|
Post by Moscow Red Army on Jan 7, 2015 11:21:35 GMT -5
While on the subject of potential scoring category changes, it gives me the chance to bring something else up that I've wanted to for some time now, and that's the idea of changing our scoring system from what we have now. This league was started, and has since been, a "Head-to-Head (Rotisserie/Category Based) Multiple Win" scoring league. Here are the scoring systems that FanTrax offers: Personally, I'm not a fan of each team have a win/loss record that looks like "2348-2285-56" at the end of the season, and would rather it be something like "14-9" or "12-9-2". The other pool that I'm part of is a "Head-to-Head (Points-Based)" style league, and I much much much prefer the way the records are tallied there. Not only because it's less unwieldy, but also because it generally keeps the playoff race very interesting through the year, where 1 win in a week can make or break your team. However, I don't think we should switch to that system out-right, because through the current system, we've generally had the mindset to build well-balanced, Rotisserie-style rosters. If we switch to Points, we'd have to come up with a value for each category and that can go any-which-way. No matter the case, I'd really like to keep out system Head-to-Head, and I'd like to put forth that we switch to "Head to Head (Rotisserie/Category Based) Single Win" starting in 2015. In my opinion, it seems like the best of both worlds. The statistical core of our current format, but with the simplistic record tallying of the other style.
|
|
St. Roch Hawks
General Manager
Doug
Every season is a reincarnation - and nobody does reincarnation better than me
Posts: 2,785
|
Post by St. Roch Hawks on Jan 7, 2015 11:40:06 GMT -5
I'm fine with the proposed switch to the "Head to Head (Rotisserie/Category Based) Single Win" scoring system on the condition that we always have an odd number of scoring categories to minimize the number of ties.
|
|
|
Post by Moscow Red Army on Jun 29, 2015 13:51:17 GMT -5
Bump
This never really got a discussion going, but I'd like for it to be considered for the coming season. I wish I had mentioned it earlier, but it totally slipped my mind until I renewed the league on FanTrax. I feel very, very strongly that we should implement this. Thoughts?
|
|
St. Roch Hawks
General Manager
Doug
Every season is a reincarnation - and nobody does reincarnation better than me
Posts: 2,785
|
Post by St. Roch Hawks on Jun 29, 2015 13:54:40 GMT -5
I'm fine with the proposed switch to the "Head to Head (Rotisserie/Category Based) Single Win" scoring system on the condition that we always have an odd number of scoring categories to minimize the number of ties. This still stands.
|
|
|
Post by Vegas Aces Wild on Jun 29, 2015 14:41:29 GMT -5
Good by Gravol
|
|
|
Post by Oslo Mastodon on Jun 29, 2015 15:05:59 GMT -5
I prefer this, and agree with Doug on the odd amount of scoring cats.
EDIT - cats as in categories. in terms of scoring felines, the more the better.
|
|
|
Post by Moscow Red Army on Jun 29, 2015 15:59:41 GMT -5
I'm fine with the proposed switch to the "Head to Head (Rotisserie/Category Based) Single Win" scoring system on the condition that we always have an odd number of scoring categories to minimize the number of ties. With SOG being added this year, that puts as at 8 Skater Categories (G, A, +/-, PIM, SOG, PPP, Hit, Blk) 3 Goalie Categories (W, GAA, SV%, SHO) That's 12 total (an even number), but we all know that SHO is a specialty category that is often left at 0 or in a tie. So, this would generally leave us at 11 categories (an odd number) with an asterisk.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2015 23:28:00 GMT -5
I'm all for something that is easier to tally and tabulate.
|
|
|
Post by Moscow Red Army on Jun 30, 2015 1:36:11 GMT -5
The other pool that I'm in (keeper style, been running for about 6 years now) is Head-to-Head: Points-Based. It works on a single-win style of result as well. The parity in that league is amazing, and we always have great playoff races because it keeps the standings closer all year long. The have's will still get bloated and the have-nots will still sink (both to a lesser degree however), but most importantly it keeps the middle very taut.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2015 8:05:34 GMT -5
I play in other head-to-head leagues (in other fantasy sports), and one is a "single win" league. It's kind of fun, in that you don't have to worry about playing multiple categories (it's baseball, so steals and saves are redundant to my monster team).
That said, I have been lobbying to change it to a multiple category win for years. Why? Because I like our system so much more. I think of it more as playing a series against another team instead of just one game. It also means if someone falls behind, they can make up wins in a hurry (last year I had a couple of hot weeks that pushed me from way outside the playoffs and into playoff contention).
I like that we're discussing other options, but I really do think that what we have now is very, very good.
Also, it will be interesting to see how our newest change (adding shots) alters things.
If we're looking to move to an uneven number of categories, perhaps we can finally ditch PIMs - as many in the fantasy hockey community have already done.
|
|
|
Post by Morweena Reimnoceri on Jun 30, 2015 9:38:14 GMT -5
On the topic of PIMs I also had mentioned a while back it may be interesting to change it to a negative category where, like golf, the lower the better.
As for change up proposed I like things as they are. I think the league is pretty even, save GMs who are trying to tank or never EVER make moves, as they are. I'm okay with having a team or two completely out of it around the deadline as it makes for a more interesting trade market.
|
|
|
Post by Moscow Red Army on Jun 30, 2015 15:38:47 GMT -5
I play in other head-to-head leagues (in other fantasy sports), and one is a "single win" league. It's kind of fun, in that you don't have to worry about playing multiple categories (it's baseball, so steals and saves are redundant to my monster team). I understand your sentiment here, but I don't think it's wholly correct. To get a win in our league with the H2H:SW system, you'd still need to better your opponent in at least 6 different categories. That still easily qualifies as playing multiple categories in my book. That said, I have been lobbying to change it to a multiple category win for years. Why? Because I like our system so much more. I think of it more as playing a series against another team instead of just one game. It also means if someone falls behind, they can make up wins in a hurry (last year I had a couple of hot weeks that pushed me from way outside the playoffs and into playoff contention). You're correct here in that someone won't be able to make up as much room so quickly as they would in H2H: Multi-Win, but that is to say that people also won't suddenly plummet in the standings either. Both of these mean that the league overall should remain more competitive throughout the entire season. If we're looking to move to an uneven number of categories, perhaps we can finally ditch PIMs - as many in the fantasy hockey community have already done. On the topic of PIMs I also had mentioned a while back it may be interesting to change it to a negative category where, like golf, the lower the better. Replacing/Removing/Modifying the PIM stat category is something I've been putting a lot of thought into the last year or so. I have an interesting replacement category in mind should we consider going that route. Before flat out removing it, I'd like to see how this season goes with the addition of SOG before modifying any categories any further. Morweena's idea of flipping it to be a negative category is one I hadn't considered, but one I have to say I find very interesting. I like +/- as a fantasy category specifically in that it has the potential to harm your team. Having a 2nd category that can have a negative effect is an intriguing idea. As for change up proposed I like things as they are. I think the league is pretty even, save GMs who are trying to tank or never EVER make moves, as they are. I'm okay with having a team or two completely out of it around the deadline as it makes for a more interesting trade market. Believe me, there we still be teams that are out of the race. The strong will still be strong, the weak will still be weak. It's more so the middle of the road teams that we'd see a difference with (in that they'd be closer to one another, and we should see tight races right up to the last week for who makes the playoffs, instead of the playoff teams determined 3 weeks before the playoffs).
|
|
|
Post by Melbourne Bushrangers on Jun 30, 2015 16:07:19 GMT -5
I would much prefer the H2H:SW option. I think it has the right balance between keeping the league interesting and ensuring you need to be strong in multiple categories to be competitive.
|
|
|
Post by Melbourne Bushrangers on Jul 9, 2015 16:11:38 GMT -5
Are we voting on this one or reconsidering at a later date?
|
|
|
Post by Oslo Mastodon on Jul 9, 2015 16:20:08 GMT -5
probably vote in a couple months, with a result reflecting the season after next.
|
|