Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Blind Bid Waivers


49erAddict-08
 Share

Recommended Posts

So, I finally got my league to agree to blind-bid waivers. Only took me about 8 years...

 

Any "lessons learned" on logistics? Our league is set up at MFL.

 

Right now, I am planning to do $100. Blind bids end late Wed night. FCFS afterwards until 5 minutes before a player's game. I can't decide if FCFS should cost $1 or be free. I kind of like the idea of people running out of $ and then having to trade for more in order to pick up free agents but on the other hand, it may be frustrating.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like FCFS to cost $1 as well BUT since it took you so long to switch maybe the owners will like it more if its free. Especially the dumbasses who blow all their money on some one week wonder then need a bye week kicker in week 9 but have no cash left

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestion... Make it 1000 instead of 100, and all FCFS acquisition cost $1. That way, owners can "reserve" their last $10-15 for FA pickups without having to dedicate such a large percentage of their overall bankroll. Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suggestion... Make it 1000 instead of 100, and all FCFS acquisition cost $1. That way, owners can "reserve" their last $10-15 for FA pickups without having to dedicate such a large percentage of their overall bankroll. Just my two cents.

 

This, with bids being in $10 increments.

 

Also, make sure you have a rule or method in place specifically addressing "churning" or you'll have a mess on your hands when the first guy figures it out. Churning is taking a guy just to make sure the guys in FCFS can't get him. I was in a league where there was a 24 hour period after a guy was dropped that they were locked, and in one playoff week we had an owner pickup and drop every single free agent QB when his opponent had a starter hurt. It wasn't pretty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This, with bids being in $10 increments.

 

 

 

That defeats the purposes of upping the budget. 1/100 is the same as 10/1000 both are 1% of the total budget. The high stakes leagues (FFPC specifically) use a $1000 budget with increments of $1. But they have no FCFS period.

 

 

Also, make sure you have a rule or method in place specifically addressing "churning" or you'll have a mess on your hands when the first guy figures it out. Churning is taking a guy just to make sure the guys in FCFS can't get him. I was in a league where there was a 24 hour period after a guy was dropped that they were locked, and in one playoff week we had an owner pickup and drop every single free agent QB when his opponent had a starter hurt. It wasn't pretty.

 

 

All of my leagues that I run have rules that state that any player picked up must remain on your roster (unless traded) until the following week. In theory an owner could pick up a ton of QBs, but he would have to use up roster spots for all of them. As for drops, I prefer all dropped players to be locked until the next waiver period - some leagues have multiple runs per week, some one per week, either way, a player must go through a waiver period before they are eligible to be picked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That defeats the purposes of upping the budget. 1/100 is the same as 10/1000 both are 1% of the total budget. The high stakes leagues (FFPC specifically) use a $1000 budget with increments of $1. But they have no FCFS period.

 

 

No it doesn't. It retains the original integrity of the $100 pool, thus the money management aspect, but still gives a small amount of forgiveness for those that blow out early. Keeping $10 allows 10 FCFS moves to cover byes and/or get emergency injury replacements vs. one min-bid on waivers. The entire reason league don't put a price on FCFS is to minimize the impact of running out of money. This allows for both. If you are smart and manage your money well you'll have plenty left over, and if you don't, you won't get hosed when Vick gets hurt in week 11 and your backup QB is Dalton. You won't get the best pick, but you won't take a donut either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of my leagues that I run have rules that state that any player picked up must remain on your roster (unless traded) until the following week. In theory an owner could pick up a ton of QBs, but he would have to use up roster spots for all of them. As for drops, I prefer all dropped players to be locked until the next waiver period - some leagues have multiple runs per week, some one per week, either way, a player must go through a waiver period before they are eligible to be picked up.

 

 

I just say no lockout. If the guy is bad enough to be dropped, there's little harm in allowing another owner to pick him up immediately afterward if they want to sit on him. But your way works too, I'm just not sure that can be automated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on your league. If they were against bidding to begin with than making them free might be best. However, I like the $1,000 budget with a minimum bid of $10.

 

However, it is all perspective, as if you have a $1,000 budget than minimum is $10, $100 budget minimum is $1. If it's $100 budget, I'd make FCFS free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it doesn't. It retains the original integrity of the $100 pool, thus the money management aspect, but still gives a small amount of forgiveness for those that blow out early. Keeping $10 allows 10 FCFS moves to cover byes and/or get emergency injury replacements vs. one min-bid on waivers. The entire reason league don't put a price on FCFS is to minimize the impact of running out of money. This allows for both. If you are smart and manage your money well you'll have plenty left over, and if you don't, you won't get hosed when Vick gets hurt in week 11 and your backup QB is Dalton. You won't get the best pick, but you won't take a donut either.

 

 

So we should reward owners for their incompetence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just say no lockout. If the guy is bad enough to be dropped, there's little harm in allowing another owner to pick him up immediately afterward if they want to sit on him. But your way works too, I'm just not sure that can be automated.

 

 

I guess I'm not a fan of giving an advantage, however small, to an owner that can just sit on the computer at any time of the day and pick up players, etc. Another man's trash.....

 

 

It also prevents collusion. While I would hope it would get overturned, there would be nothing in the rules to stop owners A and B, after the trade deadline, from agreeing to drop players and picking each other's drops up as a form of trade after the deadline.

 

 

Ounce of prevention is a lot better than the cure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We started Blind Bid last year. And with a few minor changes this year, this is how ours works.

 

$100 per team

Blind Bids start at 11pm Sunday night. Players are handed out to winners on Wed 8pm.

I thought about having a $1 per FCFS players, but with 16 teams. Someone is going to blow their money early and then it's all about politics and arguments. So I just decided to make it a limit of 2 FCFS picks per week.

 

I hope this works out better this year and I think you'll love Blind Bids. More fun and we needed it badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we should reward owners for their incompetence?

 

 

I don't think it's a matter of rewarding owners for incompetence - it is a matter of making it easier to manage your acquisition budget if you want to charge for FCFS free agency transactions.

 

At $100 total and $1 per free agent pickup, an owner might have to reserve 10% of his total budget for free agency. At $1,000 budget, with $10 increments for waiver pickups but still only $1 for free agency transactions, an owner could reserve only 1% of his budget and be in the same spot as the guy in the first example. I'm not saying either way is better or worse, just two different ways of setting it up - I don't think the second method necessarily rewards incompetence, but it does certainly make it easier for owners to retain a little money for free agency.

 

We are putting in a blind bidding system for the first time this year, and I am inclined to make free agency claims free. I don't want any owner to be in a situation where he has no ability to make any claims at all - I don't think that's beneficial for anyone other than his next week opponent, who did nothing to deserve that kind of advantage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we should reward owners for their incompetence?

 

 

Yes, because fantasy football is all about skill and luck plays no part at all. Not sure where the snarkiness comes from, it's all just a number. Either you do or you don't charge for FCFS - I was simply suggesting that if you choose to make FCFS cost .1% (as Gopher suggested, not me) that you weight waivers much heavier. Not sure if saving 12% of the budget for emergency moves makes them any more "competent" than saving 1%. I mean it's FCFS late in the season - it's not like Morris is still out there. Any donkey that's put up a double-digit game is likely to be sitting on someone's roster already, so why not give someone a chance to recover from a disaster?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, because fantasy football is all about skill and luck plays no part at all. Not sure where the snarkiness comes from, it's all just a number. Either you do or you don't charge for FCFS - I was simply suggesting that if you choose to make FCFS cost .1% (as Gopher suggested, not me) that you weight waivers much heavier. Not sure if saving 12% of the budget for emergency moves makes them any more "competent" than saving 1%. I mean it's FCFS late in the season - it's not like Morris is still out there. Any donkey that's put up a double-digit game is likely to be sitting on someone's roster already, so why not give someone a chance to recover from a disaster?

 

 

No snarkiness intended, but your reason for not charging was:

 

"The entire reason league don't put a price on FCFS is to minimize the impact of running out of money."

 

Well, if you manage your bid budget, you won't run out of money. If you blow every dollar of your budget, you can't make FA moves any longer.

 

I've got no problem going either way in practice, I'm just hoping to find a better argument than, well, if Jimmy blows his wad in week one, we should give him a free pass the rest of the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No snarkiness intended, but your reason for not charging was:

 

"The entire reason league don't put a price on FCFS is to minimize the impact of running out of money."

 

Well, if you manage your bid budget, you won't run out of money. If you blow every dollar of your budget, you can't make FA moves any longer.

 

I've got no problem going either way in practice, I'm just hoping to find a better argument than, well, if Jimmy blows his wad in week one, we should give him a free pass the rest of the way.

 

 

I agree with Snarky McSnarkypants.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got no problem going either way in practice, I'm just hoping to find a better argument than, well, if Jimmy blows his wad in week one, we should give him a free pass the rest of the way.

 

 

How about "if Jimmy blows his wad in week 1, he's SOL. However, if he is smart enough to hold back a few bucks after blowing most of his wad in week 1, and doesn't keep throwing min-bid fliers out on every RB that posts a seven-point game he'll be rewarded with the privilege of sifting through the trash that waivers rejected for that $1 bye week kicker or week 14 prayer Matt Flynn." Because I never mentioned a free pass, I suggested minimizing the impact of last season injuries, and only in the event that there's some money left over.

 

This is also why I suggested the $10 min-bid on waivers - so that that guy can't just milk his last 10 or 20 bucks on $1 waiver fliers.

 

I also don't have any big issue either way, I am just not a fan of rules that leave owners with zero outs. This poses a happy medium. Week 14 FCFS are hardly going to win a championship by themselves, but they can certainly save the day of a good team otherwise derailed by bad fortune with some level of budgetary awareness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have them bid fantasy points for the upcoming week. So if they win a player with a 10 point bid they start the week at -10 points, keeps it under control a little more when it is so valuable to success. We are trying this in one of my locals this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have them bid fantasy points for the upcoming week. So if they win a player with a 10 point bid they start the week at -10 points, keeps it under control a little more when it is so valuable to success. We are trying this in one of my locals this year.

 

 

interesting.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like FCFS to cost $1 as well BUT since it took you so long to switch maybe the owners will like it more if its free. Especially the dumbasses who blow all their money on some one week wonder then need a bye week kicker in week 9 but have no cash left

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Certainly is, but it strikes me as something that could totally eff up a league if it doesn't work out.

 

+1

I would be curious to hear how it pans out in practice. My initial thought is it would greatly depress FA transactions and owners would not like it at all. I look at FA acquisitions as a means for (hopefully) improving the number of points my team will score in any given week. I certainly wouldn't want to cede points just to try to accomplish that. :unsure:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would tilt the field in favor of the stronger teams. Teams that regularly score 100+ points would feel better about bidding higher on players they want, while the teams that NEED better players wouldn't want to risk much of their 80 points per week to get them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information