Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
The Zack
Jan 1, 2005

Pillbug
Starting an all-Gators defense this week :q:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

Ohhhkay. This was bound to happen eventually, I suppose.

Everyone, you are all responsible for tracking your salary cap, which I keep updated on our spreadsheet (see the first post for links). However, with this morning's FAAB process, team Former Kicker Ray Finkle (Gyshall) exceeded his cap by $29.50, with two FAAB transactions:

LOIS dropped Brian Quick, StL WR to Waivers
LOIS added Charles Clay, Buf TE from Waivers to Bench for $26

and

LOIS dropped Khiry Robinson, NO RB to Waivers
LOIS added Thomas Rawls, Sea RB from Waivers to Bench for $18

Unfortunately, I neglected to spell out a specific remedy for this situation in the bylaws.

The rule is 8.4; "Owners may not complete a transaction that would raise their team’s total salary above the salary cap."

8.4.3 and 8.4.3.1 are also relevant:

quote:

8.4.3 In the event that an Owner discovers his or any other Owner’s team exceeds the cap, their first action must be to inform a Commissioner of the situation. The Commissioner will evaluate the situation, take any action (including discussing with other Commissioners) if necessary, and then make a decision as to the corrective action. (This action may be simply asking the Owner to drop players to get below the cap, if the mistake appears to have been innocent and/or harmless).
8.4.3.1 The Owner should only take action to correct the salary cap violation based on Commissioner instructions.

I think there's two reasonable approaches. One would be to cancel Gyshall's bids on these two players, dropping them to the next-lower bids in this auction period. The other would be to lower his bids to the point where he'd still be under cap... but I'm not sure how to do that with two simultaneous bids. Suppose Gyshall had remembered his cap space: would he have bid his maximum for one player, and zero for the other? Or split his cap space between them? I can't know what he would have done, and obviously what he'd want done now is potentially biased, particularly since the other bids for those players are now public.

I call on my fellow commissioners to assist me with this decision, and on the players to weigh in with your opinions. We need to resolve it quickly, so that the week's games beginning tomorrow are unaffected.

Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Sep 30, 2015

Spermy Smurf
Jul 2, 2004
Make him drop Gronk.

Spermy Smurf
Jul 2, 2004
But on a serious note:

He couldn't have placed both of those bids if the salary cap tied into ESPN's app. I'd probably say roll the bids back for them both. And then we have a 3-way tie for $2 for whoever the TE is.


Those 3 can blind-bid in an email to Leper or something in order to see who is allowed to pick him up.


Also on that note: If we do the above and Team McLean wins the bid for the TE the what can we do about the trade he and I just made? Roll it back since he never would have been looking desperately for a TE? Cancel it? Let it go through since we did actually hit ACCEPT to the thing?

Spermy Smurf fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Sep 30, 2015

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

The three-way tie would be resolved by the priorities list as normal, which if I'm reading the auction report correctly, would mean he'd go to McLean.. I'm not sure what to do about that trade either...

Stevie Lee
Oct 8, 2007
cancel it and give charles clay to me tia

Spermy Smurf
Jul 2, 2004

Leperflesh posted:

The three-way tie would be resolved by the priorities list as normal, which if I'm reading the auction report correctly, would mean he'd go to McLean.. I'm not sure what to do about that trade either...

That makes way more sense.

Gyshall
Feb 24, 2009

Had a couple of drinks.
Saw a couple of things.
I thought the salary on ESPN was adjusted and accurate on the ESPN side???

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

ESPN does not track "salary" at all.

You had $200 during the initial draft auction. You weren't required to spend it all, and some teams didn't.

You have $100 you can spend all year on FAAB waivers. This money "goes away" as you spend it, even if you later drop players you picked up using this money.

The salary cap is $250. At no time can your current roster's player salaries exceed $250. You can check your team's salary at any time, by visiting the spreadsheet and clicking on the tab for your team: I manually update these sheets every time there is a transaction, and it shows your total current salary, the cap, and the remaining cap space at the bottom, in auto-calculated fields.

I don't know of a way to make ESPN be "aware" of our salary cap, independent of the FAAB budget. There's definitely no way to make it aware that players on IR only cost 50% of their salary. And, I don't think ESPN knows how to handle salaries with trades, either. All it does is track your FAAB spending.

I understand this is an innocent mistake and I don't want you to be punished harshly for it... but on the other hand, I think this is pretty well explained in the rules. If it isn't, I'm more than willing to update the rules to make them clearer.

e. So, given you had $14 of cap space after dropping Brian Quick and Khiry Robinson, the most you could have bid for Clay + Rawls combined was $14, even if you have a lot more cash left for FAAB this year. You can still spend that cash, by dropping players (to make more cap space).

Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Sep 30, 2015

Gyshall
Feb 24, 2009

Had a couple of drinks.
Saw a couple of things.
Yeah that is my bad then, I'll drop guys to make room on my bench if that is OK. I was under the impression that the ESPN FAAB budget was aware of overall salary. I'll drop dudes from my roster to make room then if that works, I already know who is on the chopping block.

atomictyler
May 8, 2009
That sort of works except that you wouldn't have been able to get those guys in the manner you did. You would have had to drop other dudes in advance to make the space. It seems like it sets a really bad precedent of "get who you can now and deal with it later".

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

Yeah, that's not really a great solution. The players you "would have" dropped won't be available until the Saturday FAAB, rather than being available in this morning's auction... and as atomictyler says, you have the benefit of knowing for certain that you won those two players who you clearly wanted really badly.

We'll figure out the fairest way to resolve this that we can; the intent isn't to be punitive, just fair.


fake edit oh god you've already dropped people
please don't panic, this isn't a huge deal, we'll get it worked out. Take a deep breath.

I would like to wait and give folks a chance to weigh in. Please don't make any further changes for now.

Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Sep 30, 2015

Gyshall
Feb 24, 2009

Had a couple of drinks.
Saw a couple of things.
Yeah I'll stop dropping guys until this is figured out.

Doesn't the #2 option LM tool here allow for adjustment of FAAB $?



I play in another ESPN dynasty league where this is adjusted by the treasurer for salary cap on a weekly basis.

I didn't mean to gently caress up but if we're expected to manage our teams salary caps through the spreadsheet there should be checks + balances on that, because it was pretty easy for me to gently caress that up without realizing it.

Also requesting the spreadsheet and rules doc be placed on the ESPN league front page as well.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

Gyshall posted:

Yeah I'll stop dropping guys until this is figured out.

Doesn't the #2 option LM tool here allow for adjustment of FAAB $?


Kiiind of. The problem here is, I don't think ESPN would increase your FAAB budget whenever you dropped a player to waivers, nor would it free up space if you put a player onto IR. If we relied on me doing this manually, then you couldn't (for example) drop a $10 player from your bench at midnight on Tuesday night, freeing up $10 of cap space so that you can bid $10 on a player to be added during automated processing on Wednesday morning.

quote:

I play in another ESPN dynasty league where this is adjusted by the treasurer for salary cap on a weekly basis.

So yeah we'd wind up with your cap being something that you can't manage on a daily basis if you suddenly want to add, drop, or trade players and you're close to your cap. How does your other league handle that?

quote:

I didn't mean to gently caress up but if we're expected to manage our teams salary caps through the spreadsheet there should be checks + balances on that, because it was pretty easy for me to gently caress that up without realizing it.

I was afraid it might be. One option would have been to go with MFL or another paid site that actually has these features fully-implemented, but we would have had to cut into our prize money to fund it and it seemed to be the consensus to go with ESPN. Having to manage this yourself was a compromise.

quote:

Also requesting the spreadsheet and rules doc be placed on the ESPN league front page as well.

That's an excellent idea, I'll do that immediately.

Spermy Smurf
Jul 2, 2004
I didnt realize we could edit everyones budget numbers like that. Thats a great idea.


Then we would have to keep track of (original 100 budget) minus (what was spent so far) and then if that was bigger than your salary cap we would need to keep that number somewhere so we dont lose it if/when you add or drop people.

Spreadsheet whiz can probably do that easily. If the spreadsheet spits out the numbers needed I would be willing to edit everyones faab budget on a twice or thrice weekly basis.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

The spreadsheet does the math right now, and I generally edit in peoples drops/adds/trades the same day they happen.

The issue is what I spelled out above: if you're near your cap, you'd have to drop players to open space for anticipated bids, and then make sure someone went in and raised your FAAB budget correspondingly. If we failed to do that, ever, then an owner would be artificially constrained and prevented from bidding the full amount they ought to be able to bid.

There's also the even worse situation: what if you're at or near your cap, and you want a drop to be conditional on a bid? Say you're right at your $250 cap. You put in a $5 bid on a player, and mark another player on your roster whose salary is $5, to only be dropped if you win your bid. There's just no way for you to ever do that under the proposed system, because your FAAB budget would be at $0 and ESPN would prevent you from making the bid.

If you dropped the $5 player and then got outbid in the FAAB auction, someone else could snipe your dropped player.

So the salary cap would become a massive pain for anyone who was not just against it, but merely near it; you'd have to drop expensive players pre-emptively just to have the opportunity to make bids, which might lose, for players you're trying to grab.

Spermy Smurf
Jul 2, 2004
We just add 10$. That would help by allowing you to bid $10 more than cap as long as your dropped player leaves you even.

Crappy scenario: cap space of 10 left, bid up to 20, but the guy dropped has to be a 10$. Dropping a 5$ guy instead, then only bid to 15$. Need more cash for a 3-man drop, just ask and someone will bump it up soon.

Still requires some thinking and spreadsheet checking, but might remind people cap space exists.

Just an idea.

Stevie Lee
Oct 8, 2007
y'all wouldn't have a problem if you only spent $151 in the draft like a certain 3-0 dumbass

Metapod
Mar 18, 2012

Stevie Lee posted:

y'all wouldn't have a problem if you only spent $151 in the draft like a certain 3-0 dumbass

Undefeated buddies :hfive:

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

OK so there's two things then:

1. Resolve the issue with Gyshall's team. I want to do that tonight, so that everyone has time tomorrow to manage their rosters before the TNF game.
2. Implement any changes we agree on aiming to make it easier for everyone to deal with the interactions between player salary, salary cap, FAAB, and adding/dropping/trading players. We can take our time on this, since our current system does actually function.

For 1., so far I've seen or had the following ideas:

  • Roll back the auctions for Charles Clay and Thomas Rawls. Restore Gyshall's team (the dropped players, and the FAAB budget). Run a new auction manually with blind bids and manually send the players to the highest bidders.
  • Roll back the auctions for Charles Clay and Thomas Rawls. Restore Gyshall's team (the dropped players, and the FAAB budget). Allow both players to go to the next auction, which will be Saturday.
  • Roll back the auctions for Charles Clay and Thomas Rawls. Restore Gyshall's team (the dropped players, and the FAAB budget). Give the win for Charles Clay to the team with top priority among the three $2 bidders (Team McClean), charge them $2, take no further action. (In this option, Rawls would be available for Saturday's FAAB auction.)
  • Permit Gyshall to drop players until he's back below the cap. Take no other actions.
  • Lower Gyshall's bids so that they don't exceed his cap, but he still wins both players (e.g., the two bids would total no more than $14). I could for example keep them proportionate: The original bids were $26 and $18, so I could lower them to and $8 and $6, roughly the same proportions. Restore the three players he dropped earlier today.

The three commissioners are discussing this via email. I think we'll probably pick something along the lines of one of these options. Our aim is to be as fair as we can, but I hope everyone recognizes that there's no solution proposed so far that is perfect. On the other hand, this isn't that big of a deal, so whatever we do, I doubt it's going to strongly affect the outcome of the season.

Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Oct 1, 2015

Metapod
Mar 18, 2012
Wait what was wrong with my team

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

Ah poo poo I meant Gyshall there, sorry.

atomictyler
May 8, 2009

Leperflesh posted:

OK so there's two things then:

1. Resolve the issue with Gyshall's team. I want to do that tonight, so that everyone has time tomorrow to manage their rosters before the TNF game.
2. Implement any changes we agree on aiming to make it easier for everyone to deal with the interactions between player salary, salary cap, FAAB, and adding/dropping/trading players. We can take our time on this, since our current system does actually function.

For 1., so far I've seen or had the following ideas:

  • Roll back the auctions for Charles Clay and Thomas Rawls. Restore Gyshall's team (the dropped players, and the FAAB budget). Run a new auction manually with blind bids and manually send the players to the highest bidders.
  • Roll back the auctions for Charles Clay and Thomas Rawls. Restore Gyshall's team (the dropped players, and the FAAB budget). Allow both players to go to the next auction, which will be Saturday.
  • Roll back the auctions for Charles Clay and Thomas Rawls. Restore Gyshall's team (the dropped players, and the FAAB budget). Give the win for Charles Clay to the team with top priority among the three $2 bidders (Team McClean), charge them $2, take no further action. (In this option, Rawls would be available for Saturday's FAAB auction.)
  • Permit Gyshall to drop players until he's back below the cap. Take no other actions.
  • Lower Gyshall's bids so that they don't exceed his cap, but he still wins both players (e.g., the two bids would total no more than $14). I could for example keep them proportionate: The original bids were $26 and $18, so I could lower them to and $8 and $6, roughly the same proportions. Restore the three players he dropped earlier today.

The three commissioners are discussing this via email. I think we'll probably pick something along the lines of one of these options. Our aim is to be as fair as we can, but I hope everyone recognizes that there's no solution proposed so far that is perfect. On the other hand, this isn't that big of a deal, so whatever we do, I doubt it's going to strongly affect the outcome of the season.

I'll try and put my thoughts out for each point. I'm not good at getting from brain to words.

1 & 2) I'm not sure I agree with any sort of rebidding. The only people it helps are the people who lost in the original bidding process. Had it gone as normal without any illegal bids the winner would be highest bidder followed by waiver order. I'm not sure why we'd throw that standard out and start over because someone made a bid they shouldn't have.

3) This seems like a fine way to do it. I'm not saying this just because I'd be the winner. I just don't understand why it SHOULDN'T go this way. The bid made wasn't a valid bid, throw it out and then follow the normal procedure for free agency. If it was someone else getting him in this manner that's fine. If I was someone else who had not gotten the player I would be THRILLED that I get a second chance because someone else made a bid that should never have been allowed.

4) That doesn't seem very fair to anyone who has been following the rules. It's basically saying "don't worry about the rules. Get the players you want and we'll let you fix your mistake the way that helps you most".

5) This also isn't a very good idea. He's getting the players he made a bid on with an invalid bid. This is just making it so he gets them for less than he originally bid AND leaves him with even more FAAB than he would have with the insane bids he originally made. This is a BIG win for breaking the rules. He'd get those players he wants along with $38 FAAB. If those players he got with an invalid bid don't pan out he can just drop them and start over with the FAAB we've just given him back.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

A new option has been raised: We'd charge Former Kicker Ray Finkle the full amount he bid in terms of his FAAB dollars, but set the two players to proportionally lower salaries that fit under his cap ($8 and $6, for a total of $14).

The advantages of this option are:
-Finkle doesn't get the "benefit" of having his large bids reduced and thereby freeing up more FAAB money
-Finkle does get the result of Gyshall's obvious intent (which was to make bids so large he was virtually certain to claim the two players) - nobody else bidding over $2 suggests nobody else valued Clay very highly, and nobody else bid on Rawls at all.
-Nobody else gets an "unfair" second shot at bidding on Clay/Rawls

I'm waiting to see what the third commissioner thinks of this plan, but two of us are favoring it right now.

atomictyler
May 8, 2009

Leperflesh posted:

A new option has been raised: We'd charge Former Kicker Ray Finkle the full amount he bid in terms of his FAAB dollars, but set the two players to proportionally lower salaries that fit under his cap ($8 and $6, for a total of $14).

The advantages of this option are:
-Finkle doesn't get the "benefit" of having his large bids reduced and thereby freeing up more FAAB money
-Finkle does get the result of Gyshall's obvious intent (which was to make bids so large he was virtually certain to claim the two players) - nobody else bidding over $2 suggests nobody else valued Clay very highly, and nobody else bid on Rawls at all.
-Nobody else gets an "unfair" second shot at bidding on Clay/Rawls

I'm waiting to see what the third commissioner thinks of this plan, but two of us are favoring it right now.

1) I'm still not sure what downside there was to him making bids that never should have been made? With this in mind we should all just blow out budget on whatever and then have it taken care of later, even if we don't have the cap space.
2) A lower bid doesn't mean there wasn't good value in it. If you look at almost all the free agent bids they're in the $1-$3. One insanely high bid doesn't mean others don't see good value in a player.
3) There would be no need to have a second shot at bidding. It would go as it should have without the invalid bid. His bid for Clay should just be thrown out and it's bidding as usual from what bids there were. Rawls back into the waivers.

I just feel like the rules were out there for everyone. Without some sort of punishment for breaking them then why would we ever follow them? I'm not saying we need to cripple him so it's not worth playing, but giving him the players for what he really should have bid at and taking away what he was planning to lose doesn't seem like a punishment at all. He's getting the players he wants for the price he bid. It's just using commish help to bypass the salary cap. It shouldn't matter if no one bid as high as him, the intent was there and the rules were broken.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

I suppose I just disagree that a punishment is in order. It's pretty clear to me that he wasn't intentionally breaking the rules: he thought ESPN was enforcing the salary cap. So my inclination is to try to be fair, rather than seeking a punitive response.

I do not think we are necessarily setting a precedent.

That said, I appreciate and respect your opinion, which I believe is in good faith, and I'm sure the other commissioners do too.

Metapod
Mar 18, 2012
Dante Culpepper is actually a person you can have on your team

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

OK, it's late and the east coasters are hitting the sack, but I believe the three of us have reached a consensus.

We are going with this one:


Leperflesh posted:

  • Roll back the auctions for Charles Clay and Thomas Rawls. Restore Gyshall's team (the dropped players, and the FAAB budget). Give the win for Charles Clay to the team with top priority among the three $2 bidders (Team McClean), charge them $2, take no further action. (In this option, Rawls would be available for Saturday's FAAB auction.)

It is the top preference for one commissioner, and the second-to-top preference for the other two. This ruling isn't much fun for Gyshall, but we feel it's maximally fair to the other teams involved, and recognizes that while we're sympathetic to Gyshall's error, a bid that isn't allowed by the rules is simply an invalid bid. Monkeying around with salary values and FAAB amounts or doing extra auctions etc. etc. isn't imagined in the rules.

This means that Team McLean wins the FAAB auction for Charles Clay, I am pre-emptively assuming he would not make the Kyle Rudolph/Doug Martin trade, so I'm cancelling that trade. If the two of you still want to make the trade, re-do it and I'll approve it right away.

We can continue to discuss any ideas for making it easier for each owner to be aware of and abide by their salary cap. I hope that everyone is, if not satisfied with the results, at least satisfied that our league's system for resolving problems is functioning well.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

In order to add Charles Clay to Team McLean, I need to know which player would have been dropped with that bid (because there's no room on the bench, so you must have picked a candidate to drop). I can't see it from any LM screen, as far as I can tell. Atomictyler, please drop a player ASAP; once you do, I'll add Clay to your team.

Other than that, I've done everything needed via LM powers:
-Dropped Clay and Rawls from Former Kicker Ray Finkle
-Added the three dropped players back to Former Kicker Ray Finkle
-Added $44 back to Former Kicker Ray Finkle's FAAB budget
-subtracted $2 from Team McLean's FAAB budget

I'll update the spreadsheets tomorrow morning.

Gyshall
Feb 24, 2009

Had a couple of drinks.
Saw a couple of things.
Welp. So how much do I have to bid? This has really taken the wind out of my sails, sorry for loving it up. My mistake for assuming this was being taken care of on the ESPN side, I guess.

Leperflesh posted:

So yeah we'd wind up with your cap being something that you can't manage on a daily basis if you suddenly want to add, drop, or trade players and you're close to your cap. How does your other league handle that?

Maybe we're overcomplicating this but the treasurer watches the transactions on the main page and adjusts FAAB accordingly. Then those FAAB transactions are checked by another commissioner. The FAAB edits show up on the main page transaction, too. It really isn't as difficult or complicated, even after reading through our rules again. At any rate, I motion that we look into getting this set up ASAP on the ESPN side.

So how much do I have to bid for guys now? Have I completely hosed myself out of getting either guy for my priority?

Also does the rules document show what rules were amended and when? I see the document was edited yesterday at 1:58PM, but no changelog on what was edited or added.

Spermy Smurf
Jul 2, 2004
The only issue with adjusting the FAAB budget is that it doesn't take into account who you are dropping.

If you are dropping a guy worth $10 on your roster, you should be able to bid with that $10 in mind.

If we don't think of a way around that, then your max bid would strictly be "how much cap space do I have left" which isn't the correct amount. How does your current league tackle this? I agree we need to get this implemented ASAP, just want to do it right and allow people to get to their cap.



The edit at 1:58 was me I believe. I didn't actually edit anything, but I did try to do a search on the document and hosed up my CTRL+F, so had to delete the F that I typed into the doc.

Edit: No, it wasnt me at 1:58. My edits only become suggestions. Unsure what that edit was.

Spermy Smurf fucked around with this message at 13:33 on Oct 1, 2015

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

Gyshall posted:

Welp. So how much do I have to bid? This has really taken the wind out of my sails, sorry for loving it up. My mistake for assuming this was being taken care of on the ESPN side, I guess.

I haven't updated your tab just yet - I'll do that momentarily - but after restoring the previous state, you have $14.50 of cap space available. You can bid up to that amount without dropping any players. Of course, you'll need to drop at least one player just to make room on your roster. The current salary of any player you drop gives you more cap space: so, for example, if you conditionally drop Karlos Dansby as part of your bid, you'll get another $5 of cap space, which would let you bid up to $19.50. (In practice, all ESPN bids are in whole dollar amounts, so really that'd be $19.)

So your salary cap limits the total salary of players on your bench, but you have another limit: the total FAAB dollars you have to spend for the rest of the season. A summary of everyone's remaining money is shown on the Free Agent Auction Summary page. Right now, you have $52 left. Suppose we use the above example: you put in a bid of $19 for a player, which (if it succeeds) includes dropping Karlos Dansby. Your bid is the highest, so the transaction goes through. Your team would be back up right at its salary limit, as shown on your spreadsheet tab, and you'd have ($52 - $19 = ) $33 left of FAAB money for this season. To spend that money, you'd need to make room on your team by dropping players.

quote:

Maybe we're overcomplicating this but the treasurer watches the transactions on the main page and adjusts FAAB accordingly. Then those FAAB transactions are checked by another commissioner. The FAAB edits show up on the main page transaction, too. It really isn't as difficult or complicated, even after reading through our rules again. At any rate, I motion that we look into getting this set up ASAP on the ESPN side.

I'm happy to continue to discuss it, although Spermy Smerf is reiterating the issue I see with this system; it restricts owners' ability to operate near or at their cap limit by using drops that are contingent on adds. ESPN will not automatically increase your budget when you drop a player... it won't even allow you to make a bid using more than your current remaining FAAB budget.

quote:

Have I completely hosed myself out of getting either guy for my priority?

Charles Clay is taken - I'll be putting him on Team McLean as soon as atomictyler makes room on his bench. You can of course engage with him to try and trade for the player.

Thomas Rawls had no other bids, so he's back on the waiver wire. You can put in a bid for him as normal - the next auction will run on Saturday, so you can get him on your team in time for Sunday if you have the highest bid. It's possible that this dustup has stirred someone else's interest in the player, but honestly I doubt anyone else is willing to spend $18 for him, so I think you have a fair chance to grab him again.

quote:

Also does the rules document show what rules were amended and when? I see the document was edited yesterday at 1:58PM, but no changelog on what was edited or added.

When I copy/pasted the rules block into this thread, I accidentally hit the delete key. I used the undo button immediately to fix it. I suppose the rules sheet recorded that as a change.

If you want to review changes, click File | Revision History. It takes you to a view where you can look at every previous "version" of the file - e.g., every chunk of edits. If you have editing privileges, you can restore previous versions, too. This auditability feature is one of the reasons I chose to use Google Docs for our rules document.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

I see Team McLean just dropped Rob Ninkovich, so I'll add Clay to his team now, and update the spreadsheet.

e. Oh and Gyshall I also just gave you back Brian Quick and Khiry Robinson, since those were drops that happened when you got Clay and Rawls.

The spreadsheets are now up to date.

Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Oct 1, 2015

Gyshall
Feb 24, 2009

Had a couple of drinks.
Saw a couple of things.
well that sucks I guess but whatever. So we are NOT updating FAAB on the ESPN side?

re: charles Clay, Can't I just adjust my bid to be $14? Do I have to miss out entirely on him?

e: and why is my entire lineup on my loving bench?

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

I dunno why your lineup is on your bench: I thought you did that.

The decision was to simply cancel your bids that were higher than your cap allowed, which means Clay went to the next-highest bidder, with waiver priority as the tiebreaker, so he belongs to Team McClean. I realize that sucks from your perspective, but we debated the other options and this is the way the commissioners were able to reach a consensus.

You could of course offer Team McLean some sort of trade to try and get Clay?

We could start updating FAAB on ESPN's side, but that hasn't been decided yet. I haven't heard anyone come up with a good way to deal with the contingent add/drop issue. If a majority of owners think the restriction is worth it for the convenience of not needing to monitor your cap, I'd be OK with it I guess.

My expectation is that sooner or later, all of the teams will be bumping up against the salary cap, though. At that point, being completely unable to do a contingent add/drop in any given waiver period is probably going to be pretty unpopular.

Spermy Smurf
Jul 2, 2004

Gyshall posted:

well that sucks I guess but whatever. So we are NOT updating FAAB on the ESPN side?


How does your other league handle the dropped players cap space?

Just tell us how and if its brilliant or we can make it work we will 100% do it ASAP. Implementing crap is not something we want to do, so trying to talk it out but the only idea put forward so far is my 'add 10$ to the number' isnt generating much chatter.

Leperflesh
May 17, 2007

Yeah the $10 idea isn't terrible, but the number feels like it'd be arbitrary and I think it's another potential point of confusion.

One thing I could do is actually post, in the thread, everyone's cap space after each waiver period? Or maybe email it to you guys? It'd be easy to just pull the 12 cells from the spreadsheet and send them out.

Bloody
Mar 3, 2013

The add $10 seems not significantly better than what we have now and also adds a butt load of commissioner work. Just pay attention to your cap space I guess?

Gyshall
Feb 24, 2009

Had a couple of drinks.
Saw a couple of things.

Leperflesh posted:

I dunno why your lineup is on your bench: I thought you did that.

The decision was to simply cancel your bids that were higher than your cap allowed, which means Clay went to the next-highest bidder, with waiver priority as the tiebreaker, so he belongs to Team McClean. I realize that sucks from your perspective, but we debated the other options and this is the way the commissioners were able to reach a consensus.

You could of course offer Team McLean some sort of trade to try and get Clay?

We could start updating FAAB on ESPN's side, but that hasn't been decided yet. I haven't heard anyone come up with a good way to deal with the contingent add/drop issue. If a majority of owners think the restriction is worth it for the convenience of not needing to monitor your cap, I'd be OK with it I guess.

My expectation is that sooner or later, all of the teams will be bumping up against the salary cap, though. At that point, being completely unable to do a contingent add/drop in any given waiver period is probably going to be pretty unpopular.

Turned out to be my adblocker doing some nonsense. Fixed it!

Re: FAAB/rules/salary - I don't know what they are doing special in the other league other than A) we start the season with FAAB = remaining salary cap space and B) they are adjusted after waivers process by one of the commishs

I was not in during the startup year and I'm not sure how they did the draft then, but I'll check. The annual rookie draft is not done on ESPN, it was done on fleaflicker or MFL, iirc. Remaining free agents are drafted on ESPN.

e: Actually I think we did do the draft on ESPN but we had to do two drafts? I can't remember now.

Spermy Smurf posted:

How does your other league handle the dropped players cap space?

Just tell us how and if its brilliant or we can make it work we will 100% do it ASAP. Implementing crap is not something we want to do, so trying to talk it out but the only idea put forward so far is my 'add 10$ to the number' isnt generating much chatter.

I'm not for implementing something that won't work for our ruleset, but in my other league the settings I can see are:

FAAB Budget: $500
Waiver Processes 1 day
FAAB Settings: Waivers

No team has a FAAB budget of more than $120 currently. In that league I've just always gone by my FAAB as my remaining salary.

I'll stop whining and admit defeat though, mainly because I just want to watch football. I think a good idea would be to put this and any other byelaws front and center on the main page of ESPN, I did see the links which are good - but anything that ESPN cannot specifically do we should probably have as a posted byelaw on the ESPN page.

Also, since I've lost my waiver priority for this week and basically any usefulness for waivers this week as well, I motion that this be the standard "punishment" or whatever for being and ignoranamus and not checking the rules before submitting your weekly waivers (whilst pooping)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Gyshall
Feb 24, 2009

Had a couple of drinks.
Saw a couple of things.
Haha, just got a response from one of my other leagues' commish. Only thing he responded with?

https://github.com/vbudhram/fantasy-football-io

e: Might be able to get a copy of whatever node.js app they're using, that would be swell.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply