best ball fantasy

[murf74 461]

So I have read about leagues that are just like every other (head to head, waivers, trading, playoffs, etc) except one big difference....you dont set a lineup....you get credit for your entire roster with best possible lineup.

 

I think this is my type of league. I love working trades and waivers to get a stacked roster. What I hate is setting a lineup and having guys get injured and not play with his backup on bench scoring 18 pts.

 

What I hate is rooting against my own guys on my bench so I don't feel so bad benching them.....why not just be able to root for your entire roster?

 

Why do I have to not get credit for a player that is on my roster

 

Traditional leagues credit more a shallow team that stays healthy. If I assemble a stud roster I don't want to disqualify them on a weekly basis. I think best ball rewards active owners and hurts those typical owners who roster absolute garbage all year but are lucky enough for starters to stay healthy

 

Does anyone play in these leagues?

[GreenTD 56]

I'm with ya Murf, this is my type of league. It's annoying when I've worked tirelessly to assemble a great roster from top to bottom. Then have to agonize over who I should start/sit because all my players could start on any given fantasy team. To top it off, then get beat by some team that only has a few good players & their bench is composed of waiver fodder that you couldn't pay me to waste a roster spot on.

 

Is this a certain site you're talking about or just a unique league setting you've heard of?

[murf74 461]

I'm with ya Murf, this is my type of league. It's annoying when I've worked tirelessly to assemble a great roster from top to bottom. Then have to agonize over who I should start/sit because all my players could start on any given fantasy team. To top it off, then get beat by some team that only has a few good players & their bench is composed of waiver fodder that you couldn't pay me to waste a roster spot on.

 

Is this a certain site you're talking about or just a unique league setting you've heard of?

It's explained a bit here:

 

http://www.footballguys.com/08pasquino_specialrules.php

 

I have heard from guys at footballguys that myfantasyleague does this type of leagues, but I was only able to find best ball with draft only where you don't play head to head, or waivers,etc.. But they said you could definitely set it up with head to head, waivers, trades, best ball.

[tanatastic 2,061]

I'd vote that bench points count towards total points for tiebreakers come playoff seeding time. Other than that, starting the right guys is a major part of fantasy. Yes it's mostly luck and matchups aren't worth a damn most of the time, but it's fun when u get it right...wich is almost never.

[taco breath 419]

if the guys at fbg are doing it, i'm in. :thumbup:

[murf74 461]

if the guys at fbg are doing it, i'm in. :thumbup:

 

I verified through the site's helpdesk and got a response that this type of league setup is possible. Now I just have to convince my local guys to go in this direction or just start a league up myself.

 

I am hell bent on getting in a league like this. I would love to spend less time during the week and right before game time worrying about injuries, who is in who is out. Heck if you had Forte and Michael Bush on your roster you would not have skipped a beat in this week's best lineup, otherwise in traditional leagues you are ticked for 3 days straight because of your rotten injury luck. Or you had Andy Dalton on your bench and played Rodgers, heck wouldn't it be nice to get credit for Andy's 3 TDs? Or you scooped up Bryce Brown via free agency on Monday and really wanted to play him but couldn't possibly bench your more reliable starters.

 

Those of you lucky enough to get Brown and didn't start him because of solid starters like Rice and Charles ....doesn't this type of league sound appealing to you? Or the owner that lost Miles Austin with 0 pts in the first quarter, yet had Blackmon on the bench with a very nice game. Wouldn't it be nice if you got credit for Justin instead of the ZERO you got for Austin to no fault of your own? Those of you that lost DJax early last night, wouldn't have mattered much as long as you had a nice deep bench.

[jkil22 1]

Takes the stress and agony out of Fantasy Football, no thanks.

[FeelingMN 273]

Making decisions is what the game is all about. It's like scooping a pot in poker even though you already mucked your hand.

[Serpent 51]

If you want this type of league and others do too of course it's fine to do it. Do whatever you enjoy.

 

But as others have posted, there is definitely something to making a tough call and having it go your way in fantasy. Is it luck? Well, yeah, it sure is, but we'd like to think there is some skill too and to have some power over making a decision.

 

For that type of league however, you generally want boom or bust players because you don't have to actually figure out when they boom. Also, it would make sense to grab a couple of kickers and DSTs if you can't find enough high probability high point RBs/WRs. Ks and DSTs are generally crapshoots, but if you're automatically going to just get the highest score counted, you can actually get about +20 combined between them. That's a solid and easy exploitable advantage.

 

I had a league once where return yards counted and big yardage or TDs are the only things that gave real points. So I drafted a few WRs, traded them all away for RBs (we started 4 RBs) and then just started kick returners at my WR slots. People bitched about it afterwards but those were the league rules and that's how to best exploit them. In a high points league if I have good starters then taking an advantage at K and DST makes sense, rather than trying to guess on getting the big 30 pointer skill player that I might not be able to stock up on to begin with.

[PackYourNut 47]

What is the point of FF if "managing" or "coaching" your team doesnt count... What you're describing is not Fantasy Football... it's more like "FF Drafting"!

 

Half the fun is watching people on your opponents bench go off, while their starters sh!t the bed... then the league gets to ridicule them for a week.

[murf74 461]

What is the point of FF if "managing" or "coaching" your team doesnt count... What you're describing is not Fantasy Football... it's more like "FF Drafting"!

 

Half the fun is watching people on your opponents bench go off, while their starters sh!t the bed... then the league gets to ridicule them for a week.

No you draft, trade, do waivers. Not just a draft.

 

To each his own but my teams are usually stacked top to bottom and don t get any advantage over the guys that aren't active and keep crap on their bench

 

Who knows I could hate it but I want to try one for sure

[TheShoe1010 1]

I'm not one to sound like a Fantasy Football elitist like a lot of people on here, but I think choosing lineups is one of the things that makes FF challenging and fun. This format also has higher potential for rewarding inactive owners. Long story short, I think this is an ideal league format for less skilled/novice owners or those that really do have little to no time to commit to the game, which is perfectly fine.

 

To me, if you're constantly building powerhouse lineups top to bottom it may mean you're leaving points on the table by not trying to improve your starting positions via trade. I mean, depth is very important because injuries are so frequent but it doesn't make sense to have starters at skill positions ride your bench all year unless you have a stud/excellent week-to-week starter at every other position.

[murf74 461]

I'm not one to sound like a Fantasy Football elitist like a lot of people on here, but I think choosing lineups is one of the things that makes FF challenging and fun. This format also has higher potential for rewarding inactive owners. Long story short, I think this is an ideal league format for less skilled/novice owners or those that really do have little to no time to commit to the game, which is perfectly fine.

 

To me, if you're constantly building powerhouse lineups top to bottom it may mean you're leaving points on the table by not trying to improve your starting positions via trade. I mean, depth is very important because injuries are so frequent but it doesn't make sense to have starters at skill positions ride your bench all year unless you have a stud/excellent week-to-week starter at every other position.

Building a solid roster doesn't mean you haven't already traded to get that way.

 

For instance I started with Ryan and rodgers at qb. After peytons bad game I got him packaged in a deal trading away rodgers when the intent was to upgrade only rb. Well ended up with another stud qb leaving me with manning and Ryan. After a few weeks of qbbc I then finally traded Peyton away.

 

And you can't always find a trade partner that lacks what you have and vice versa.

 

You seem to like having that very shallow starter only lineup that will kill you with injuries and bye weeks. Bye weeks lasted thru week 10. So all year you HAD to carry at least one good extra starter at each position just riding your bench for the great majority of season.

 

You can't trade up to your utopia lineup until week 11

[TheShoe1010 1]

Building a solid roster doesn't mean you haven't already traded to get that way.

 

For instance I started with Ryan and rodgers at qb. After peytons bad game I got him packaged in a deal trading away rodgers when the intent was to upgrade only rb. Well ended up with another stud qb leaving me with manning and Ryan. After a few weeks of qbbc I then finally traded Peyton away.

 

And you can't always find a trade partner that lacks what you have and vice versa.

 

You seem to like having that very shallow starter only lineup that will kill you with injuries and bye weeks. Bye weeks lasted thru week 10. So all year you HAD to carry at least one good extra starter at each position just riding your bench for the great majority of season.

 

You can't trade up to your utopia lineup until week 11

 

Look, I'm not arguing that a shallow starter-only team is a better bet than a deeper team, my argument is that a league like this would take a lot of strategy out of the game, which I think makes it a little less fun. But that is subjective, of course.

 

My other thought (again, at the risk of sounding like an elitist) is that setting rosters is one of the things that seperates experienced/knowledgeable owners from the rest of the pack.

[Matthew's Berry's 0]

I originally liked your premise, but You will still may have issues ...

 

What if 4 of your guys are on bye but are studs. You will get the loss going against a team without bye issues that week ... then you get a cheap win following week because of reverse.

 

Or, what if a bunch of guys are out to injury but only for a week? Drop them for backup scrubs and just hope they are there in two weeks? You certaintly couldn't hold them for a zero.

 

Rosters would probably have to be position equal due to scoring formats correct? So if all teams say carry 3 QBs your league wont have more than 10 teams. Or carry only 1-2 but now you are basically back to the "standard" format.

 

So sounds like instead of working a starting lineup, you will be feverishly working the wire. You may rock a draft team, but it's going to change drastically on weekly basis .. so everyone will be switching players (especially studs 2-4 weeks injured).

 

I dunno .. still not sold M

[murf74 461]

Look, I'm not arguing that a shallow starter-only team is a better bet than a deeper team, my argument is that a league like this would take a lot of strategy out of the game, which I think makes it a little less fun. But that is subjective, of course.

 

My other thought (again, at the risk of sounding like an elitist) is that setting rosters is one of the things that seperates experienced/knowledgeable owners from the rest of the pack.

 

setting lineups is mostly just luck.

 

Ask anyone who has lost a game cause of Austin leaving in quarter one last week....I could go on and on.

 

I don't have a problem picking lineups based on matchups,etc and that is fun..... but injuries seem to get me every week, and on guys not going into the game banged up.

 

Other items of luck are when special teams or defenses score a bunch of points and makes your QB and WR starts useless. For instance Colin K. had 14 pts scored for him in an otherwise really juicy matchup. That reduced his potential scoring and increased Gores, but ain't nobody who predicted going in Brees would throw 2 pick 6s. Or the QB of your WR goes down in a game...this negatively affects your WR that you started again in an unforseen way (see Ben and Cutler).

 

I agree there are huge problems with defenses and kickers becoming must have bench positions and difference makers. I think that would really suck. And as someone else said, hording at positions would be a problem so you would need roster limits.

 

It's interesting discussion anyway.

[Philo312 41]

I hear ya Murf,...I've commished a 10 team league for 6 years. For the last 2 years, we've discussed incorporating bench scoring for the exact reasons you bring up. It's almost came to fruition this year, but the same 5 owners vehemently voted against it. Why? I don't really know execept one owner said it's too time consuming and one mentioned it creates a competitive advantage for the more serious guys... (I couldn't understand that one at all) Anyway, it's my last year. In short, I agree with you re: bench scoring or a weekly "best ball" scoring format.

 

..btw: what's your prognostication on Dwyer Sunday?? will he get the 20+ touches...or is it just a smokescreen to fire up Mendenhall where he ends up with a 50/50 split??

[murf74 461]

I hear ya Murf,...I've commished a 10 team league for 6 years. For the last 2 years, we've discussed incorporating bench scoring for the exact reasons you bring up. It's almost came to fruition this year, but the same 5 owners vehemently voted against it. Why? I don't really know execept one owner said it's too time consuming and one mentioned it creates a competitive advantage for the more serious guys... (I couldn't understand that one at all) Anyway, it's my last year. In short, I agree with you re: bench scoring or a weekly "best ball" scoring format.

 

..btw: what's your prognostication on Dwyer Sunday?? will he get the 20+ touches...or is it just a smokescreen to fire up Mendenhall where he ends up with a 50/50 split??

 

My comments

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=413796&view=findpost&p=4910350