Mafiascum.net

i mean we are going .5 ppr next year more than likely but IG if you don't plan on coming back that solves that...

Aside from the 0.5 per receptions what other changes were we looking at for next year again?

Can we have the IR rules I proposed, the if 10 team no divisions 4 to playoffs rules, and 16 man roster (adding another bench) settings I proposed?

Something I might do for fun is compare Yahoo's initial team projections with where the teams are now. I got the lowest letter grade tied with Pablito, but I believe he was projected to be last by Yahoo while I was projected to be second to last. I want to know how wrong yahoo was on everyone else because they were very wrong with me

I mean we’re also going to need to figure out how to deal with the 17th game that’s likely getting added next season...

I really don’t understand the criticisms of the mechanics of this league when 5 years ago they were literally the Yahoo default settings. I don’t think PPR (or half PPR) is actually that good in any capacity because a WR making a catch and being tackled for a loss shouldn’t get rewarded, and I think replacing the third WR with a flex is probably fine but relatively meaningless (especially in 12+ person leagues) because there are almost never more than 32 startable RBs (one per NFL team) in a given week. If anything it punishes people like PEG (who was L1’s CMC owner) because it makes the RB waiver wire much dryer. I know I would’ve benefitted from it this year considering I had Ronald Jones riding the pine most weeks, but I feel like I was the exception and not the rule.

I think the better solution might be changing the pass yardage value so that it comes closer to valuing RBs and WRs equally, but I’m not sure what that’d look like.

while I agree, retaining/getting players is paramount I think, and if .5 PPR helps wh that then I'm ok with it. Just b/c Panzer wants it doesn't mean it'll win.

luckily auction is our PPR free sanctuary.

Yeah but auction is on ESPN and I’m probably not bothering with it again unless that changes

Could always do 0.5 or 1 point per receiving first downs instead of 0.5 or 1 point per receptions.

If we do 0.5 or 1 point per receiving first downs and a player catches a ball for a loss, they would not get any point as they didn't get first down, and they would lose points per the loss of yardage by our previous rules. So this alternative would solve you problem d3f3nd3r

I have both a 0.5 per receptions league in my 10 man league and a 1pt per receiving first down league in my 8 man. I could compare the final season values for all receivers to our values in this league and see how much difference really exists once week 17 completes. I know week 17 des not matter toward our games but I think it does matter per yahoo final results

Speaking of week 17 not mattering, why did reckoner just drop Mike Thomas for Mclaurin? Nero dropped Mclaurin before last week concluded since mclaurin did not play then. That makes sense to me, but why did Reckoner just drop thomas for McLaurin? All things are over this year, right? Why you do this Reckoner? Did you make a waiver claim when McLaurin was dropped and yahoo just decided to resolve it now? I don't understand

Yeah I think point per receiving first down would make sense but I don’t know if that option is available to us on Yahoo.

In post 828, D3f3nd3r wrote:I really don’t understand the criticisms of the mechanics of this league when

5 years ago

they were literally the Yahoo default settings

Change w/ the times

Also the rest of what you wrote is factually wrong. but w/e.

PokerFace wrote:Could always do 0.5 or 1 point per receiving first downs instead of 0.5 or 1 point per receptions.

Crazy that y'all are on board for something as arbitrary as this but normal ass PPR is somehow bad.

...so a wide receiver making a catch but losing nine yards on the play should be rewarded?

If a WR makes a catch and loses nine yards odds are pretty good the fault lies with the offensive coordinator and/or the blockers rather than the WR, so hey, why not.

In post 833, D3f3nd3r wrote:Yeah I think point per receiving first down would make sense but I don’t know if that option is available to us on Yahoo.

pooky wants it to. i think everyone else would be fine with the change as well.

Can I volunteer to stay in L2 (with first dibs if someone doesn't return next year) to end this debate? It's been going on for longer than I care to pay attention to.

I don't think anyone is saying ppr is bad, panzer. I think some of us just don't like its 1 possible flaw. Though if you get a 0.5 reception point and then lose 5 yards, you would still get nothing. Its not an issue when you lose more than 5 yards. Its only an issue when you lose 1-4 yards. So I wouldn't say its a big flaw

Off hand I remember my 8 team pprfd league giving out higher projections for players than my 0.5 ppr 10 team league BUT I think the true results were the 0.5 ppr league resulted in more receiver points even though you got 1 pprfd vs 0.5 ppr. BUT keep in mind this is me going from memory. I will get actual factual numbers on this and post my league comparisons here when week 17 concludes

With all that in mind, I personally want to favor whichever setup gives receivers the most between the two options and I "think" the winner is going to be 0.5 ppr when I do the comparisons

In post 838, Groose Caboose wrote:Can I volunteer to stay in L2 (with first dibs if someone doesn't return next year) to end this debate? It's been going on for longer than I care to pay attention to.

Aronis said he might not be coming back so if he doesn't then you take his spot. If he did then sure. It's very noble of you.

I would personally prefer 0.5 per catch to any of the other options (1 per catch, any number of points per first down catch, not having PPR at all) but would be amenable to just about anything.

Also, as long as we're bandying about scoring change ideas, I'd like to more seriously suggest the kicker thing I previously mentioned in 302; specifically, that kickers get 0.1 point per yard of successful FGs, rather than an integer number of points based on distance intervals. As an example, a 37-yard FG would be worth 3.7 points instead of 3 points. I have no particular argument for why this is any sort of remotely necessary change; it simply made kickers a bit more fun in the league I was in that tried it this year, so I figure why not, maybe it'll take here as well.

I'm happy with that but I'm not entirely sure Yahoo gives you that option? I think the only different "items" it tracks are <20, 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, and >50 kicks as opposed to the actual yardages.

they actually have that on there.....

The league that used it was a Yahoo league, so it must be possible somehow.

although I would like to point out that we can only have a maximum of 26 scoring categories so we'd have to get rid of something every time we add a new one.

That's surprising, because that league also uses IDPs, which come with their own assortment of unique scoring categories, while L2 here did not and I assume L1 also did not.

(To be clear, I am ambivalent about IDPs and have no intention of pushing for them here)

In post 833, D3f3nd3r wrote:Yeah I think point per receiving first down would make sense but I don’t know if that option is available to us on Yahoo.

its on there but its dumb, imo

The question is, would that system be only one option (0.1 point per yard) or would 19yd, 20yd, 21yd, ... have to be their own separate scoring categories?

According to the settings page for that league, there is a single "Field Goals Total Yards" category set to "10 yards per point". Turn on fractional scoring (which we already use), and that works out to 0.1 point per yard.