Pay for Pay 2012 Discussion Thread

[schlesinj]

My thought was our most recent way was waivers and FCFS after waivers ran until games start. With FAAB for the first round all teams have the chance to get the big name guy after an injury to a RB.

[revo]

Really? My expectations as a commish are that the owners are smart enough, and committed enough, to cover their asses enough to field a complete line-up.

Anyway, I think that this would be another argument for the WW...you put in enough claims to get what you need to field a line-up, and the rest of the claims are voided once you fill your need.

I've been a commish for "committed" leagues since '96, and yeah, owners don't place nearly enough claims on kickers, defenses and TEs.

[Hornsby]

I've been a commish for "committed" leagues since '96, and yeah, owners don't place nearly enough claims on kickers, defenses and TEs.

So why do you have to feel the need to "nanny state" them in those instances? IMO, sometimes losing a game because of your own lack of planning makes for a better owner down the line...

Either way, I'll play by whatever the rules may be...

[revo]

So why do you have to feel the need to "nanny state" them in those instances? IMO, sometimes losing a game because of your own lack of planning makes for a better owner down the line...

Either way, I'll play by whatever the rules may be...

Because you're not only in it for yourself. You know that in HTH you sometimes need other teams to pull their own weight to beat a key opponent. There's nothing more aggravating than seeing a team start players on a bye because they couldn't land a player. Now you may argue that FCFS after waivers works out to help here, but by running two waivers each week, there really should be no excuse -- and it's a better system than quick finger.

We run two FAAB runs in my two other leagues (one converted from straight waivers), and it's been nothing short of ideal.

[Erik]

Do teams ever run out of FAAB?

Only the ones who are poorly managed by owners who are bad at math.

[revo]

Having a ton of experience with FAAB in baseball, I can safely say that there will inevitably be weeks where you do not fill your roster. I'm an active owner always but sometimes get burned by losing all of my, say, seven bids and end up with a dead spot. In baseball that's not that huge of a deal since the season is so long. In football that would be an absolute killer. This league is moving in the totally wrong direction with FAAB, imo.

Again, I ask: Was this an issue that came up last year? I was gone so I don't honestly know. Or are we simply dealing with a couple folks who got hurt about getting scooped on some injury?

Again, I say: We should not put up faulty polls and use their results as gospel. We should have had a good discussion about this beforehand. The poll that is up right now is not a good one, once again, because it uses two variations of one system (waivers) and one variation of the other (FAAB). That obviously gives a significant advantage to FAAB right out of the gate for multiple reasons. First, the votes can be split between the two variations of waivers but cannot be split for FAAB. Moreover, if one of the variations of waivers is a really bad one then the other system gets a significant boost.

It did come up last year, and as I read the old thread, we actually had already voted on FAAB and it passed. In addition, we already had voted to add TEs to the flex spot and it passed.

"OK, so as per the votes above and based on 10 returning owners:
1) FAAB in place of waivers -- 6 votes, so it passes for next year. We'll discuss how much FAAB dough we have at a later date.
2) FAAB twice per week -- 5 votes. Let's table this to discuss again before the season begins.
3) Bench upping by one spot -- 1 vote, so it is denied.
4) TEs added to Flex -- 9 votes, so it passes."

http://forum.rotojunkiefix.com/showthread.php/2296-RJ-Pay-for-Play-Draft-Discussion-Thread-2011/page16?highlight=waivers

So we really should be discussing the FAAB twice per week vs. FAAB once per week with a free for all afterwards.

[frae]

I know the argument against FCFS is that it benefits someone who is by a computer all day, but for me it is just a lot easier than organizing a 2nd set of FAAB bids if I miss out on everyone in the first one. I know that is a rather lame argument, but I find FCFS easier after faab runs once.

[Erik]

Both of my leagues that do FAAB also do FCFS for the rest of the week after FAAB runs. (You can't pick up a guy after his game starts, of course.) It works fine. The "hot" pickups get claimed during FAAB, and FCFS is generally only used when people miss out on their FAAB targets or get a late-week injury.

[Trautdiggity]

I guess I'll stop ranting about this now but we need to get this kind of stuff in order for the future. Discussion should happen with rule changes and everyone's opinions should be taken into consideration about what changes we consider. If things are unclear, we should wait until they are clearer before simply voting away.

So what if we started more simply with a question of generally waivers vs faab, no other discussion at all. We all know elD is for waivers and Revo is for faab. I'm also for faab.
That's 2-1 faab

[Erik]

FAAB here also.

[frae]

I voted for waivers on the site so I will vote for waivers again.

[Hammer]

Faab please

[Hornsby]

WW...not that this should be construed in any way to be an actual poll.

[Hornsby]

Less than a month to go to the start of the regular season... shouldn't we get this thing rolling fairly soon?

[frae]

Less than a month to go to the start of the regular season... shouldn't we get this thing rolling fairly soon?

We usually fly through it with everyone now having access to smart phones or at the very least text messaging. I think we try to wait until at least the 2nd preseason game if not the 3rd.