PDA

View Full Version : Transaction and game limits



flubber
12-27-2011, 12:28 AM
If you have not commented on roster size yet please chime in in that thread but it appears we will have a 16 team league with 20 player rosters.

So the question now is around min games transaction limits etc etc- What do you wish in this regard

flubber
12-27-2011, 12:35 AM
1. Transaction limits-- Yes-- since every week is a separate contest I favor weekly limits-- I find 5 per week is a good balance-- It allows a manager to actively manage but is a low enough level that you cannot brute force and churn for additional skater games--

I am against season limits as this can set up unequal contests late in the season where one player could have many transactions left and another manager few

2. Min games-- every H2H I played had a goalie minimum of 3 games for stats to count

No max games for anything-- If someone wants to have a roster of all centres so they get 21 games from centres each week and they lose out on other positions so be it-=- People can carry whatever roster they want

Overall I am in favor of people having a fair bit of leeway to manage but I do see the need for a weekly transaction limit to prevent churn.

Tim
12-27-2011, 12:59 AM
1. TRansaction limits-- Yes-- since every week is a separate contest I favor weekly limits-- I find 5 per week is a good balance-- It allows a manager to actively manage but is a low enough level that you cannot brute force and churn for additional skater games--

I am against season limits as this can set up unequal contests late in the season where one player could have many transactions left and another manager few

2. Min games-- every H2H I played had a goalie minimum of 3 games for stats to count

No max games for anything-- If someone wants to have a roster of all centres so they get 21 games from centres each week and they lose out on other positions so be it-=- People can carry whatever roster they want

Overall I am in favor of people having a fair bit opf leeway to manage but I do see the need for a weekly transaction limit to prevent churn.

Completely agree with everything said. This is my vote too.

dlscowby22
12-27-2011, 01:04 AM
Honestly, i feel 3 moves per week max would be more than fair. you shouldnt be playing free agent pool to supplement your off days with starts. to me, that just isnt what drafting a team is about. if you want to replace a under preforming player, cool. an injured player, cool. other than that, no. But thats my opinion. 2-3 minimum starts for goalies = good. also no max games for skaters.

UK Rob
12-27-2011, 08:30 AM
I agree with dlscowby22 about the 3 moves per week. I feel that in a deep league even 4 moves per week is enough to brute force some extra points; it is certainly enough to swing categories in my 12 team H2H this year so it could only be exaggerated with more teams.

For minimum Goalie games I think 3 is fair. With a 16 team league and here on LWL I would expect us all to carry 3 Goalies minimum so if that was the case all but 2 backups would be on rosters already and it shouldn't be any trouble to get 3 starts out of 3 active Goalies.

Max. games I don't like at all; that's for a rotisserie league not a H2H.

internalprime8
12-27-2011, 08:57 AM
I am purdy much in agreement with dlscowby and uk. 3-4 moves per week is fine for me to prevent churning. The most important thing is to also have at least a 2-3 day waiver period for every player dropped. 3 minimum goalie starts is enough to prevent people from sitting on one good start. Season limits and max games don't make any sense in a H2H format league.

flubber
12-27-2011, 09:24 AM
Flubber 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
Tim 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
dlscowboy 3 moves a week, NO season limits, 2-3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
UK Rob 3 moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
internalprime8, 3-4 moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits

flubber
12-27-2011, 09:26 AM
The most important thing is to also have at least a 2-3 day waiver period for every player dropped.

All my H2H have this. You need to have enough time to makle the waiver wire have meaning.

flubber
12-27-2011, 09:30 AM
Honestly, i feel 3 moves per week max would be more than fair. you shouldnt be playing free agent pool to supplement your off days with starts. to me, that just isnt what drafting a team is about. if you want to replace a under preforming player, cool. an injured player, cool. other than that, no. But thats my opinion. .

Its a valid one-- I see this sometimes as philosophically managers differ. Some see a fantasy pool as about the draft and any transactions are limited almost undesired in some ways. Others (and this is my camp) want a pool to be something where some active management is beneficial

flubber
12-27-2011, 09:57 AM
I agree with dlscowby22 about the 3 moves per week. I feel that in a deep league even 4 moves per week is enough to brute force some extra points; it is certainly enough to swing categories in my 12 team H2H this year so it could only be exaggerated with more teams.
.

Actually my experience is the deeper the league, the LESS likely it is that there is anyone available that will materially change things.

I'll state my bias up front-- I like settings that reward active managers. Heck I would suppoet unlimited transactions except I played it once and saw the stupidity of churn. WE had a guy that dropped 5 players pretty much every day and added 5 more. It was only a 8 team league so there were goof players on the FA wire. AS a method it was very effective but there weas very little intelligence or judgement required. I think everyone recognized the tedium of it and I vowed never again to play in a H2H unless there were transaction limits .

THat said I cannot see any "churn" in limits such as we are discussing. Personally I WANT people to be looking at who they can add late in a week to perhaps take a category. I don't see that as brute force. I see it as making a more active and exciting league. I don't want limits that create a "draft it and forget it type team".

WE haven't gotten to stats yet but if we have a lot, I like the idea of having a couple of moves available to set my team up for the matchup (perhaps I perceive you are weak in blocks so I drop a couple of my marginal players that are good shot blockers since I hope to win that anyway and pick up someone else) and then a few more for late week attempts to swing close categories. You might see my moves and then pick up some shot blockers to take what you see as a now vulnerable category

Just my opinion but even with as many as 5 trans a week its not brute force, its about intelligent use of a scarce resource. I LIKE the idea that I can influence the result on the week

Tim
12-27-2011, 12:15 PM
All my H2H have this. You need to have enough time to makle the waiver wire have meaning.

I actually prefer to have the waiver period really short. My preference is 2 days at the most. People that are more active should be rewarded over those who are not imo.


Its a valid one-- I see this sometimes as philosophically managers differ. Some see a fantasy pool as about the draft and any transactions are limited almost undesired in some ways. Others (and this is my camp) want a pool to be something where some active management is beneficial

I'm definitely with you on this one. The more adds per week you have per week the more strategy that can be involved. Five adds is perfect imo because it allows strategy, but it's not enough for churn.



Actually my experience is the deeper the league, the LESS likely it is that there is anyone available that will materially change things.

I'll state my bias up front-- I like settings that reward active managers. Heck I would suppoet unlimited transactions except I played it once and saw the stupidity of churn. WE had a guy that dropped 5 players pretty much every day and added 5 more. It was only a 8 team league so there were goof players on the FA wire. AS a method it was very effective but there weas very little intelligence or judgement required. I think everyone recognized the tedium of it and I vowed never again to play in a H2H unless there were transaction limits .

THat said I cannot see any "churn" in limits such as we are discussing. Personally I WANT people to be looking at who they can add late in a week to perhaps take a category. I don't see that as brute force. I see it as making a more active and exciting league. I don't want limits that create a "draft it and forget it type team".

WE haven't gotten to stats yet but if we have a lot, I like the idea of having a couple of moves available to set my team up for the matchup (perhaps I perceive you are weak in blocks so I drop a couple of my marginal players that are good shot blockers since I hope to win that anyway and pick up someone else) and then a few more for late week attempts to swing close categories. You might see my moves and then pick up some shot blockers to take what you see as a now vulnerable category

Just my opinion but even with as many as 5 trans a week its not brute force, its about intelligent use of a scarce resource. I LIKE the idea that I can influence the result on the week

Again, I'm definitely with you here. Agree with everything said.

dpclark11
12-27-2011, 12:23 PM
I vote for 5 moves per weeek, 3 min goalie starts, and a 2 two day wavier period

UK Rob
12-27-2011, 12:35 PM
Actually my experience is the deeper the league, the LESS likely it is that there is anyone available that will materially change things.

I'll state my bias up front-- I like settings that reward active managers. Heck I would suppoet unlimited transactions except I played it once and saw the stupidity of churn. WE had a guy that dropped 5 players pretty much every day and added 5 more. It was only a 8 team league so there were goof players on the FA wire. AS a method it was very effective but there weas very little intelligence or judgement required. I think everyone recognized the tedium of it and I vowed never again to play in a H2H unless there were transaction limits .

THat said I cannot see any "churn" in limits such as we are discussing. Personally I WANT people to be looking at who they can add late in a week to perhaps take a category. I don't see that as brute force. I see it as making a more active and exciting league. I don't want limits that create a "draft it and forget it type team".

WE haven't gotten to stats yet but if we have a lot, I like the idea of having a couple of moves available to set my team up for the matchup (perhaps I perceive you are weak in blocks so I drop a couple of my marginal players that are good shot blockers since I hope to win that anyway and pick up someone else) and then a few more for late week attempts to swing close categories. You might see my moves and then pick up some shot blockers to take what you see as a now vulnerable category

Just my opinion but even with as many as 5 trans a week its not brute force, its about intelligent use of a scarce resource. I LIKE the idea that I can influence the result on the week

I can understand this position and I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with it but for me the idea of being able to drop a player for 1 game so that you can slot in somebody else then pick them up again to be used later on in the week is not what I would choose. I don't see the point in making 5 moves a week if there's no real long-term value to your team. I realise this is H2H weekly but personally, I like each move to actually make a difference to the overall value of the roster rather than just constant spot starts when you could get enough games from the players anyway; for me, it devalues the effort put into drafting a good team slightly.

flubber
12-27-2011, 01:47 PM
I actually prefer to have the waiver period really short. My preference is 2 days at the most. People that are more active should be rewarded over those who are not imo.


.

While I agree about rewarding activity I wouldn;t want the waiver wire to be really really short-- I think all 3 of my leagues are at 2 days and I never really thought about it

flubber
12-27-2011, 01:52 PM
UK Rob

I see your point of view but mine differs. I see nothing wrong with making a move to help my team win this week-- If I expose a stronger player , its QUITE likely someone will make me "
pay" by picking up my former player but thats the risk one takes.


Also I do not mind devaluing the draft slightly if the result is that yu have a league that cab reward participation. My experiences has been a league that has more moves ( actually happening as the limits are irrelevent) generally also has more banter and trades and discussion and I see all of that as positive.

i can tell you to a certainty now --If we had 5 moves there would be weeks I would use 5 and also weeks I would use zero-- It would depend on how my team set up

dpclark11
12-27-2011, 02:15 PM
UK Rob

I see your point of view but mine differs. I see nothing wrong with making a move to help my team win this week-- If I expose a stronger player , its QUITE likely someone will make me "
pay" by picking up my former player but thats the risk one takes.


Also I do not mind devaluing the draft slightly if the result is that yu have a league that cab reward participation. My experiences has been a league that has more moves ( actually happening as the limits are irrelevent) generally also has more banter and trades and discussion and I see all of that as positive.

i can tell you to a certainty now --If we had 5 moves there would be weeks I would use 5 and also weeks I would use zero-- It would depend on how my team set upI completley agree with Flubber. You arent guaranteed to be able to pick up the player that you dropped earlier in the week. With the reward of getting extra skaters in for the week comes the risk of losing that player to another team. I'm all for 5 moves a week as I agree with everything Flubber has said. It rewards active managers yet it can still bite you in the butt if you drop a good player and he is picked up by another team.

dpclark11
12-27-2011, 02:18 PM
Update

Flubber 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
Tim 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
dlscowboy 3 moves a week, NO season limits, 2-3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
UK Rob 3 moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
internalprime8, 3-4 moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
dpclark11, 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits

Looks like were in a dead heat between 3 and 5 moves a week and we seem to all agree on a 3 minimum goalie apperance so far

UK Rob
12-27-2011, 05:05 PM
Like I said earlier I understand that view and if it comes out on top then fair enough. I'm mostly just glad that we're all discussing these things to get the best possible outcome out of it that we can.

Tim
12-27-2011, 05:55 PM
Five moves just gives much more room for strategy imo. That's why I'm all for it.

Flames89Champs
12-27-2011, 05:58 PM
I like 4 moves a week, no season limits, 3 goalie appearances minimum, no other limits, and a 2 day waiver turnaround. But just to clarify, I am an active manager... I would be happy with 5 moves a week or more.. but since people are stuck between 3 and 5... I'll go with 4. Haha!

dpclark11
12-27-2011, 06:10 PM
I like 4 moves a week, no season limits, 3 goalie appearances minimum, no other limits, and a 2 day waiver turnaround. But just to clarify, I am an active manager... I would be happy with 5 moves a week or more.. but since people are stuck between 3 and 5... I'll go with 4. Haha!I think if the vote is close say 8-7-1 or 8-6-2 (The third number being those who vote for 4) which is where it looks like its heading I would be fine with a compromise with 4 moves a week just to make everyone more happy, but for the time being my vote stands at 5

dpclark11
12-27-2011, 06:13 PM
Just a quick update on the votes

Flubber 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
Tim, 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
dpclark11, 5 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
Flames89Champs, 4 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
internalprime8, 3-4 moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
dlscowboy 3 moves a week, NO season limits, 2-3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits
UK Rob 3 moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits

Tim
12-27-2011, 06:31 PM
Here's who has voted so far.

Transition and Game Limits

ldbc
flubber - Voted
hovercraft
internalprime8 - Voted
rocketman9 - Voted
UK Rob - Voted
Wings9798
mj12 - Voted
john29
gnial
afox
dlsowby22 - Voted
flamer89champs - Voted
leafs
Tim - Voted
dpclark11 - Voted

Roster Makeup

ldbc
flubber - Voted
hovercraft
internalprime8 - Voted
rocketman9 - Voted
UK Rob - Voted
Wings9798
mj12 - Voted
john29
gnial
afox
dlsowby22 - Voted
flamer89champs - Voted
leafs
Tim - Voted
dpclark11 - Voted

Updated as of 12-30

UK Rob
12-27-2011, 07:33 PM
I think if the vote is close say 8-7-1 or 8-6-2 (The third number being those who vote for 4) which is where it looks like its heading I would be fine with a compromise with 4 moves a week just to make everyone more happy, but for the time being my vote stands at 5

Democracy, where we all get what nobody wants. :D

mj12
12-29-2011, 12:45 PM
I am good with: 3-4 moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances-- NO other limits.

Trades - any discussion on having a 2 day wait period on trades? we have this in my current league, good in some cases, but not so good in others - I just traded for Edler- and the day before he came to me - he got a SHP - pissed me off as I could have used that cat win.

Rocket
12-29-2011, 02:35 PM
I am good with 4 moves per week, 3 min goalie starts and 2 day waiver period. Good discussion boys!

Tim
12-30-2011, 05:48 PM
I'll pm everybody to attempt to get this going again.

Wings9798
12-31-2011, 01:37 PM
Sorry a bit slow on the replies, that Hawks Wings game last night took a bit out of me.

I agree with everyone on 3 goalie starts a week. With 16 players a roster of 20 it may be hard to get 4 and 2 isn't of value so 3.

I'm going to differ on weekly moves. 3-5 moves per week gives the ability of a person to 'churn' over 100 times. With this deep league picks 16-20 will be mostly 3-4th liners and a team could churn those every week. If we want to put more value in the draft then I'm suggesting season roster moves I play now with 36 which is about 1 per week. A bit more strategy to hold instead of the dropping. It looks like I'm already the minority on this but just a suggestion. No other limits.

Waiver wire yes 2-3 days also. Can we pick up and use the day of game. Example if you pick up a player at 9am can you use him that day or you can use a player until the following day? I vote for the following day.

Now to get my vote on for the roster make up.

Leafs
12-31-2011, 02:42 PM
Ok: 4 Moves a week, NO season limits, 3 minimum goalie appearances

dpclark11
01-15-2012, 01:19 PM
I'll pm everybody to attempt to get this going again.I got you pm a little while ago, have any of the users who have not voted responded yet? At what point should we start letting other people who wanna play that are a little more active on this site join

Tim
01-24-2012, 07:09 PM
I got you pm a little while ago, have any of the users who have not voted responded yet? At what point should we start letting other people who wanna play that are a little more active on this site join

This is a REALLY late response lol, but I'm not going to replace anyone until at least before the hockey season ends.

Tim
01-24-2012, 07:20 PM
We will have 3 minimum goalie appearances, no season limits, and no other limits as it was basically unanimous there. The moves per week is extremely close. Here's what everyone has voted for so far.

Flubber 5 Moves a week
Tim 5 moves a week
dpclark11 5 Moves a week
Flames89Champs, 4 Moves a week
internalprime8, 3-4 moves a week
dlscowboy 3 moves a week
UK Rob 3 moves a week
mj12 3-4 moves a week
Rocketman9 4 moves a week
Wings9798 1 move per week
Leafs 4 moves a week

The voting is 3:3:2:2:1. There are three votes for five moves a week, three votes for four moves a week, two votes for three moves a week, two votes for three to four moves a week, and one vote for one move a week. I'm not sure how to categorize the votes that are three to four, so it would help if those people could choose one or the other. This vote is really close too, so I'll leave it open for two more weeks.

flubber
01-25-2012, 08:28 AM
We will have 3 minimum goalie appearances, no season limits, and no other limits as it was basically unanimous there. The moves per week is extremely close. Here's what everyone has voted for so far.

Flubber 5 Moves a week
Tim 5 moves a week
dpclark11 5 Moves a week
Flames89Champs, 4 Moves a week
internalprime8, 3-4 moves a week
dlscowboy 3 moves a week
UK Rob 3 moves a week
mj12 3-4 moves a week
Rocketman9 4 moves a week
Wings9798 1 move per week
Leafs 4 moves a week

The voting is 3:3:2:2:1. There are three votes for five moves a week, three votes for four moves a week, two votes for three moves a week, two votes for three to four moves a week, and one vote for one move a week. I'm not sure how to categorize the votes that are three to four, so it would help if those people could choose one or the other. This vote is really close too, so I'll leave it open for two more weeks.

On 11 votes cannot we consider it decided at four? Its obviously going to be 3 or 4. No other result is possible as at 2 or 5 transactions you have eight people voting contrary to that.

At four you have five people that voted for that, with 3 people voting higher and 3 people voting lower so its exactly in the middle of our current distribution. If we said 3 transactions you currently have 6 of 11 votes for a higher number of transactions .

We can wait for more votes but I am thinking you should limit that we should start considering things decided and move on This has been up for about a month or so now so anytone that really cares that much would have voted

internalprime8
01-25-2012, 09:17 AM
You can change my vote from 3-4 to simply 4. My leaning toward 3 originally was because I didn't want people churning every week for cheap wins but I think with the number of managers in this league with 4 acquisitions there will be more waiver vs FA pickups and I think that could add an interesting twist. Plus 4 being the limit doesn't mean every manager will make 4 moves every week.

flubber
01-25-2012, 09:48 AM
Plus 4 being the limit doesn't mean every manager will make 4 moves every week.

In fact, my experience is most managers will NOT make 4 move a week. In none of my leagues is anyone really even close to max moves. Most folks are around 20-30 moves for the year BUT I have noticed that for most managers they come in spurts and they will hit the transaction limits some weeks. Most often its when they get a significant injury which triggers a couple of moves.

mj12
01-25-2012, 11:08 AM
you can change my vote from 3-4 to 4. makes it simple.

internalprime8
01-25-2012, 12:27 PM
In the league I'm playing in we have a 4 limit max and it's rare that I feel like I'm inhibited by 4 moves. Most weeks I make only 1 or no acquisitions. I haven't tried to maximize starts since the very early weeks. Usually I will just swap out 1 or 2 fringe players who have cooled off for players who are hot or I think are going to be. Now that I think about it, when I have hit 4 acquisitions previously it was mostly from goalie swapping because I only had 1 starter (Lehtonen being Injured) so under normal circumstances it wouldn't even be an issue.

NightParade
01-25-2012, 12:52 PM
Depending on my team I make a lot of roster moves, it also depends on my opponent. Last year we had a max 3 and I used all 3 almost every week, this year its 4 and I usually only make 1 or 2 moves, go figure. But I've appreciated the 4 moves when I have used them.

Tim
01-25-2012, 03:10 PM
On 11 votes cannot we consider it decided at four? Its obviously going to be 3 or 4. No other result is possible as at 2 or 5 transactions you have eight people voting contrary to that.

At four you have five people that voted for that, with 3 people voting higher and 3 people voting lower so its exactly in the middle of our current distribution. If we said 3 transactions you currently have 6 of 11 votes for a higher number of transactions .

We can wait for more votes but I am thinking you should limit that we should start considering things decided and move on This has been up for about a month or so now so anytone that really cares that much would have voted

Very good point. Four moves a week it is.

hovercraft
01-27-2012, 04:22 PM
4 moves a week is a good number.

I hope we have no limits on Trades though

Edgeman
01-27-2012, 05:40 PM
Do you guys have the league full yet?

Tim
01-27-2012, 08:46 PM
Do you guys have the league full yet?

Yes we do sorry. There are a couple ahead of you on the waiting list too.

What are people's thoughts on having two leagues?