FF2010: Keeper League discussion thread

I really hope people are paying attention to these threads and will be sending me their email address shortly. I'm still waiting to hear from...

3. boogle
5. EvilHomer3k
7. Jolly Bill
12. Pigpen

You haven't set the league scoring yet, correct?

Nvm, just answered my own question by looking at the other GWJFFLs from last year. Plus it's not setup for PPR.

I was getting scared with the whole "1 point per tackle". I went through a league last year where the owner changed the rules after we drafted and defenses ended up deciding games and being some of the highest average scores. Lame. And that was for (Monopoly) money.

Hmm... I guess all of the discussion is settled then, eh?

...

Sorry I haven't been active in the discussion, I'm in the middle of a move right now.

As long as we have the keeper rules and scoring lined out before the draft I'm fine with letting a lot of the minituae slide until we get in season. Keeper inflation rules will obviously influence people's bidding, so I think that's the item we should get hammered out ASAP.

Have you decided how the draft is going to be handled, commish? There wasn't a whole
lot of discussion on the blind vs open bid question you posed to kick this thread off. I'll reiterate that I like the idea of speeding up the draft which we might accomplish with blind bids, but I'm worried we will lose a lot of what makes auction drafts appealing without the ability to react to the market. I put up the idea of having the winning bidder pay the bid of the second highest bidder earlier (ala eBay), which I think would help to a degree, but still isn't optimal. Any other ideas out there?

ukickmydog, if you're following this thread, it _might_ behoove you to check in on it again on Thursday.

So, I've been running some numbers. I took ESPN's average auction values for the upcoming season and ran a 7 year look-out on player values using a few different value appreciation formulas too see where they'd end up. The actual values aren't perfect, as ESPN's values are based on 10 team leagues with smaller rosters than we use, but the effect would be the same (with perhaps a little bit of curve flattening at the high end of the spectrum).

For the upcoming season, ESPN projects:

1st players (overall rank 1-12) will have average auction values (AAVs) of $65.9 (Chris Johnson) to $38.5 (Rashard Mendenhall)
2nd round - AAVs of $36.7 (Larry Fitzgerald) to $27 (Roddy White)
3rd round - AAVs of $25 (Beanie Wells) to $19.7 (Jonathan Stewart)
4th round - AAVs of $19.1 (Tony Romo) to $13.8 (Michael Crabtree)
5th round - AAVs of $13.3 (Steve Smith NYG) to $10.1 (Mike Wallace)
Rounds beyond the fifth have AAVs below $10

I ran a number of formulas with the intent of increasing the number of players whose values are increased into the "first round" range by 12 per year, which would be the same as giving up a pick a round higher each year the player is kept. I also intended to make the 6-12 most expensive players difficult to keep beyond the 3rd/4th year.

The formula I found that came closest was this:
-Increase by 15% if value > $40
-Increase by 28% if value > $30 but < $40
-Increase by 41% if value > $20 but < $30
-Increase by 50% if value >$ 10 but < $20
-Increase value to $10 if value <$10
-If a price increase would push a player to the next bracket, he is instead increased at the lower rate.

The effects of this formula on ESPN's player values:
-At the start of the second season, the 24 most expensive player values will be increased to "first round" territory (value>$38) and the top 3 player values are greater than $66.
-At the start of the third season, the 38 most expensive player values will be increased to first round territory and the top 4 player values are greater than $66.
-At the start of the fourth season, the top 51 player values are increased to first round territory, and the top 14 player values are greater than $66.
-At the start of the fifth season, the top 60 player values are all greater than $38, and the top 14 player values are greater than $66.

With these values, it would be very expensive to keep a player more than 5 years, no matter the price he is acquired at. Roughly speaking, players jump a "round" each year with the increase in their prices.

I think the most important price range to get right by FAR is the $10 to $30 range. If the price increases for this range are too low, a player can be kept for nearly his entire career if he's acquired close to $10. 40 of the top 60 player values fall between $10 and $30 in ESPN's rankings.

These values are by no means perfect- I likely didn't pay enough attention to the high end of the range, but it does highlight the portions of the player value range that are the most crucial to get right. The range above $30 increases quickly enough no matter the rate to cause players to get thrown back quickly anyway.

Great stuff, Landshrk83. I look forward to seeing everyone's opinions now that we know exactly who has a horse in the race and who doesn't. Personally, I'm going to play with the numbers myself before adding my two cents.

In other news, I'll probably delay the start of the auction (for a couple reasons, but mostly) because there's still one person who hasn't emailed me his address and another who, despite being sent an invite, hasn't signed up for the league.

Edit: Just one data point for everyone to mull over. If Toby Gerhart is the next Chris Johnson (and I'm not sayin he is), the formulas above would mean that he would cost someone $62 (less than CJ this year) in his 9th year and $71 to keep him for a 10th year. My opinion is still in development but I thought I'd throw that out there.

Alright so I just wanted to run a spreadsheet of several different scenarios. Now I took my own personal auction values on several players so people could see an example of what most people would be willing to pay per player. This is based on a $200 per team auction. I wanted to do this because I just feel a flat fee would be easier or simpler. And yes I'm aware some people might pay way more for Chris Johnson but that's where I have him tagged.

On the left is the year and of course below this is the option. Whether it is +$8 or + 20%.
"+5""+8""+10""+12""+15" 20% 35% 50%
Chris Johnson Round 1
1 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42
2 47 50 52 54 57 50.4 56.7 63
3 52 58 62 66 72 60. 76.5 94.5
4 57 66 72 78 87 72.5 103. 41.75
5 62 74 82 90 102 87.0 139.5 212.625

Matt Forte Round 2
1 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33
2 38 41 43 45 48 39.6 44.55 49.5
3 43 49 53 57 63 47.52 60.1425 74.25
4 48 57 63 69 78 57.024 81.192375 111.375
5 53 65 73 81 93 68.4288 109.6097063 167.0625

Calvin Johnson Round 3
1 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23
2 28 31 33 35 38 27.6 31.05 34.5
3 33 39 43 47 53 33.12 41.9175 51.75
4 38 47 53 59 68 39.744 56.588625 77.625
5 43 55 63 71 83 47.6928 76.39464375 116.4375

Anquan Boldin Round 4
1 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19
2 24 27 29 31 34 22.8 25.65 28.5
3 29 35 39 43 49 27.36 34.6275 42.75
4 34 43 49 55 64 32.832 46.747125 64.125
5 39 51 59 67 79 39.3984 63.10861875 96.1875

Michael Crabtree Round 5
1 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17
2 22 25 27 29 32 20.4 22.95 25.5
3 27 33 37 41 47 24.48 30.9825 38.25
4 32 41 47 53 62 29.376 41.826375 57.375
5 37 49 57 65 77 35.2512 56.46560625 86.0625

CJ Spiller Round 8
1 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
2 15 18 20 22 25 12 13.5 15
3 20 26 30 34 40 14.4 18.225 22.5
4 25 34 40 46 55 17.28 24.60375 33.75
5 30 42 50 58 70 20.736 33.2150625 50.625

Bernard Barrian Round 11
1 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
2 12 15 17 19 22 8.4 9.45 10.5
3 17 23 27 31 37 10.08 12.7575 15.75
4 22 31 37 43 52 12.096 17.222625 23.625
5 27 39 47 55 67 14.5152 23.25054375 35.4375

Round 15
1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 8 11 13 15 18 3.6 4.05 4.5
3 13 19 23 27 33 4.32 5.4675 6.75
4 18 27 33 39 48 5.184 7.381125 10.125
5 23 35 43 51 63 6.2208 9.96451875 15.1875

Round 19
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 6 9 11 13 16 1.2 1.35 1.5
3 11 17 21 25 31 1.44 1.8225 2.25
4 16 25 31 37 46 1.728 2.460375 3.375
5 21 33 41 49 61 2.0736 3.32150625 5.0625

ukickmydog, If you're following these threads better than some others who should be, you shall be rewarded. PM me your email address if you still want in to the keeper league.

Grumps, I flew in from no internet backwoods alabama today. f*ck off I'm doing the flea flicker now.

I prefer the percentages more than the specific amount. I also like having lower percentages at the higher end of the salary scale. I think there should be some balance between being rewarded for finding a player cheap and getting that player forever because you got him cheap as a rookie.

Are we auctioning waiver wire picks or doing some type of draft? If the latter we should make sure to assign a minimum value to them. If the former we should have a formula that translates waiver money into auction draft money.

EvilHomer3k wrote:

Are we auctioning waiver wire picks or doing some type of draft? If the latter we should make sure to assign a minimum value to them. If the former we should have a formula that translates waiver money into auction draft money.

If we set everyone's free agent acquisition budget to $200 then those values should translate directly to keepers for the following year.

Landshrk83 wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Are we auctioning waiver wire picks or doing some type of draft? If the latter we should make sure to assign a minimum value to them. If the former we should have a formula that translates waiver money into auction draft money.

If we set everyone's free agent acquisition budget to $200 then those values should translate directly to keepers for the following year.

Correct.

I'm disappointed to report that we still don't have a twelfth team signed up. If you're a fan of either Pigpen or ukickmydog, drop them a PM and tell them to get me an email address. The first one I hear from is in.

Still waiting on a 12th team...

Can we make this like real football? We've got 11 players, the 12 player is the audience/forum!!

I kid, I kid

I've steam'd ukick concerning this. Poop.

Due to scheduling conflicts, the draft won't begin before 8/20. If we don't have a 12th team by then (by this point, I don't really care who it is*), I guess this thing will wait until next year.

*As a matter of fact, I'm done. If you want in, see *Legion*. He will be the gatekeeper for the last slot.

Grumpicus wrote:

Due to scheduling conflicts, the draft won't begin before 8/20. If we don't have a 12th team by then (by this point, I don't really care who it is*), I guess this thing will wait until next year.

*As a matter of fact, I'm done. If you want in, see *Legion*. He will be the gatekeeper for the last slot.

I just got an email telling me the draft is tonight.

The live draft for your Fantasy Football league "GWJFFLK" is
scheduled for Sat 8/7/10 @ 6:30 PM EDT.

I was both very scared and very excited.

Fixed that.

Not a peep from anyone wanting to be #12.

It's looking a lot like we may be waiting another year. We're not going to try and pull teeth to get 12. If we can't open our doors and get 12 people in without campaigning, then we're not ready to do this.

I keep wondering if it has to do with the fact the signup thread is locked and the Keeper League discussion thread keeps popping up. Dunno.

boogle wrote:

I've steam'd ukick concerning this. Poop.

You did? Hmm, must have missed that. Sorry folks, I didn't read this thread after the other one locked and I wasn't in. Haven't been following the rules / timing of draft but I would be up for being #12.

ukickmydog wrote:
boogle wrote:

I've steam'd ukick concerning this. Poop.

You did? Hmm, must have missed that. Sorry folks, I didn't read this thread after the other one locked and I wasn't in. Haven't been following the rules / timing of draft but I would be up for being #12.

Multiple times. There goes my plan to collude with you.

ukickmydog wrote:

I would be up for being #12.

See the man with the radioactive avatar.

Was I supposed to check my inbox? I wasn't paying much attention. Never done an auction before, so I'm ready for absolute failure.

BlackSheep wrote:

Was I supposed to check my inbox? I wasn't paying much attention. Never done an auction before, so I'm ready for absolute failure.

The nice part is that you'll have the next 5-7 years to contemplate how poorly your draft went.

Now that it looks like this thing is actually happening, I wanted to pipe up and say that the more I think about it the more I'm digging *Legion*'s post on the first page about qualifying offers. I think with some system like he proposed, we could likely set a fixed percentage inflation (say, 10 or 15%) for ALL players, regardless of initial auction price. It would be extremely unlikely that someone would get to keep a stud player for a bargain price year after year without him being poached.

This adds a whole new layer to the league, as well, and one that I think I'd dig. It allows for a lot more backstabbery (poaching players from division rivals? Yes, please...), as well as a mechanism for weaker teams to catch up (setting a slightly below market value for a player and getting compensation in return). All of this would still require minimal record keeping year to year, as the number of years a player is kept still doesn't matter.

ukickmydog wrote:

but I would be up for being #12.

I require some groveling and a sizable dowry.

Landshrk83 wrote:

Now that it looks like this thing is actually happening, I wanted to pipe up and say that the more I think about it the more I'm digging *Legion*'s post on the first page about qualifying offers. I think with some system like he proposed, we could likely set a fixed percentage inflation (say, 10 or 15%) for ALL players, regardless of initial auction price. It would be extremely unlikely that someone would get to keep a stud player for a bargain price year after year without him being poached.

I've been thinking about whether a fixed percentage inflation is even necessary at all with the qualifying offers, or if it would just be extra unnecessary upkeep.

It seems to me like if nobody is willing to make a higher offer on your player, then he's probably priced right where he's supposed to be.

If a guy was $10 last year, and he's really only worth $10, and I make the baseline no-compensation offer on him of $10 which no one bothers to try and one-up, are we missing anything by not having him inflate to $11?

This is all thinking out loud, and I haven't thought through far enough to come up with a scenario where qualifying offers + inflation makes a big difference over just qualifying offers alone. But maybe I'm just missing something obvious? Is there a clear reason why we would still want a baseline inflation with the qualifying offer mechanism in place? Maybe just to ensure that anyone who slips through the cracks still gets a little bump upward? If nobody else is willing to make offers on someone, is it a bad thing that his value stagnates instead of inflates?

All questions I haven't yet formed a solid opinion on, yet.

I am happy with the idea of the qualifying offer system in some form, though. I think it masterfully handles the "doomsday" scenario Grump has brought up: some cheap unsung rookie becoming the next stud. No matter how cheap the price he was initially acquired for, come the next year, you either have to inflate him highly yourself to a number that makes compensation too expensive to poach, or you have to match the offers other players make on that guy - or you have to let him walk. Whichever way it happens, his number goes up, and does so much more rapidly than under any general set of inflation rules we come up with.

I also think that qualifying offers perhaps takes away the need for a salary floor. Anyone who is under the salary floor that really requires inflation is going to get it through a qualifying offer or an offer from another team. Meanwhile, if I take a prospect cheaply, and he doesn't pan out this year but I still feel good about him and want to keep him, I could still have him for the couple of bucks he's worth, instead of having the salary floor inflate him beyond the price point suitable for longshot prospects. I like that.

This adds a whole new layer to the league, as well, and one that I think I'd dig. It allows for a lot more backstabbery (poaching players from division rivals? Yes, please...), as well as a mechanism for weaker teams to catch up (setting a slightly below market value for a player and getting compensation in return). All of this would still require minimal record keeping year to year, as the number of years a player is kept still doesn't matter.

Perfect. You see it exactly the way the idea plays out in my head. It's really a simple rule mechanic but when I try to explain it, it gets wordy.

Landshrk83 wrote:
BlackSheep wrote:

Was I supposed to check my inbox? I wasn't paying much attention. Never done an auction before, so I'm ready for absolute failure.

The nice part is that you'll have the next 5-7 years to contemplate how poorly your draft went.

Perhaps you don't know how this game works? That's a quaint little dig there, though with all that glorious hyperbole built in. Hell, I could let my dog pick my picks and be as likely to be competitive as if I picked them myself, so there's that.