Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48

Thread: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

  1. #1
    Gunnin' for that #11 spot LG33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    29
    Posts
    18,774

    Default Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Let this thread serve as the starting point for more focused debates (and eventually votes) pertaining to ABA Keeper League alterations.

    First off, the question of why needs to be answered. Why do we want to change things? It would be helpful to discuss our goals first so that we better tailor any prospective changes toward meeting those goals. Is it a simple question of participation, or do we need to address competitiveness as well?

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to LG33 For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,681

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Since I started this, let me weigh in.

    I feel the part of the problem is we have two leagues that are set up exactly the same. The only difference is the amount of keepers. At the beginning I thought this would be positive, now it appears to be a major drawback.

    Another issue has to be the lack of our yearly re-draft league, the original A.B.A.. With out that league filtering out weak owners we're left with about a quarter of the league not putting in the time or effort that others are use to.

    Boredom is another issue. We've been playing with the same set of rules for more than 10 years now.

    With all that said, I would like to see some minor changes made to our league. Nothing to the extent I proposed on the league site. I attempted to set up a league with those rules before without the success I was looking for. Next fall I will try once again to start up a 15 player salaried based keeper league.

  4. #3
    Gunnin' for that #11 spot LG33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    29
    Posts
    18,774

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    How much do you think competitiveness has to do with inactivity? I mean, are the owners absentee GMs because they have ****** teams? And, if so, do we then want to provide them with more and better opportunities to improve their squads - within and between seasons - than simple waiver wire primacy?
    Last edited by LG33; 03-03-2015 at 11:23 PM.

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,681

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Look at the most active owner list and match it up with their W-L record.

    I haven't done that so I'm not really sure what it might say.

    Off the top of my head I don't think how well your team is doing indicates how active you are.

  6. #5
    Funk Seoul Brother Frostwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,328

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    what do people think of changing the # of keepers drastically (maybe down to 5 or 4 even, with potential additional keepers for young players)? just throwing ideas out as to other ways in which teams can improve.

    oh and thank you LG and james for leading the discussion.

  7. #6
    Gunnin' for that #11 spot LG33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    29
    Posts
    18,774

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Draft Changes

    IDEA #1: I think teams that fall below a certain performance threshold should be able to draft two second rounders, and, if they so choose, should be able to forfeit their second rounder (as opposed to their first) to protect more keepers. Huh? Well, here's how it might work:

    Imagine there are ten teams in the league, and let's say that the bottom four teams perform significantly worse than the top five. The normal draft structure (barring any trades) is pretty straight forward (1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 / 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 / 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10), so that the worst team ends up with the 1st pick, the 11th pick, and 21st pick.

    Under this proposal, the bottom four teams would lose their third rounders for additional second rounders. There's a number of ways we could do this, of course, but for simplicity's sake let's just have them select two in a row. The new draft order now looks differently (1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 / 1-1-2-2-3-3-4-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 / 5-6-7-8-9-10), so that the worst team now gets the 1st pick, the 11th pick and the 12th pick. They are free to use these picks as trade chips, to protect additional keepers (giving up the 12th pick first), or simply to add talent faster. This plan would also see the better teams' draft position worsen, hopefully serving to even things out across the league.

    IDEA #2: Let's forget about draft order and move to a bidding system. This option, of course, would be much more complicated to administer, so if this is an idea that picks up traction, I'd volunteer to run it myself. In this scenario, each team receives credits inversely proportional to their team's scoring average or finish. Then there is a blind bidding process on each rookie and free agent. The goal here is to still give the poorer teams better chances to improve, while simultaneously injecting some excitement and strategy into the draft. And, unlike draft picks which you can either use or trade, these credits will rollover from year to year. If you don't like the rookie class, you can save up for the next year's draft.


    Obviously, these are just the beginnings of half-baked ideas, but if either of them strike a chord I'll put some more thought into them.

  8. #7
    Gunnin' for that #11 spot LG33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    29
    Posts
    18,774

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Frostwolf View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    what do people think of changing the # of keepers drastically (maybe down to 5 or 4 even, with potential additional keepers for young players)? just throwing ideas out as to other ways in which teams can improve.
    Or maybe, instead of reducing the # of keepers, we instead introduce a two-tiered protection scheme. Currently, we can protect nine players without forfeiting any of our draft selections. That means we only have to let go of three guys and, due to the size of this league, most teams have at least three inconsequential dudes on their roster. But what if we treated every draft as if it were an expansion draft, so out of those nine keepers, you have to leave three vulnerable to poaching. How poaching would work can be worked out however we choose. I would suggest that no team can suffer multiple poachings in a single season (or maybe even in consecutive seasons). Secondly, the poached team should acquire a draft pick as consolation, perhaps from the team that's doing the poaching. In a way, this would be akin to a forced trade. Alternatively, we could create additional draft slots to alleviate the poachee's loss. Does every team get a chance to poach? In what order? Obviously, there are details to be ironed out, but I think this might be an interesting direction to go in.

  9. #8
    All is full of Orange! Mourning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Bilthoven, The Netherlands
    Age
    39
    Posts
    9,060

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I love the credits idea you floated, LG. It's a move away from more realism, but a step towards making the whole thing more strategic and I like that. A lot.

    Not sure how the rest of the owners feel about that though.
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Mourning For This Useful Post:


  11. #9

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I like a lot of these ideas, here's another what if:

    Teams have an incentive to be more active. They forfeit their second round pick if they're in the bottom 5 of the most active owners list at the end of the season.

  12. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,681

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I'll do ya one better on that.....

    The 1st round is based on record, all other rounds based on the "most active" list. The most active owner gets the 1st over all pick in all but the 1st round.

  13. #11
    Funk Seoul Brother Frostwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,328

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    i actually really like that idea. the site keeps track of how active each owner is right?

  14. #12
    Gunnin' for that #11 spot LG33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    29
    Posts
    18,774

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    According to the site, I'm the 10th ranked most active owner this year, but I log in at least twice a day and I've engaged half the teams in (mostly unsuccessful) trade negotiations. I shouldn't be penalized for that. Moreover, the better teams are going to have the most active owners, so I think it will hurt competitiveness even more. I think using that as a criterion for draft order would set the ABA KL in a bad direction. In my opinion, there are better ways to encourage activity.
    Last edited by LG33; 03-05-2015 at 02:42 PM.

  15. #13
    Funk Seoul Brother Frostwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Age
    26
    Posts
    1,328

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by LG33 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    According to the site, I'm the 10th ranked most active owner this year, but I log in at least twice a day and I've engaged half the teams in (mostly unsuccessful) trade negotiations. I shouldn't be penalized for that. Moreover, the better teams are going to have the most active owners, so I think it will hurt competitiveness even more. I think using that as a criterion for draft order would set the ABA KL in a bad direction. In my opinion, there are better ways to encourage activity.
    i agree with that too, and maybe basing entirely on that stat is too much - maybe a weighted system where record, average, owner activity (and anything else) all factor into draft position?

    also the system can be gamed just by logging in and out repeatedly, so there's that.

  16. #14

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I think that "activity" is based on the number of individual sites (like each time you click a link in their site like rosters, game logs, etc.) you visit within hoops.ws, not just how many times you log on.

  17. #15
    Member burnzone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    39
    Posts
    705

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I think manager activity should only be used for the commissioner to see if anyone needs to be replaced, and a new owner brought in if it's a severe enough case. But as was mentioned by zallen541, if it's based upon clicks within the site, then that # will always be skewed a bit. I am like LG33, I log on a couple times a day, and I'm ranked 9th right now, sometimes as high as 2nd, it varies.

    But I'd sure hate to see any manager be penalized in any way, due to using less clicks within the site to manage their team, but maybe they log on as much as anyone else. I do understand though, how on a commissioner level it can be frustrating if multiple team owners average logging on once every week or 2, and never respond to any trade requests.

    Tweaking the scoring a bit sounds ok to me, maybe take a few different categories from 1 points to 1.5 or something. I do not like the idea of altering the draft a whole lot all at once, it's been the same for so long, that would be a lot to digest. One change per season if necessary to the draft format seems logical, and then make changes in other areas as well if it looks like it will improve the league in the commissioners eyes.


    I also like the idea of another keeper league being set up in addition to this one, but with different rules and options, that has a lot that can be explored going in from scratch.

  18. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,681

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I fully intend to set up an additional league next season.

  19. #17
    Gunnin' for that #11 spot LG33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Age
    29
    Posts
    18,774

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    It doesn't seem like we are making any progress. Maybe we should appoint an eight-member (or fewer) Board of Governors to make the decisions for the rest of the league.

  20. #18
    Member burnzone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    39
    Posts
    705

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Make it mandatory to post once in this thread, for anyone who wants to continue as a team owner. Inactivity, apathy, and seemingly lack of caring from some team members has been a thorn in keeper leagues side for a long time unfortunately.

    I personally enjoy managing the team, but to be bluntly honest it's very boring at sports.ws becasuse there is zero community aspect there. Some post in the trash talk, some respond to trade requests and negotiate back and forth, but there's always a noticable number of team owners that seem to rarely log on, or participate in any discussions.

    I always make effort to log in every day, but after about 60 seconds of 'managing' the team, there's absolutely nothing to hold my interest unless there are posts in the trash talk forum.


    Could we post a vote of some sort, and try to get a feel for how many people are committed to staying active on the site, and with their team for the entire season (aside from emergency type life matters)? Should this league combine with another, to purge consistently inactive team owners?

    Maybe it needs to be posted every offseason that this keeper league is not for people to have a fantasy team, just to have one. But to actively manage it, be a part of something, and respect how severe inactivity could negatively impact the rest of the league.

  21. #19
    Member burnzone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    39
    Posts
    705

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I just looked, and 6 team owners out of 20 have posted in this thread so far in 5 days, and 8 team members out of 20 posted in the original commissioner vote thread in the trash talk forum. That is certainly not going to get it done for any keeper league, and while I'd love to try a second one with customized league rules, I unfortunately don't see any way in hell to find 20, or even 16 truly active team owners to fill another league.

    Should some start recruiting for potential active team owners, outside of PD?

  22. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    4,681

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    The league was having an issue most of the season with 4 or 5 owners not logging in regularly. Once teams were knocked out of the playoff race the problem grew worse. I was not surprised that the timing of the commissioner vote only drew about half the league.

    There is no way a 3rd league can be made up of just Pacers Digest posters. We can't get enough active owners to keep two leagues afloat!

    The league I will setting up next fall will be open to everyone with experience on the site. I'm sure Pacers Digest will be represented but I will be very selective on who gets in.

  23. #21
    International Counter bellisimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Age
    32
    Posts
    9,120

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    the most active user stat on sports.ws website isn't reliable. I am ranked as #14 on the list even though I am always active and respond on time to trade offers, check the waiver wires, etc on a daily basis.

    Yes - once the team gets knocked out of the playoffs - there is very little for the GM of that team to do to check in to the website. They'll most likely just check the end of the season to see who won the playoffs. There is nothing that entices the GMs whose teams didn't make the playoffs to log in regularly.

    I think we need to take a page out of real life and instead of making too many drastic changes at once - we should focus on making 2-3 different changes - starting as early as for next year - and build from there.

    In my opinion the top things to consider would be: number of owners, draft positioning and the amount of players each team can pick. We should break this down to three different threads on each topic once we have 3 different ideas that is proposed for each topic and vote for it.

  24. #22
    Well lubricated Skaut_Ech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,399

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Just FYI, I've been keeping up with the threads. I'm still thinking what to say on the matter. I think the biggest stumbling block is participation. When a full 1/4 of the league doesn't show up, it puts a grinding halt to getting a lot of things done. I've even seen owners log on, ignore a trade request, then log off, not to be seen for a good 4-5 days.n Or they loook at a request, then never respond. I think that's indicative of what is bogging things down. Not to take a cutting the gordian knot approach, but right now, I think the best would be to consolidate both leagues into one and skim off the absentee owners. Fresh start, tweaked rules and hopefully more robust participation. Just look at how many people show up when a player is put up for a vote. IKl was averaging about 10 people showing up to vote on a position change. 10. 10? Really? ABA was a bit better. Maybe consolidation and a reboot is in order (I know, I know, it ruins years of team building)
    Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

  25. #23

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    I think consolidation would do little to solve our real problems because many of the most active owners are in both leagues already. Even if we brought the few active owners into one league we would still be not much closer towards our goal of having 20 owners who respond to trade requests and set their lineups smartly. I think torching years of team building is a drastic and ultimately inefficient way to solve our problems. I think we need to be more creative in recruiting new owners and more swift in removing deadbeat owners. One idea could be to reach out to another NBA fan community (say the Blog-A-Bull or Pippen Ain't Easy forum) for a raucous league. Split the owners into a Pacers conference and a Bulls (or any other team...except maybe the Heat) conference. I think that could liven up some rivalries and serve our league well. I know some might think allowing non-PD people is blasphemous, but if we honestly want change in our ownership we'll have to fundamentally change our recruitment.

  26. #24
    Member bulldog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    1,589

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    First off, I haven't had many problems with other owner's inactivity. Sure, a trade request or two took about a week to get a response, but that's not too bad.

    Do we have a few owners who are the most egregious offenders? Could we contract by 1 or 2 teams to fix the problem?

    Honestly I think this league functions pretty well overall, the negative tone surprises me. It's just fantasy basketball. I remember when y'all jumped on my case cause I was in a foreign country for two weeks. Its going to happen.

    I wouldn't mind increasing competitiveness of the league by modifying the keepers system. Here's an idea.

    Cap the number of "veterans" (players with more than 3 years of experience) you can keep at 5. You can keep up to 3 more prospects (players < 3 years experience).

    Would encourage some churn amongst the productive players, and force all teams to try to grab young guys and prospects.
    2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

  27. #25
    2014 IKL Champion DrBadd01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    United States.
    Posts
    1,986

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Changes to the ABA Keeper League - Discussion Thread

    Using other forums to help find good owners is a great idea. Other options for new owners could include talking to your friends outside of PD. I am certian that everybody would know somebody who is interested in particpating. Somebody at work, or school perhaps. Zallen came to join the league because I used to work with him at te some company.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •