Open Draft Format

[ddies23 0]

A majority of the people I have seen posting their teams or mock drafts here seeming run an "open draft", meaning they are not limited to the number of players they can select at each position during the draft. I am currently attempting to get my long time, very competitive league to make this change. We are restricted to drafting 2 qb's, 4 rb's, 4 wr's, 2 te's, 2 k's, and 2 d/st's, and any waiver wire moves have to involve the same position. Example, if you want to pick up a wide reciever, you have to drop one that you have. I am proposing that we should be able to draft as many players as we want at each position and transactions should be open as well (I can drop a kicker and pick up a running back). Does anyone have any pro's, cons's, words of wisdom, or advice on why or why not we should make this change or any restrictions we should put on the change? I have already heard from some league members that we would need to put a cap on the number of players such as 5 or 6 at rb and wr and 3 at qb, etc...

[typhus 13]

A majority of the people I have seen posting their teams or mock drafts here seeming run an "open draft", meaning they are not limited to the number of players they can select at each position during the draft. I am currently attempting to get my long time, very competitive league to make this change. We are restricted to drafting 2 qb's, 4 rb's, 4 wr's, 2 te's, 2 k's, and 2 d/st's, and any waiver wire moves have to involve the same position. Example, if you want to pick up a wide reciever, you have to drop one that you have. I am proposing that we should be able to draft as many players as we want at each position and transactions should be open as well (I can drop a kicker and pick up a running back). Does anyone have any pro's, cons's, words of wisdom, or advice on why or why not we should make this change or any restrictions we should put on the change? I have already heard from some league members that we would need to put a cap on the number of players such as 5 or 6 at rb and wr and 3 at qb, etc...

 

Cant stand leagues with positional limits and here is why. Being successfull in FF has alot to do with evaluation, and pos. restrictions throw a wrench into how you draft and use the waiver wire. Half the fun of playing the game is hitting on sleepers, and you cant hit on sleepers when you cant evaluate unproven talent, because there is a hoarding rule in place.

JMHO...

[ddies23 0]

Cant stand leagues with positional limits and here is why. Being successfull in FF has alot to do with evaluation, and pos. restrictions throw a wrench into how you draft and use the waiver wire. Half the fun of playing the game is hitting on sleepers, and you cant hit on sleepers when you cant evaluate unproven talent, because there is a hoarding rule in place.

JMHO...

 

I completely understand, which is why I want to make the change. I hate being forced to draft a backup kicker, defense, or even a tight end when I could be taking shots on handcuffs, sleepers or rookies. I think I have most of them convinced, but was just looking for any other pro's or con's to the new rule.

[ouradu 0]

I think usually the concern is hoarding. The way I see it, that is why you restrict the number of total players on your roster. We start 8 players, we have a max of 16 players, any positions on your bench. The only restriction is you have to have someone to fill every starting position. If you want to hoard RBs, we've had guys with 5 or 6 on their rosters at one time, then there's always a give and take, you get extra RBs but you hurt at the other positions if a starter goes down. I think that's part of the game. You have to decide how to balance your risks, and it allows for different owners to have different strategies and try to test them against the other teams. If you restrict by position you are taking out a very important strategy point of the game.

[Thornton Melon 544]

My league had positional requirements up until a couple of years ago. It sucked. It really hampers trading, too. If you had solid RBs, and needed a WR, you couldn't just trade a RB for a WR. You had to throw in a WR and the other guy had to throw in a RB. I had numerous trades that didn't happen because of this. I'd imagine your league has the same problem. Convince the rest of your league to sh!tcan this rule. You won't regret it, and by midseason, everyone in your league will wonder why the hell they ever had the rule in the first place.

[typhus 13]

Its a mentality... Usually the result of whining owners that cant stand the thought of one particular owner taking everyones handcuffs.

The hoarding rule is the same thing as the seat belt law. Just another example of infringement of personnal rights, which should be common sence in the first place.

If you dont want to wear your seat belt, you shouldnt have to, and its your fault if you end up going through your windshield.

Same with the haording rule BS.

If you want to draft 10 RB's and have no quality WR's, QB's and depth,,, then its your own fault when you dont make the playoffs.

[ddies23 0]

I think usually the concern is hoarding. The way I see it, that is why you restrict the number of total players on your roster. We start 8 players, we have a max of 16 players, any positions on your bench. The only restriction is you have to have someone to fill every starting position. If you want to hoard RBs, we've had guys with 5 or 6 on their rosters at one time, then there's always a give and take, you get extra RBs but you hurt at the other positions if a starter goes down. I think that's part of the game. You have to decide how to balance your risks, and it allows for different owners to have different strategies and try to test them against the other teams. If you restrict by position you are taking out a very important strategy point of the game.

 

Exactly. The concern is hoarding. Not only during the draft, throughout the season as well. The worry that after a team's main starters have had their bye week, whats to stop them from dropping all of their back ups and picking up the next 6 FA running backs? My response...nothing. I say go ahead and let them do it. They will end up dropping quality players at other postitions. Realistically, nobody would probably do this. I dont foresee anyone having more than 5 or 6 players at the RB or WR position and probably 3 qb's, max. Like I said, I think I have them pretty much convinced, but they want to put restrictions on it too. Basically they want to just make it so that you do not have to draft a backup kicker, tight end and defense giving you 3 extra picks for the other positions. 1 extra QB, RB and WR. But I say, why cap it? If I want to draft 6 quarterbacks to and corner the market, I would be screwing myself in the process! We do not allow trades, so that doesnt come into play.

[Thornton Melon 544]

Exactly. The concern is hoarding. Not only during the draft, throughout the season as well. The worry that after a team's main starters have had their bye week, whats to stop them from dropping all of their back ups and picking up the next 6 FA running backs? My response...nothing. I say go ahead and let them do it. They will end up dropping quality players at other postitions. Realistically, nobody would probably do this. I dont foresee anyone having more than 5 or 6 players at the RB or WR position and probably 3 qb's, max. Like I said, I think I have them pretty much convinced, but they want to put restrictions on it too. Basically they want to just make it so that you do not have to draft a backup kicker, tight end and defense giving you 3 extra picks for the other positions. 1 extra QB, RB and WR. But I say, why cap it? If I want to draft 6 quarterbacks to and corner the market, I would be screwing myself in the process! We do not allow trades, so that doesnt come into play.

 

 

There's another rule you need to change...

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Injury concerns - Some players are inherently more injury prone than others, so if people want to take a chance on those guys that's cool, but they should be able to backup that position with more bodies if they want to.

 

Also, say a team has 2 QB and both get injured short-term. Say PManning (gasp!) and Rivers are both out for a couple weeks due to injury and/or bye weeks. The team in this situation has to drop one of these guys just to have a starting QB over this time. Or trade them if your league allowed trades. That's just not right.

[ddies23 0]

Injury concerns - Some players are inherently more injury prone than others, so if people want to take a chance on those guys that's cool, but they should be able to backup that position with more bodies if they want to.

 

Also, say a team has 2 QB and both get injured short-term. Say PManning (gasp!) and Rivers are both out for a couple weeks due to injury and/or bye weeks. The team in this situation has to drop one of these guys just to have a starting QB over this time. Or trade them if your league allowed trades. That's just not right.

 

I agree with your first point, Mike. Last season Steve Smith fell quite a few spots because of his injury status. Everyone knew he would return a few weeks into the season, but nobody wanted to waste an early pick on him. With this rule change you could have and not felt the least bit concerned about it because you could easily back up the position.

 

The argument to your second point, and I only say "argument" because that is what the other owners are going to do to me when this is officially proposed...is that we are allowed to IR an injured play (for a fee, of course) and pick up another from the waiver wire (for another fee) until the injured player returns. So the owner doesnt neccessarily have to "drop" the injured QB in this case, but I see what you are saying.

 

With basically everyone on the same page here, I think I will be able to get the rule change passed to the capacity of at least the 3 extra picks. 1 each for the QB, RB and WR positions instead of a backup K, TE and D/ST. But should I settle for this restriction? Is there any reason to be concered with hoarding? I know it is possible if we have a true "open draft", but will any team seriously have more than 5-6 players at any position? Has this happened to anyone?

[rebooters 1]

Cant stand leagues with positional limits and here is why. Being successfull in FF has alot to do with evaluation, and pos. restrictions throw a wrench into how you draft and use the waiver wire. Half the fun of playing the game is hitting on sleepers, and you cant hit on sleepers when you cant evaluate unproven talent, because there is a hoarding rule in place.

JMHO...

 

exactly! the league can be even more competetive if you lift these restraints. last year i drafted 7 RB's (half my team). I won the league. In my experience changing these rules can only help your league.

 

help me! http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=277258

[ddies23 0]

 

exactly! the league can be even more competetive if you lift these restraints. last year i drafted 7 RB's (half my team). I won the league. In my experience changing these rules can only help your league.

 

help me! http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=277258

 

Is that type of hoarding common in your league and just accepted or do/did you get complaints?

[Big_Pete 0]

Is that type of hoarding common in your league and just accepted or do/did you get complaints?

it's not really hoarding, seeing at that point, you are drafting deep deep sleepers. People that nobody has really heard of.

I'm familiar with the Broncos, so I'll use them as an example...

we all know Travis Henry is #1, so I get Mike Bell as a handcuff, that's 2 RB's, only 1 of which I'll use.

I get another RB for the 2nd RB slot, that's 3rb's I currently have.

I want that dude's backup for a handcuff, that's 4rb's I have.

Now I want a RB for my RB/WR slot, so I draft him, that's 5rb's right there...

now say I think someone COULD get playing time, and in Denver, that's certainly a possibility, so I draft Cedric Cobbs (someone most never heard of), that's 6RB's on my roster, but I also want to draft Cecil Sapp, cause I've heard buzz around camp that he might push Bell for the #2 spot, however unlikely it is... that's my 7th RB, none of which will see any time except for the starting 3, and maybe a handcuff if an injury happens....

so you see, it's not really "hoarding", it's just having lot's of backups that will never see action unless "worst case scenario after worst case scenario" happens, in which case you look like a focking genius cause you had Cecil Sapp on your roster when everyone else in the league says "Cecil who?!?"

[Big_Pete 0]

Is that type of hoarding common in your league and just accepted or do/did you get complaints?

he's also in a keeper league, that's why you routinely see teams with LT/SJax or LT/LJ etc...

[rebooters 1]

Is that type of hoarding common in your league and just accepted or do/did you get complaints?

no complaints. its within the rules. Its all just one of many strategies. since i "hoarded" rb's, i was thin at other spots. hell, my opening day starting qb was drew bledsoe. I was frantic for Qb's every week but i got the job done. so yea, no one even batted an eye. I had lots of trade bait though!

[rebooters 1]

he's also in a keeper league, that's why you routinely see teams with LT/SJax or LT/LJ etc...

yea, in my keeper i have SA/SJAX/R. Brown/Portis

[LunaTick 29]

I like it for it is a means to balance out some short comings of a redraft serpentine league.

 

Thus if in your first handful of rounds, you realize that your rbs are weak or else you waited to long and there is no stand out at qb. you can balance this through taking more potential at those positions and casting them off later in FA.

 

I play in a 10 team 7 starter 14 total roster offense only redraft league.

1 qb, 2 rb, 2 wr, 1 te, 1 k

Those in my league that go rb rb rb ...... usually take more wrs

Those that wait too long on any position, tend to take more of that position to compensate.

Most in my league will only draft 1 te and a few more will only draft 1 kicker to take more fliers elsewhere in the draft.

 

Question you need to answer is, when bye week comes up. How do you accept or address a team playing that has a bye te active as a starter

 

Our league opinion is you are a big boy and if you don't want chance for a few points, then them is your apples.

But for you, coming from a mandatory roster league, they may not accept this.

Thus you may have to look at a rule like, if you start a player on a bye and have no other on your roster at position to sub. Then you have effectively dropped him from your roster.

 

hth,

[ddies23 0]

Question you need to answer is, when bye week comes up. How do you accept or address a team playing that has a bye te active as a starter

 

Our league opinion is you are a big boy and if you don't want chance for a few points, then them is your apples.

But for you, coming from a mandatory roster league, they may not accept this.

Thus you may have to look at a rule like, if you start a player on a bye and have no other on your roster at position to sub. Then you have effectively dropped him from your roster.

 

 

 

We did quickly address this and the though is that if you only draft 1 TE and say his bye week is 4. In week 4 you can either drop the TE you drafted for another TE or you can drop any player on your roster to pick up a TE or you can do nothing. You see, part of this change would be that we would also not have waiver wire restrictions as far as a players position. For example, currently in our league, if you want to pick up a RB from the ww, you would have to drop one of your current RB's. But in the new format you could pick up that RB and drop a backup kicker, that 3rd QB you drafted and is out for the season, or that rookie you thought would start but has now been cut and is working a the Pepsi delivery guy in your area, etc...

[LunaTick 29]

Question you need to answer is, when bye week comes up. How do you accept or address a team playing that has a bye te active as a starter

 

Our league opinion is you are a big boy and if you don't want chance for a few points, then them is your apples.

But for you, coming from a mandatory roster league, they may not accept this.

Thus you may have to look at a rule like, if you start a player on a bye and have no other on your roster at position to sub. Then you have effectively dropped him from your roster.

We did quickly address this and the though is that if you only draft 1 TE and say his bye week is 4. In week 4 you can either drop the TE you drafted for another TE or you can drop any player on your roster to pick up a TE or you can do nothing. You see, part of this change would be that we would also not have waiver wire restrictions as far as a players position. For example, currently in our league, if you want to pick up a RB from the ww, you would have to drop one of your current RB's. But in the new format you could pick up that RB and drop a backup kicker, that 3rd QB you drafted and is out for the season, or that rookie you thought would start but has now been cut and is working a the Pepsi delivery guy in your area, etc...

 

 

I guess what I was getting at is some people question the validity or the fairness or the ethics of not having a roster of active players.

 

Again, in my league, I frequently just let the guy ( a te on a bye week) stay on as my starting te. I only drop them if I don't like them anymore and there is something of value on the fa wire. See in my league, the te doesn't score much. Is it worth a fee and a fa to make the move. (our league resitcts fa to 2 per week, with trades unlimited).

[ddies23 0]

I guess what I was getting at is some people question the validity or the fairness or the ethics of not having a roster of active players.

 

 

Ahhh, I see what you are saying. Good point. I think that may be one reason why my other league members are skeptical. You see, we are going in to our 14th year and 8 out of the 10 teams are original members. It is a very competitive group with a pretty hefty league fee. The payouts are nice, but the trash talk and bragging rights are right up there. So they are not the easiest to convince when it comes to changing the league rules. They have an "if it aint broke, dont fix it" mentality about things like this. They dont want to open any doors for colusion. I will definately bring this up to them.

 

Thanks for the responses everyone. Please continue to post if you have anything to add.

[Big Bob 0]

My league does not have position requirements, but we do limit it to no more than 5 players at any one position. This gives you enough for your starters and backups as well as a sleeper or fill-in player, but limits the "hoarding" aspect.

[ddies23 0]

My league does not have position requirements, but we do limit it to no more than 5 players at any one position. This gives you enough for your starters and backups as well as a sleeper or fill-in player, but limits the "hoarding" aspect.

 

 

Yeah, that is what I think we are leaning toward doing. It is not much of a change since we already are required to draft 4 at the RB and WR position, but at least I will not be "forced" to draft a backup K or D/ST if I dont feel I need to and can use those picks for a 5th at those positions and possibly a third or fourth at another position.