|
Leperflesh posted:Yeah it's $20. quote:By our league rules 4.3.1 and 4.3.2: In that case: whalers should play chefs and leper should play garb. That's how I seeded the remaining teams, so seems fine. Zauper fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Dec 12, 2017 |
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
Here's a random idea: -Some # of teams make the playoffs. Some get byes, some are wildcards in the first week. -All teams that fail to make the playoffs, plus maybe also the teams that lose their wildcard matches, go into a non-matchup pool. -They get ranked at the end of week 16 by total Points For scored. No matchups, just PF. -Top PF scorer gets the consolation prize. -Still use the records/PFs of teams that didn't make the playoffs for seeding into the draft, perhaps ignoring the consolation tournament entirely (so the winner of the consolation tournament could potentially also be getting first draft pick, if they were the worst team going into the postseason). This system would have the advantage of not eliminating teams from the consolation tournament: all teams not in the quarterfinals would still have some incentive to set lineups and try to do well to win the consolation prize, and meanwhile, there'd be no benefit to tanking because posteason performance would not affect draft position at all. It has the added advantage of giving us more flexibility to setting up the actual playoffs, too: we could potentially have six or more teams seeded into the playoffs, with more than one wildcard match. e. Zauper I edited some more stuff into the post you quoted, so please check again, but yeah basically I agree the current system could be improved a lot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:
Yeah, I see that -- it's pretty much in line with what I was thinking. Essentially the crux of my complaint was 'it kinda sucks to lose draft position for $20'. It also doesn't need to be decided now, because it wouldn't go into effect until the 2018 season obviously. It's hard to drop the wild card losers into consolation unless consolation runs into week 17. Think about the math -- if you did that this week, you'd have 1 too many teams in the consolation bracket, so you'd be giving a bye this week. It would definitely be a cool thing to think through, but at least initially I'm struggling to see how to get it to work without running into week 17. In order to not run into week 17, you need 4 teams eliminated in week 14 (so 8 playing in 15 -- 4 in each bracket, and 2 in each bracket in 16). If you aren't eliminating anyone from the wild card game(s), you'd need to eliminate 4 from the consolation bracket, which isn't doable without reducing playoff qualifiers unless you do something funky like only taking the top X by PF as 'winning' that round. Zauper fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Dec 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Leper, I like the idea of dumping all remaining teams into a pool. Use best ball type of points for, not plain points for because some guys forget to set lineups. Just a two week best ball type of thing with some random prize associated with it. Or 1.05 is the prize. Whatever works. Phoneposting so can't scroll up and see what you had written. I just got excited and hit post.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Yeah the idea would be not having to do matchups, so you can have an odd number of teams in the pool and go for however many weeks you want. We'd still do actual matchups for the championships of course. Best Ball would be another whole different thing. I love a best ball format and play a couple every year, but it'd be a big difference from our current setup. I'm not even sure if you can configure a league to switch to best ball just for certain games, and only for certain teams but not other teams.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Even if its manual it wouldn't be bad for a couple weeks. We just had a few teams (me included by accident) not set full rosters since being eliminated.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Zauper posted:
I did not set this up. I am a bad commish. I dismissed my calendar reminder and never actually did the job. That being said: it is not what I quoted and don't know how to fix it. I can reseed everything in the consolation bracket to fudge it, but it's the consolation bracket so I am not sure what that gains us. I can't find a way to swap two head to head teams. Someone smarter than me will have to double check.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
so uh...what happens when someone forgets to set a lineup on the playoffs? e: fuckin holidays 
Stevie Lee fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Dec 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Spermy Smurf posted:I did not set this up. I am a bad commish. I think it's fine, though, we can just compare the scores as if the matches were correct, and then advance the correct two players manually into the final match.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 07:21
|
|
|
Stevie Lee posted:so uh...what happens when someone forgets to set a lineup on the playoffs? Oh man, I didn't know what you meant but I just looked at the scoring and yeah, SBH really blew it. Carson Wentz, Leonard Fournettte, yuck. That said, I suspect that even if SBH had set his "most efficient lineup" you'd still be crushing him. He'd be up 20pts with Flacco + Gronk(over Watson), but his only bench RB was Washington who scored 2.9, so unless he worked the waivers and picked all the best IDP matchups, he was probably boned. But you know what's really interesting? Cougars are behind Titoons by less than five points, Titoons are done, and Cougars still have one player left.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 07:29
|
|
|
And that player is Kwon Alexander
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
Yeah, ABs injury and some bad choices really screwed it. AJG only had two receptions. Second lowest point total of the year. Expected rivers to keep it going vs the chiefs who hadn't been playing good d, but should have stuck with cousins. Only reason I'm in it is gurley. But drat, your DE did work to keep you close while gurley was going nuts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 13:26
|
|
|
lol I got high score this week, sure
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 08:07
|
|
|
Zauper posted:In that case: pre:Week 15 Gridiron Chefs 128.66 Concord Concordes 177.14 STRAIGHT BASS HOMIE 99.60 1017 BRICK SQUAD 169.51 Mediocre Cougars 148.85 Who Da Titoons? 133.78 Long Island Whalers 111.99 I'm Pretty Garbage At This 133.02 Bye Weeks First Down Syndrome 110.82 BALLS OF FURY 139.04 Team McLean 83.97 Ash Ketchum Gotta catch em 147.94 Concordes beat Garbage Chefs beat Whalers. Concord Concordes play Gridiron Chefs for the consolation prize. BRICK SQUAD plays Mediocre Cougars for the championship HOMIE plays Titoons to determine third and fourth place. Everyone else can have a matchup set, but it's meaningless. I'll go try and set this up now. e. They've loving changed the controls. Last year it was possible to manually set matchups on an individual basis: this year the only thing you can control is the seeding. For all the incredible levels of customization MFL has, why in the hell would they take this option away??? e. Wait nope I got it. I changed the consolation playoff brackets so consolation seed 1 (whalers) plays winner of match 1 (chefs) and now the matchups look right. http://www64.myfantasyleague.com/2017/options?L=79286&O=79 Is this right? Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Dec 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
Screenshot where you found the option to change that. I only found the same place you did before your edit. Just the seeds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
"playoff schedule setup" I just had to change which consolation bracket game the #1 seed would get matched against, to what you see there now. Previously #1 seed played winner of Game 2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
Yeah I knew I was going to get demolished and I had a very busy weekend so it really wasn't on my mind until like 3pm so I'm not really that twisted about it e: rebuilding year  1017 is the team of destiny Teemu Pokemon fucked around with this message at 05:35 on Dec 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
Teemu Pokemon posted:1017 is the team of destiny don't jinx me I need that money to buy weed
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Jinx him!
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
Zauper posted:Yeah, ABs injury and some bad choices really screwed it. AJG only had two receptions. Second lowest point total of the year. Expected rivers to keep it going vs the chiefs who hadn't been playing good d, but should have stuck with cousins. By the way, I do have one piece of confusion here -- Aaron Donald's score. My understanding is that sacks don't also count as TFLs. He has 4 tackles, 1 assist, 1 FF, 2 TFL and 3.0 sacks. He was on two half sacks and 2 full sacks. That means 4 of his 5 T/A are sacks. How then does he also have 2 TFL?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
Here's the entire description of the stat provided by MFL:quote:This is the number of Tackles for a Loss in a game by a defensive player. This stat is not updated during the games in the live stats. It is only updated after the games are finalized. So... I don't fuckin' know, really! It's plausible that they're double-counting sacks as TFLs. Can we find any cases where an IDP player had more sacks than TFLs?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 17:05
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Here's the entire description of the stat provided by MFL: Zach Brown, Week 9. Griffen Everson, Week 14. e: Do most sacks also count as TFLs? If so, a strip sack would be worth: 4pts sack, 4pts FF, 1.5pts T, 2 pts TFL for a total of 11.5 points. e2: do assists count as TFLs? Zauper fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Dec 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
If the QB got past the line of scrimmage before being tackled, then it's not a sack; that's a successful run. So by definition a sack is a TFL. But, I have assumed MFL does not double-count them: a TFL should be scored on tackles of ball carriers other than the one who took the snap. In theory. A "strip sack" is also not a sack at all, and shouldn't really be called one, in my opinion: it's a forced fumble. If the QB wasn't in possession when hitting the ground, he wasn't sacked. I don't think the scoring has a strip sack (I can't find one anyway). Additionally, a strip sack is not a tackle. A tackle is only a tackle if the player with the ball is downed. A fumble can't happen after a player is down. So the only question is how does MFL come up with its TFL number and does that number include sacks. If a player has more sacks than TFLs in MFL's stats, that means MFL definitely isn't always counting a sack as a TFL. Do they ever? It's possible. I just don't know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:If the QB got past the line of scrimmage before being tackled, then it's not a sack; that's a successful run. So by definition a sack is a TFL. But, I have assumed MFL does not double-count them: a TFL should be scored on tackles of ball carriers other than the one who took the snap. http://forums.myfantasyleague.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=27605 quote:A "strip sack" is also not a sack at all, and shouldn't really be called one, in my opinion: it's a forced fumble. If the QB wasn't in possession when hitting the ground, he wasn't sacked. I don't think the scoring has a strip sack (I can't find one anyway). quote:Additionally, a strip sack is not a tackle. A tackle is only a tackle if the player with the ball is downed. A fumble can't happen after a player is down. As mentioned above, now I think that they are counting sacks as TFLs, except for 0 yard sacks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
I'm not sure I trust forums posts by randos as being definitive, and that also doesn't jive with us having players who recorded more sacks than TFLs in a game. ... gently caress though, becuase I'm doing some googling and: https://www.sportingcharts.com/dictionary/nfl/sack.aspx quote:"In order for a sack to be recorded, it must be obvious that the quarterback either intends to throw a forward pass, or is still in the "pocket" without a clear objective for the play. If officials determine that the play was intended as a rush, a tackle of the quarterback does not result in a sack and is recorded as negative rushing yardage by the quarterback." soooooo, I'm loving wrong, and this explains everything! A sack is not a TFL and a TFL is not a sack. TFLs of a QB occur when the QB attempts to advance the ball via running and is tackled behind the line of scrimmage, while a sack occurs when the QB is in the pocket and/or still apparently attempting a pass. Which is, uhhh, really loving stupid. Because say Russel Wilson makes a pump fake while scrambling just before being tackled, was that a sack? Who the hell knows, he always does that, so does Alex Smith, it's a way of causing the defender to hesitate or flinch even when you had no intention of throwing a pass. How can the statisticians look into the mind of the QB and decide what his intent was? And then we also have quote:A quarterback is also considered sacked if he loses a fumble on or behind the line of scrimmage that is recovered by the opposing team and that's a "strip sack." Presumably only if the player touching the QB down was the same player that forced the fumble? In that case yeah, probably scored as both the forced fumble and the sack, and if that player also recovers the ball, a fumble recovery.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I'm not sure I trust forums posts by randos as being definitive, and that also doesn't jive with us having players who recorded more sacks than TFLs in a game. Except clearly there are situations where a play is scored as both a sack and a TFL, so that doesn't explain it. Look at Ngakoue, week 4. 2 tackles, 1 TFL, 1 FF, 2 sacks. Or week 7 - 3 T, 1 A, 3 TFL 2.5 SK. On the other hand, Week 11 - 2 T, 1 A, 2 FF, 2.5 SK. That's 2 strip sacks, and presumably the half sack wasn't counted as a TFL and was the A.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Need to actually watch the tape, I'm thinking, because I don't know just from looking at the stats you mention, whether some sacks are being counted as TFLs or not. But it does look like they might be, at least sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Need to actually watch the tape, I'm thinking, because I don't know just from looking at the stats you mention, whether some sacks are being counted as TFLs or not. But it does look like they might be, at least sometimes. If you only have 2 tackles and have 2 sacks, how would you also score a TFL that isn't a sack? Or 4 tackles, 2.5 sacks and 3 TFL? The math doesn't work, unless a sack isn't a tackle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
Zauper posted:unless a sack isn't a tackle. this I am doubting everything right now e. specifically: NFL rules apparently say stripping the ball from a QB "counts as a sack" even if the QB doesn't go down. This sort of sack may not count as a tackle? e. Also, forcing the QB out of bounds behind the LOS counts as a sack, right? Does it also count as a tackle?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:this That is possible, but in one of the other weeks there were no strip sacks. Forcing OOB counts as a tackle generally, so I would imagine it counts as a tackle in that case too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
I almost went into today with only 4 defensive starters lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
barring any wild start adjustments...i think I won.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
As long as Ash doesn't threepeat it's good with me. That would be embarrassing to the rest of us.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 13:37
|
|
|
Ugh, I put up league top scores in our QF and finals weeks, looks like I snagged 3rd in spite of only starting 10 players.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 13:38
|
|
|
Stevie Lee posted:barring any wild start adjustments...i think I won. Congrats and good game. Who knew Cooper over Tate was the right play?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
Just in case, I'll wait a couple days for the final score adjustments to happen before paying out the prize money, but here's the final results for the league: Winner: Stevie Lee's 1017 BRICK SQUAD! $160 first prize, and congratulations for breaking Ash Ketchum's two-year winning streak! You had top PF through week 13 and dominated the season. Well-deserved win. 2nd place: The Zack's Mediocre Cougars $80 second prize 3rd place: Zauper's Who Da Titoons? $40 third prize 4th place: Teemu Pokemon's STRAIGHT BASS HOMIE $0 you get nothing lol, fourth place really is the worst, let's fix this for next year. 5th place and winner of the consolation bracket: Gridiron Chefs $20 consolation prize, and honestly amazing given you went 3-10 in the regular season, just goes to show ya. Also lol you lost your top-four pick, is that really worth $20? Let's reconsider this for next year too. Those of you getting money, I'll ping your email addresses I have and wait for confirmation before sending cash via paypal. The remaining teams will seed based on points scored through week 13: BALLS OF FURY 1892.61 First Down Syndrome 1889.31 Long Island Whalers 1836.15 ---- Concord Concordes 1754.00 Team McLean 1737.50 Ash Ketchum Gotta catch em 1737.48 I'm Pretty Garbage At This 1683.32 The bottom four teams get randomly seeded the top four picks. The three teams above them (balls, first down, whalers) get randomly seeded the middle three picks. And the last five picks are in reverse order of the top results. As of right now, rosters should be considered locked. I think it's fine to drop players, but please don't make any adds. I'm going to double-check that there are no more waiver periods scheduled. That's all based on our rules for this year. I think now would be a great time to start drawing up a list of the rules changes we've discussed for next year... let's get them hammered out now instead of waiting till everyone loses interest over the summer. We've discussed scoring changes, reworking the taxi squad, prize pool, maybe compensatory picks for taxi squad player thefts, and various other improvements and changes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:4th place: Teemu Pokemon's STRAIGHT BASS HOMIE $0 you get nothing lol, fourth place really is the worst, let's fix this for next year. quote:As of right now, rosters should be considered locked. I think it's fine to drop players, but please don't make any adds. I'm going to double-check that there are no more waiver periods scheduled. Can we still trade? I don't know that folks will want to trade at this point, but it feels like it should probably be ok. I'm definitely game for digging into rules changes, definitely better to do it now while folks are still focused over waiting til the summer. Only caveat on my end is that I'm going to be out of town until mid-jan so may not be able to weigh in much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Actually the rules are pretty vague about the offseason lock, which is mostly about dropping players, and even there the rules just say the lock is announced at least a week in advance. I think we need to add an entire new section to the rules titled "Offseason" and put down in writing exactly what the procedure should be at the end of the regular season, end of the playoffs, and in advance of the draft: we can codify when teams get locked and in what respect, when dues are due, and make a clear window for rules changes to take place. I would imagine that given we are contemplating rules changes and scoring changes, some owners may not want to do a lot of trading right now. But all of the above notwithstanding, we have no actual rule about trading, so it's permitted, even during a lock, until we make such a rule. And we are not currently locked, so owners can drop & trade at will. e. we had a "no add/drops allowed" event scheduled for the 31st. Per the 1-week notification rule, I've just changed it to next Tuesday the 2nd; but we can extend it out if there's any reason to do so. e2. and we also had waivers turned on for the next week and a half, so I've just manually deleted the remaining "process waivers" events from December and January. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Dec 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
I have a huge list of poo poo to post about. Will do tomorrow. It's all about rules and whatnot. I would actually like more than 6 people to vote on it, so will be sending it out via email to tally votes. But more importantly:  Anyone not coming back next year? Alfalfa is in the queue in case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
I'm in, especially now that I've tasted success. I'd like to change my team name. When is the best time to do so? Now or after rule changes, etc.?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2017 01:19
|
|