewhere for sure next year. Yesterday’s promise assured that.
We have a new feature this season: GM/Coach rankings. The GM column lists the maximum points you could have scored if you put all your top-scorers in your starting lineup. The Coach grade is a percentage of how many points you actually did score compared to how many you could have.
Your max potential score is really a rating of how well you draft, trade and manage the waiver wire/free agent pool. The points are listed as average/week instead of total for season.
SDMB Dynasty League - Week 1
…General…Head
Team…Manager…Coach
We Do HGH…196.24…78% C+…
CuteWiddleBunny(Hmlt…168.52…70% D+…
Awful Offals…150.10…85% B…
RetroVertigo…144.80…86% B…
Warner’s Brothers…130.53…77% C…
New York Fanboys…126.05…95% A…
Isotopes…123.75…87% B…
Fightin’ Quakers…122.74…70% D+…
9 Inch Neils (RNATB)…114.45…63% D…
The Gusterrhoids…112.75…84% B…
Exploding Pancakes…103.75…82% B-…
Varlos’ Zzzzzzz…99.74…70% C-…
EDIT: The underlying logic to calculate the max potential points is fairly complex. I’m pretty confident I implemented a tight algorithm, but if you all would go ahead and verify that these week 1 numbers are correct that’d be super. It’s the flex positions (and multi-pos players like Dexter McCluster) that really complicate things.
heh. In your defense, I think it very unlikely anyone would have hit upon your ideal starting lineup for week 1. I uploaded a screenshot to imageshack here. (Hope that works.) Forgive the thrown-together bare-bones look of the thing; I basically wrote the entire thing over the weekend, then spent most of yesterday trying to come up with algorithm for identifying the perfect roster.
A couple things I noticed is that the coaching grades in this league are terrible compared to the other ones for the obvious reason that the benches are so much larger in this league. Also, either the starting lineups or the scoring system is way different here, because the max potential scores are through the roof compared to the other leagues.
EDIT: If anyone is wondering why 70% is a D+ instead of a C-, it’s a rounding thing for display. The actual percentage is 69.93%.
You know, I’ve been thinking of trying a best-ball league (where you draft a roster don’t pick starters - whoever in your roster gets the highest score that goes into that roster spot) and I wasn’t sure if any sites automatically offered that, but your program here could probably do it. Hmm.
Yeah, I like the triple-layered aspect of FF as it is now. First part is assembling your team, second is choosing who to start, and third is the head to head each week. As annoying as it is when it happens to you, it’s fun when the second highest scorer loses to the highest scorer in a week. Double plus bonus fun if the two highest outscore the rest of the league by a huge margin.
I still think it would be interesting. I wouldn’t want it as a primary league, but we’re all doing 3+ leagues, so anything you joined in addition would be partially for the novelty factor or different strategic considerations. It would also be a low-maintenance league, so it might be practical to take on as a 5th league.
