Last Week's Question: What can commissioners
do when owners quit midyear?
In my column for Week
7, I featured the question of a reader named John, whose league
was jeopardized when a midseason rule change prompted two owners
to quit. I asked for suggestions from readers about how a league
with two abandoned teams can limp to the playoffs. The answers are
so different that I feel a bit like I'm attending a debate between
strangers with very different ideas about the rules governing "invisible
men" when you try to play baseball with too few people.
Let's start with Rho's response because it is certainly the least
troublesome:
Regarding John's 12-team league where 2 teams
dumped their rosters, [why not simply] downsize to just 10 teams?
Their respective opponents this week would match up against each
other instead, and the 2 teams' players that were dumped should
then be removed from this season's waiver/FA pool. Running them
thru a waiver or auction seems like a potential for drastic imbalances.
Since the two problem teams in John's league were abandoned by their
owners, it's hard to see much of a downside to following Rho's advice.
Who cares what happens to the teams now that their owners are gone?
The simplest approach is to take the players from those teams out
of circulation and move forward as a smaller league.
However, some leagues might prize structural elements that come
with having a certain number of teams in a particular divisional
format. Some simply treasure league integrity for its own sake.
Rob wrote in with a detailed discussion of what his league did to
preserve its integrity after one member (a Blackhawk helicopter
pilot whose memorial Facebook page is here)
was killed in the line of duty:
My 16-team redraft league is filled with friends
and colleagues scattered throughout the world who have all served
or are currently serving in the Army. Two years ago, a week before
our online draft was scheduled to kick the season off, the Blackhawk
helicopter our co-commissioner was piloting was shot down in Afghanistan,
killing the entire crew and all passengers.
After the initial shock wore off, we were faced with what to do
with his owner slot. Nobody felt right with replacing him short
notice, and the overwhelming desire was to let Brian's luck ride,
as he was the returning league champion. We allowed his team to
be picked with auto-draft and his team was managed weekly by a vote
which did not include his opponent for the week. Most of the decisions
were no-brainers, so it wasn't as hard as it may seem. Also, his
team was not allowed to be included in trades or post any waiver
claims. However, once the waiver claims were processed for the week,
I (as the other co-commissioner) was free to pick through the free
agent trash heap to replace injured or ineffective players.
This system worked well for us and although Brian's team did not
return to glory, it remained competitive and fair for all.
I hope our unfortunate ordeal provides some helpful insight for
those leagues out there with similar ownership participation dilemmas.
That's not just a really cool story from the armed forces. It's
a thoughtful and practical way to allow an ownerless team to participate
in a league without causing tension between the other owners. No
one had to lose a waiver claim to the team on auto-pilot, but there
was a solution to the problem of a roster compromised by injuries.
Phil imagined a slightly more aggressive (but equally fair and practical)
system of roster management:
I agree with the idea of freezing the rosters
and using an independent source to determine weekly lineups. As
for the contingency for injured players, the same philosophy could
hold true; any player suffering serious injury -- and nowadays better
add "or suspension" -- will be evaluated against available
waiver wire players of the same position using an independent set
of Rest of the Way Rankings (like FFToday).
For example, if AWOL owner had Victor Cruz, the commish would figure
out the best available WR and put in a wire request for that guy,
staying true to whatever system is in place (minimum bids in FAAB).
If the request fails because another owner wins the free agent,
then try again. I would say it would be overkill to try to manage
the roster using this same technique for poor-performing players,
but you could do that too.
And I think you missed one big question ... What if the AWOL team
being managed by the league actually wins some money!? :) ... The
clear answer is to divide the winnings among the remaining owners,
but if a live draft is still in place it would also be fun to have
it catered (or free beer) the following year.
Good catch Phil! I hadn't even considered the possibility of an
auto-pilot team winning the league. But of course that could happen,
and I think having a dinner catered courtesy of one of the two Mr.
Nobodies in John's league would be almost as nice as winning the
league outright.
Although readers were generally on board with the idea of allowing
some neutral set of projections to dictate the setting of the lineup
for an abandoned team, Lloyd raised an objection:
I don’t like the idea of having the commissioner
set a roster no matter what the method. If a solution is truly needed,
I’d have the team opposing the missing owner be required to
beat the average score for the week set by all teams setting a lineup.
I realize that the scoring would no longer be able to be done by
the online service, but I would prefer that you meet a scoring standard
for a win than have the commissioner running 3 or 4 teams by year’s
end. Consider this: Maybe the AWOL owner never spent the time to
“correctly” play the players he has. Now the commish
comes in and it turns into a winning team. Going to take them to
the playoffs, too? Better to have your efforts set early on retaining
the owners all season long than to have them leave and the rest
of the season be dominated by commissioner-driven lineups.
I received a lot of feedback on this question, and I'm sorry I don't
have the space to cover every nuance of every response. However,
the four notes above do a pretty good job of covering the range
of opinions on John's plight. I hope his league can benefit from
the discussion and carry on to the end of the season.
This
Week's Question: Has your league seen any trades of just two players
at the same position?
This week's question comes from Marty, who writes:
I'm trying to trade Andre Ellington for Ahmad
Bradshaw, but my commissioner says the trade is "suspicious."
Suspicious how? They're both doing pretty well, only I would rather
have Bradshaw than Ellington, and the guy who has Bradshaw would
rather have Ellington.
But my commish says he would prefer we didn't do the deal because
it wouldn't "look good."
He thinks you're supposed to trade RBs for TEs or WRs or whatever.
Plus, he has no problem with those combo packages where people throw
in a backup QB and a kicker they were about to cut just to make
the deal seem complicated.
But if it's just one top-10 RB for another top-10 RB, he thinks
it looks like we're doing something sneaky because, according to
him, "That's not how trades are done."
The first thing I did after reading the note was to check the leagues
I belong to for a trade involving two teams with one player each
at the same position. I thought I would just give Marty a couple
of quick counter-examples to show his commissioner, but I came up
empty.
It's easy to find trades of one player for another player at a different
position, and it's easy to find trades involving players at the
same position as part of package deals, but I don't see any trades
of a single QB for a single QB (or a single RB for a single RB,
etc.).
If you've had any such trades in your league, I
would love to hear about them (and whether or not they seem
"suspicious" to you).
Survivor Picks - Week 8 (Courtesy of
Matthew Schiff)
So you’re still here? Good for you. It’s becoming harder
to pick games since you can’t reuse your old picks. This week
has some intriguing matchups and some opportunities to use teams
that you normally wouldn’t. Then again, there are also some
obvious options if you haven’t felt comfortable using some
of the league’s best.
Trap Game: Cleveland over Oakland
Are the Browns for real? Be careful how you answer. The Raiders
have been at their best against solid teams, such as the Patriots
(who beat them by a single TD) and the Chargers (who beat them by
a field goal). The winless Raiders are dead last in total offense,
31st in points scored with an average of 15.3 per game, and their
defense allows 26.3 points per game. This is exactly the type of
team that can help the Browns get back to their winning ways, especially
in front of the Dawg Pound. But the Raiders aren't just angry and
frustrated; they are capable of being competitive, so this probably
won't be the cakewalk that the lines makers expect. The Browns may
have just enough to eke this one out at home, but I expect a nail-biter.
#3: Kansas City over St. Louis (6-1: Pit,
NO, CIN, SF, CLE, SD, NE)
The Chiefs have quietly gone about their business in an AFC West
dominated by the Broncos and the Chargers to find themselves right
in the hunt at 3-3. The team has allowed the third fewest touchdowns
and fifth fewest points this season, which should make matters difficult
for rookie sensation Austin Davis and company. Yes, the 2-4 Rams
won a close one against the Super Bowl champion Seahawks on some
trick plays and have been competitive in all but one game this season,
but St. Louis allows an eye-popping 29.3 per game. That defensive
shortcoming is too severe for the Rams to steal two games in a row
on the road.
#2: Miami over Jacksonville (2-5: CHI, Sea,
NO, TB, DET, Den, CLE)
Can the Jaguars make it two in a row? Possibly. But probably not
against a Dolphins team that finds itself a half game behind second-place
Buffalo in the AFC East and desperate for a win to remain in the
playoff race. Last week, Miami went into Soldier Field and won a
must-win game against a Bears team that everyone believed had a
chance to win the NFC North. This week, the Dolphin defense should
exploit the inexperience of rookie quarterback Blake Bortles and
a Jaguar offensive unit that has given up the most interceptions
through the first seven weeks of the season. While a healthy Lamar
Miller would help Ryan Tannehill, Mike Wallace has finally been
set free and is on pace to score 12 touchdowns from his third-year
signal caller. Don’t let one week fool you into thinking Jacksonville
is a good team; they just were able to put it all together for sixty
minutes against a Cleveland team that didn’t show up. Take
the fish over the cats in this Florida state rivalry.
Image by Tilt Creative (Ty
Schiff)
#1: Dallas over Washington (6-1: PHI, DEN,
NE, SD, GB, SEA, BAL):
The Cowboys are on a tear, and if you haven’t used them
this season, now is the time. Yes, there are rumors that RG3 might
suit up and play in this divisional rivalry, but it is more likely
that Colt McCoy, formerly of the Cleveland Browns, will be under
center. Either way, barring a complete letdown by a Dallas offense
that puts up over 400 yards a game and has a running back that
has gone over 100 yards every game this season, Jerry Jones and
his “boys” should have an easy win on Monday night.
Washington’s seventh-ranked defense may create some challenges
for America’s team, but look for Demarco Murray to continue
his 100+ yard streak in prime time.
Mike Davis has been writing about fantasy football since 1999.
As a landlocked Oklahoman who longs for the sound of ocean waves,
he also writes about ocean colonization under the pen name Studio
Dongo. The latest installment in his science fiction series can
be found here.
|
