Have you ever had a season where you could never get anyone you wanted on the waivers?

[DildoShwaggins]

I swear I've had 6 straight weeks where I have not gotten ANY of my initial waiver picks. They are always getting snagged up by other teams to the point of now it's just annyoing as hell lol

[League_Champion]

7 minutes ago, DildoShwaggins said:

I swear I've had 6 straight weeks where I have not gotten ANY of my initial waiver picks. They are always getting snagged up by other teams to the point of now it's just annyoing as hell lol

 

I'm in several leagues like that. The guys are super competitive and watch the wire like a hawk. It's bare bones. 

[awahl63]

Switch to FABB

[irish]

1 hour ago, awahl63 said:

Switch to FABB

This is the only way to do it. Give everyone a fair shot at adding any available player and it's not a race to the innerwebs.

[stevegrab]

Nope my team is usually bad so I have a high pick in waiver order.

 

Blind bidding (assuming that is FAAB) may be more fair to all teams, it is also more complicated that many leagues want. Not everybody who plays FF wants to get into every detail (IDP, flex, dynasty/keeper, bidding, etc.)  

 

Whenever I read "______ is the only way to do it..." I have to   since many people obviously do it differently and are happy. 

[MTSuper7]

FAAB is a good answer for that problem. Otherwise, if you stick with first come, first served, I think a smart draft strategy can be to draft some guys who might start slow or are suspended for the first 1-3 games. You end up starting slow, but you get the best on the wire, then your team is built to win starting in week 3 or 4. Think Edelman and Ingram this season.

[Def.]

9 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

Whenever I read "______ is the only way to do it..." I have to   since many people obviously do it differently and are happy. 

 

Seriously, it is the most fair way setup and is no harder than prioritizing which round of waivers needs to go where in order to get the guys you want.  All three my locals were skeptical too, but after trying it for one season they all voted unanimously to keep the setup and not one person has ever since said they liked priority waivers better.  Just food for thought. 

[stevegrab]

52 minutes ago, Def. said:

 

Seriously, it is the most fair way setup and is no harder than prioritizing which round of waivers needs to go where in order to get the guys you want.  All three my locals were skeptical too, but after trying it for one season they all voted unanimously to keep the setup and not one person has ever since said they liked priority waivers better.  Just food for thought. 

 

I'm simply saying FAAB is not the ONLY way and that for some owners and leagues the additional work (managing your bid $, leaning how to bid if you're not doing it already) requires owners to be more involved, and that doesn't fit every league. I would not oppose it, but I know my league, and the owners would not be in favor of its added complexity. 

 

 

[Chaim Witz]

57 minutes ago, Def. said:

 

Seriously, it is the most fair way setup and is no harder than prioritizing which round of waivers needs to go where in order to get the guys you want.  All three my locals were skeptical too, but after trying it for one season they all voted unanimously to keep the setup and not one person has ever since said they liked priority waivers better.  Just food for thought. 

What sites can/should you use to implement this type of waiver process? It's definitely an interesting concept to me, and how is total amount available determined, then tracked.

 

One more really stupid question: If amount is 500 for season, and three teams all bid 500 on one particular waiver player, how is winner determined with equal blind bids?

[loaf]

I tried to get FAAB in my league. Turns out most of my Owners are lazier than I thought...

[Def.]

41 minutes ago, Chaim Witz said:

What sites can/should you use to implement this type of waiver process? It's definitely an interesting concept to me, and how is total amount available determined, then tracked.

 

One more really stupid question: If amount is 500 for season, and three teams all bid 500 on one particular waiver player, how is winner determined with equal blind bids?

 

As far as I know all the freebies now have it as an option as well as any pay site.  The amount you want to use is arbitrary though $100 seems to be common.  If there's a tie then it would go to the tiebreakers which may or may not be altered depending on website but usually are record than overall points. 

[Def.]

53 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

and the owners would not be in favor of its added complexity.

 

Hey your league does its thing that's great, but the above drives me nuts.  Its really not any more complicated, its just different than what your doing now. 

[stevegrab]

29 minutes ago, Def. said:

 

Hey your league does its thing that's great, but the above drives me nuts.  Its really not any more complicated, its just different than what your doing now. 

 

OK, guess we'll have to agree to disagree then, because to me when I am interested in a player making a waiver claim is simple, player to add, player to drop. There is no thought about how much I want to spend, and what others may be doing. Even for people used to doing bidding on waives they still must do something extra. It may be negligible to you because you're used to it. 

 

Just look at loaf's post, his league didn't want to do it, because they are lazy, which means it requires more effort. 

[MTSuper7]

10 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

 

OK, guess we'll have to agree to disagree then, because to me when I am interested in a player making a waiver claim is simple, player to add, player to drop. There is no thought about how much I want to spend, and what others may be doing. Even for people used to doing bidding on waives they still must do something extra. It may be negligible to you because you're used to it. 

 

Just look at loaf's post, his league didn't want to do it, because they are lazy, which means it requires more effort. 

 

It doesn't imply laziness to me. It implies status quo bias / resistance to any change. Granted I don't know these situations in detail, but I'd guess that you guys are just not selling the benefits well enough to get it implemented. When I pitched this change to my main local, I did a few things:

 

• Make it seem like a small change: "Guys, you can pretty much keep doing things the way you always have been. The system works the same - you pick who you want and who you would want to drop to get that player. There is only one small thing that changes..."
• Bring up the pain points of a "same as last year" mentality: "Remember how James Conner was on the waiver wire to start the year? Well, you fluked your way to being a top scoring team in week one. Why should you be punished by not having any chance in hell of picking up Conner? Or do you remember OBJ's rookie year when he blew up when he came back from injury mid-season? Because the bottom feeders were pretty much out of the playoffs, they didn't bother to put in requests so X team picked him up when they were a fringe playoff team and ended up riding him to the championship game. How is that fair when you had the same record but had scored a measly 20 points more on the season, meaning you lost your waiver bid on a crummy tiebreak?"
• Ask questions to get them to come to the right conclusion on their own: "Do you think the team that scores lowest in the first week or two always has the weakest roster? Do you ever wish that you had a legit chance to get any player on waivers that you wanted, regardless of your team's record?"
• Let them know we could just try it for this year to see how it goes: "If you really end up thinking it sucks, we can just go back to the way we've always done it. Is there really any serious harm in giving it a shot to see if we like it?"

 

It also can help to show them how it would work if possible. That allows them to see just how easy it really is. And it is easy - there is literally one additional field to complete when putting in a request.

 

For what it's worth, there was a definite learning curve as people adapted to this last year. Some people were blowing through their budget in the first month of the season, and some people spent almost nothing all year. But EVERYONE wanted to keep it in place, and I've noticed that people have shown improvement in how they manage their FAAB this year. 

 

 

[stevegrab]

Most of our league does not feel our current waiver system needs to change, and I'm not trying to convince them of changing to FAAB. Our league of 25+ years is very resistant to change, and I guarantee if somebody proposed bidding they'd bring up the extra work. And depending on who proposes the change some owners will object more strongly. 

 

But that isn't my point, which is I simply cannot agree that using bidding for waivers requires no extra time or effort on an owner's part. That is why I pointed to loaf's comments, and I trust him to tell us if his league is lazy or just resistant to change. I and you are in no position to say otherwise. One additional field to add, the waiver amount which is not a simple decision, especially for people who do not play in 10 different leagues that are bound to have some bidding. 

 

PS  A guy like Conner is not on our waivers, they are drafted because we have large rosters. There are a few lightning in the bottle guys that come along, but fewer than in most other leagues. 

[gallagorilla]

10 hours ago, stevegrab said:

 

OK, guess we'll have to agree to disagree then, because to me when I am interested in a player making a waiver claim is simple, player to add, player to drop. There is no thought about how much I want to spend, and what others may be doing. Even for people used to doing bidding on waives they still must do something extra. It may be negligible to you because you're used to it. 

 

Just look at loaf's post, his league didn't want to do it, because they are lazy, which means it requires more effort. 

It's just ignorance. It's fine, though - try it and you'll quickly realize what you've been missing. It will cost you an extra couple brain units per week - no more than 3, though

[stevegrab]

10 hours ago, gallagorilla said:

It's just ignorance. It's fine, though - try it and you'll quickly realize what you've been missing. It will cost you an extra couple brain units per week - no more than 3, though

 

Ignorance, no that is saying that needing to come up with a bid is no more work than not making a bid. Which was the original claim I was trying to refute. 

 

I cannot just try it, my league would need to change their rules. I and most of my league are fine with FCFS based on current standings. There is no one size fits all fantasy football setup. Some think that without IDP, bidding waivers, PPR, dynasty, etc people are playing it wrong. "The only way is FAAB". That's just narrow minded. Tons of people playing fantasy for fun don't need every nuance that others like. 

Edited November 16, 2018 by stevegrab

[MTSuper7]

1 hour ago, stevegrab said:

 

Ignorance, no that is saying that needing to come up with a bid is no more work than not making a bid. Which was the original claim I was trying to refute. 

 

I cannot just try it, my league would need to change their rules. I and most of my league are fine with FCFS based on current standings. There is no one size fits all fantasy football setup. Some think that without IDP, bidding waivers, PPR, dynasty, etc people are playing it wrong. "The only way is FAAB". That's just narrow minded. Tons of people playing fantasy for fun don't need every nuance that others like. 

I wouldn't say the only way or the best way is FAAB. I'd say the fairest way is FAAB. The easiest way is FCFS. The best way depends on what you value. What's more important to your league? Being as fair as possible or being as easy as possible? 

 

And yes, there is additional complexity and strategy with FAAB. If your league enjoys the strategic layers of roster management, they will be open to FAAB. If they feel FCFS works for their interest level, then they won't be open to FAAB.