Paul Roos Lg. Ultimate Footy Dynasty league 2017 - Paul Roos Cup

[FRROST]

I'm not too sure how much it is to make it a premium league and implement premium categories but i'm happy to keep this as a free league and thus roll with the standard 9 categories. If there are a decent number of people who are unhappy with standard categories or who would like to implement certain premium categories i'm happy to change it to a premium league. However currently i'm fine with just rolling with the following categories. If anyone has an opinion on this or would like certain categories over certain other categories please feel free to speak up. These are the standard categories, the premium ones are the ones that say "available via stats" next to them...
View attachment 285163

Very delayed reply here, now that I'm in the league I thought I'd have my say.

I'm new to the category game but now I'm in 2 leagues (1 I've picked up a team and the other is brand new which is great).

I would recommend no FA or FF cats - Why? Because we have kicks/handballs/scoring etc all categories where it's solely on the player to earn - no umps involved. I also think that I'd prefer not to draft in players who win free kicks (ie. I'd like to pick selwood for his ability to collect the pill, not because he ducks his head).

Does this mean we would need to pay a little extra for the "pro" version (or whatever its called)? If so, what are our thoughts of:

$10 per year per coach. 14 coaches makes $140, $40-ish towards the subscription (no idea what the cost is so I could be well off) & $100 to the winner.

Food for thought - as tender mentioned, we'd obviously need to lock cats in prior to draft. I'm sure that'll all be sorted as everyone seems super keen for UF to open up.

 

[tenderwarrior]

Very delayed reply here, now that I'm in the league I thought I'd have my say.

I'm new to the category game but now I'm in 2 leagues (1 I've picked up a team and the other is brand new which is great).

I would recommend no FA or FF cats - Why? Because we have kicks/handballs/scoring etc all categories where it's solely on the player to earn - no umps involved. I also think that I'd prefer not to draft in players who win free kicks (ie. I'd like to pick selwood for his ability to collect the pill, not because he ducks his head).

Does this mean we would need to pay a little extra for the "pro" version (or whatever its called)? If so, what are our thoughts of:

$10 per year per coach. 14 coaches makes $140, $40-ish towards the subscription (no idea what the cost is so I could be well off) & $100 to the winner.

Food for thought - as tender mentioned, we'd obviously need to lock cats in prior to draft. I'm sure that'll all be sorted as everyone seems super keen for UF to open up.

We can have fa/ff differential which is another option, but that would give us 8 categories instead of 9, so probably increases the likelihood of draws - though having different categories weighted differently sorts that out.. I have a preference for the FA/FF Differential stat over and above the two separate FA and FF stats if it came down to a vote.

Cash prizes in pure dynasty leagues to not work very well as there it gets in the way of future development. I like cash leagues, but not for this set-up. I also think it has to be clear from the start that it is to be a $$$ league. Some coaches may have signed up already who have no interest or who are not in a position to be in a $$$ league.

 

[FRROST]

I'd be pro differential rather than having each FA/FF category. If you weighted the other categories to avoid 'draw' possibilities then does the FREE KICK cat become the deciding category? probably does, which I'm not overly keen on. Can disposal efficiency be added in? or "disposals" as a whole (I know that would basically mean collecting Handballs/Kicks results in double the value).

$$ - yep fair enough, makes sense - getting to the point where you feel you need to "rebuild" would suck knowing its as if you're throwing a tennar in the gutter. Having said that, If you can win 1 season in a 10 year stint, you'd break even. Reality is, the winnings would not be big, Its more to support the group in paying for that subscription - if it makes the game more challenging/exciting. Easy either way - completely understand if some are anti-entryFee

 

[deeman87]

Yeah as Tenderwarrior touched upon cash leagues don't work in dynasty. Would be fine 1st year but when someone has to take over a bottom team they just wouldn't knowing they're throwing money away. Personally i like the current setup with weighted points and the more important cats being worth 2 points and frees and goal % being worth 1. If there is enough interest in people paying for pro and wanting to scrap the frees cats I'm ok with it but we'd need half the league to opt for this for me to consider it. I get the argument that frees are a crap category and i agree with it which is why it's worth less than the other cats. Having said that, while umps play a big part in frees there is a definite pattern in terms of some players being strong in frees cats while others aren't. So you can keep that in mind when drafting. I also don't see many cats I'd like to replace them with as disposal efficiency % is the only pro cat I'd like to add in. If anyone has strong views on this please feel free to weigh in as now is the time.

 

[FRROST]

Efficiency would be a good addition. May help you bring in a player who only grabs 10 touches, won't help another category but if every touch is perfect (ie. Weiters - may be some bias is that call haha) could help your mob get over the line.

Either way I'm happy and if I need to throw a couple dollars in I'm happy to so if majority see "pro" as the way to go.

 

[deeman87]

One other option is this. We weight goal accuracy % as 2 points instead of 1 with the rest of the cats also weighted as 2. Then we have free kick differential as 1 category worth 1 point. This would make frees almost irrelevant as it would be worth 6-7% of overall category score.

 

[tenderwarrior]

Yeah as Tenderwarrior touched upon cash leagues don't work in dynasty. Would be fine 1st year but when someone has to take over a bottom team they just wouldn't knowing they're throwing money away. Personally i like the current setup with weighted points and the more important cats being worth 2 points and frees and goal % being worth 1. If there is enough interest in people paying for pro and wanting to scrap the frees cats I'm ok with it but we'd need half the league to opt for this for me to consider it. I get the argument that frees are a crap category and i agree with it which is why it's worth less than the other cats. Having said that, while umps play a big part in frees there is a definite pattern in terms of some players being strong in frees cats while others aren't. So you can keep that in mind when drafting. I also don't see many cats I'd like to replace them with as disposal efficiency % is the only pro cat I'd like to add in. If anyone has strong views on this please feel free to weigh in as now is the time.

Spoils as a category is interesting, as it breathes some life into the dour tall defenders who otherwise are only depth or on the FA list..

 

[FRROST]

One other option is this. We weight goal accuracy % as 2 points instead of 1 with the rest of the cats also weighted as 2. Then we have free kick differential as 1 category worth 1 point. This would make frees almost irrelevant as it would be worth 6-7% of overall category score.

You could look at it like that or you could see it as being the tie breaker, 8pt v 8pt and then FREES cat is the decided - which makes it even more frustrating that you may lose your game due to a "chance" stat. (nb. fantasy footy is all about a little luck/chance in the end)

Spoils - agreed. Something different.

Could you drop to 8 categories and just change weight to be:
3 cats = 2pts = 6 (kicks/handballs/tackles)
5 cats = 1pt = 5 (scoreboard/marks/goalkicking/hitOuts/FA-FFdifferential)
11 pts up for grabs. Can't have a draw that way.

 

[tenderwarrior]

You could look at it like that or you could see it as being the tie breaker, 8pt v 8pt and then FREES cat is the decided - which makes it even more frustrating that you may lose your game due to a "chance" stat. (nb. fantasy footy is all about a little luck/chance in the end)

Spoils - agreed. Something different.

Could you drop to 8 categories and just change weight to be:
3 cats = 2pts = 6 (kicks/handballs/tackles)
5 cats = 1pt = 5 (scoreboard/marks/goalkicking/hitOuts/FA-FFdifferential)
11 pts up for grabs. Can't have a draw that way.

I think now it is just becoming confusing.. and too restricting on what type of team you need to win. Your example has you winning the game by winning 3 out of 8 categories I think the current way of setting it up is better - otherwise why bother having tall backs who take marks, rucks who win hit-outs, or goal-kickers if you can just win by having a team of ball-winners who like to tackle?

2 pts - Score, Kicks, Handballs, Marks, Tackles, Hitouts = 12
1 pt - score accuracy, frees for, frees against = 3

15 points up for grabs - and you can still have a draw if a category has a tie..

 

[FRROST]

Ahh. Ofcourse - you can tie a category. Would be very slim chance I'd imagine.

Great point tenderwarrior ... that scoring system is ace! Making the frees categories of little value compared to others, you can still draft in players who pick up a bunch of frees and avoid the hacks but in the end these categories probably come down to a little more chance (which is fine I think, always keeping the lower teams in with a chance to sneak a win). Score accuracy is also one a rated quite low as this can be blown out by midfielders having their pot shots at goal - assuming the % is made up of behinds v goals?

Really happy with that set up tender, just didn't think it when posting my last msg.

 

[deeman87]

Ahh. Ofcourse - you can tie a category. Would be very slim chance I'd imagine.

Great point tenderwarrior ... that scoring system is ace! Making the frees categories of little value compared to others, you can still draft in players who pick up a bunch of frees and avoid the hacks but in the end these categories probably come down to a little more chance (which is fine I think, always keeping the lower teams in with a chance to sneak a win). Score accuracy is also one a rated quite low as this can be blown out by midfielders having their pot shots at goal - assuming the % is made up of behinds v goals?

Really happy with that set up tender, just didn't think it when posting my last msg.

Mate that's the set up we already have that's been in place for months... But no, good discussion is very welcome. I think it's the optimal scoring system without paying for pro.

 

[deeman87]

Spoils as a category is interesting, as it breathes some life into the dour tall defenders who otherwise are only depth or on the FA list..

Spoils is an interesting cat for sure and would change team setups and drafting quite a bit.

 

[FRROST]

Mate that's the set up we already have that's been in place for months... But no, good discussion is very welcome. I think it's the optimal scoring system without paying for pro.

Ahk, well awesome!.

I thought I saw something that said each of the 9 cats were worth 1pt. Nonetheless - just amping up conversation in the lead in to UF opening.

 

[deeman87]

Ahk, well awesome!.

I thought I saw something that said each of the 9 cats were worth 1pt. Nonetheless - just amping up conversation in the lead in to UF opening.

Absolutely. What are people's thoughts on the cap on f.a moves during the season. It's currently set at 30 but I'm now thinking that might be a bit too low, I'm not too sure that i actually like having a cap on f.a moves. Do people want a cap on f.a moves? If so how many?

 

[FRROST]

F.A = any player who is not on a list, basically the left overs.
F.A moves = a trade with the F.A pile, you delist a player in exchange for a Free Agent.

^ if that is correct, then:

I understand there is a waiver system, it's not first in best dressed. It's a bit strategic, If you take the punt on a player early on after 1 or 2 good games then you go to the end of the waiver list. That player could then end up playing only 2 games - unlucky, 4 weeks later the next Papley comes up - unfortunately you wasted your chance.

I would vote less FA moves per club. 20-30 is good. It means coaches need to think about it a little more - can't just freely chop n change their side. I think there needs to be an element of risk/strategy remaining in the FA system.

For those who have done this each year, how many FA moves would you do on avg? If the answer is 20, I'd vote we make the ruling 10. Makes for a more strategic approach.

 

[tenderwarrior]

F.A = any player who is not on a list, basically the left overs.
F.A moves = a trade with the F.A pile, you delist a player in exchange for a Free Agent.

^ if that is correct, then:

I understand there is a waiver system, it's not first in best dressed. It's a bit strategic, If you take the punt on a player early on after 1 or 2 good games then you go to the end of the waiver list. That player could then end up playing only 2 games - unlucky, 4 weeks later the next Papley comes up - unfortunately you wasted your chance.

I would vote less FA moves per club. 20-30 is good. It means coaches need to think about it a little more - can't just freely chop n change their side. I think there needs to be an element of risk/strategy remaining in the FA system.

For those who have done this each year, how many FA moves would you do on avg? If the answer is 20, I'd vote we make the ruling 10. Makes for a more strategic approach.

deeman87 has set it at 30 FA picks per season. Is it up for vote? I am not sure.

I think less the better. In the BF Dynasty League we have 5 each, and most coaches do not use their quota. Given that their will be between 600-650 AFL players on the main lists, there rally is not much point in too many FA selections. Having a heap of FA selections will also add it own type of strategy though, so either way whether it is 5, 10 or 30 It doesn't concern me too much.

 

[Stoney]

IN! Sweet.

3xkeeper leagues - the mrs will hate me!

Welcome mate.

I'm so amped for this one!

 

[Dignan]

Just my two cents on some of the discussions.

Current categories and category weighting as outlined by deeman in the OP are good by me. Also a fan of the realism when it comes to list size/turnover/required draft picks etc.

I'm not keen on paying for premium.

FA picks - I'm a little inexperienced when it comes to this in dynasty leagues so I'll let the more experienced guys work out the specifics here. I think whatever number maximises strategic game play is best.

 

[FRROST]

deeman87 has set it at 30 FA picks per season. Is it up for vote? I am not sure.

I think less the better. In the BF Dynasty League we have 5 each, and most coaches do not use their quota. Given that their will be between 600-650 AFL players on the main lists, there rally is not much point in too many FA selections. Having a heap of FA selections will also add it own type of strategy though, so either way whether it is 5, 10 or 30 It doesn't concern me too much.

Agreed - could go less or could go more, each would have their own element of strategy.

 

[iluvparis]

In terms of a cap on FA move caps I think you want to set it at a spot where 2 or 3 teams are coming up against their limit late in the season - this stops endless churn through the FA pool until you find a gem and makes moves a little more strategic.

 

[deeman87]

Alright cool so sounds like everyone wants a cap on F.A i think I'll leave the number at 30 for now, that's leaves teams able to make an average of one and a bit moves per week. I don't want to limit it too much at this point. There will be a waiver period for anyone you cut so teams still need to give a decent amount of thought tl anyone they drop. I have a feeling Tender is right and that this will be a bit of a non issue with most teams not wanting to drop most of their list. iluvparis, i'm going to assume you posting in here is confirmation you're in still, PM me your email please.

 

[FRROST]

deeman87 I just want to add, if we are picking a squad of 44 and then have 30 FA moves, it looks as though there is an expectation coaches won't be happy with their squads.

tenderwarrior mentioned most coaches didn't even get to 5 FA moves in his other league. I think the reason being is that there really won't be many players sitting in FA pile. There will be 616 listed players, which would leave <200 FA's. 80% of these will be 1 of the following:
1 - collect the pill <10 times a game, and therefore add no value.
2 - play <10 games a year, as a fringe player.
3 - be aged 18-20yo and in development league.
4 - be a depth player who won't be given a chance in the ones, ie. Whiley / McKenzie / Templeton (examples of 2016 lads who went injury free and just couldn't get a game - all of which temporarily ruined my other keeper league team haha).

The other 20% will come in and surprise us all ( 2016 McCarthy / Mcd-Tip / Papley etc) - I can see all of us jumping on the likes of these week in week out, if we have 30 FA picks then chances are we'll have all 14 coaches bidding and it will come down to the guy with the highest waiver each time. If you have 10 picks (or even less) you may find some coaches skip on bidding, so they can move up the waiver list and grab the next jet - patience comes into play as a strategy. Just food for thought - I'm probably more 'pro' the minimal number cap, but will be happy either way because we'll all be in the same boat.

 

[deeman87]

deeman87 I just want to add, if we are picking a squad of 44 and then have 30 FA moves, it looks as though there is an expectation coaches won't be happy with their squads.

tenderwarrior mentioned most coaches didn't even get to 5 FA moves in his other league. I think the reason being is that there really won't be many players sitting in FA pile. There will be 616 listed players, which would leave <200 FA's. 80% of these will be 1 of the following:
1 - collect the pill <10 times a game, and therefore add no value.
2 - play <10 games a year, as a fringe player.
3 - be aged 18-20yo and in development league.
4 - be a depth player who won't be given a chance in the ones, ie. Whiley / McKenzie / Templeton (examples of 2016 lads who went injury free and just couldn't get a game - all of which temporarily ruined my other keeper league team haha).

The other 20% will come in and surprise us all ( 2016 McCarthy / Mcd-Tip / Papley etc) - I can see all of us jumping on the likes of these week in week out, if we have 30 FA picks then chances are we'll have all 14 coaches bidding and it will come down to the guy with the highest waiver each time. If you have 10 picks (or even less) you may find some coaches skip on bidding, so they can move up the waiver list and grab the next jet - patience comes into play as a strategy. Just food for thought - I'm probably more 'pro' the minimal number cap, but will be happy either way because we'll all be in the same boat.

Interesting point you make. Just so you know the waiver waiting period which i think i'll make as 48 hours leaving all managers ample time to jump online, only applies at the end of a round or when someone drops someone. If you grab a player when he's just a regular free agent it doesn't count toward your waiver priority. That being said, as you say, a lot of people will be wanting to jump on the hot free agents that played well on the weekend. I'll have a think about reducing the number. I'm mostly coming from a fantasy NBA perspective where there's a lot more swapping and changing as players game time fluctuates with injuries a lot more so there's generally a lot of movement in the free agency pool as players gain and lose their value. But i guess with list sizes being double what we can play the argument is definitely there that you should have all you need going into the season without chopping and changing your list each week.

 

[deeman87]

Just BILC, Drew23 and Crossingham16 to confirm their involvement now.

 

[deeman87]

Not overly confident of Crossingham making it in since he hasn't been online in 4 months so i think we're definitely going to need 1 more filler, i'll say Stoney's mate is top of the wait list for now as i think the more friends and stuff involved the more committed to beating each other they will be. Stoney can you get your mate to post in this thread over the next week or so if he wants in and he can have Crossinham's spot barring him making an appearance on here.