2024 Dynasty - draft lotto p64, rosters in spreadsheet

[bwgood77]

Vassell and Cam have similar value this year, with Gafford lower. Long term Vassell looks to be quite a bit more valuable, but if you need a C, blocks, rebounds and somewhat similar other stats that Cam gets, it could work out long term if Cam stays healthy.

I probably wouldn't have done it, especially with a rebuilding team, but it's pretty fair.

[dmastro32]

Well bye Steven Adams

[bwgood77]

Well bye Steven Adams

Man, Memphis can't get a break. Lost him right before the playoffs last year and now this season. They should try to trade for RWIII

[bigfoot]

Oh boy. Would have been nice to know the season actually opened for waiver pickups and such. Seems to have given an advantage to managers who are actively checking the yahoo site. Last year I don't believe the waiver season opened until the first games and all free agents were on the waiver wire so that all managers had a fair chance at them by using their position in the waiver list. Certainly needs to be addressed for next season.

Edit: I certainly would have put in a claim for Tillman or Aldama

[bigfoot]

Also moving GTD guys to IL+ slot and then picking up waiver guys is just bogus. As far as I'm concerned all the IL+ slot should be eliminated and we only have IL slots. Have three or four IL slots. The IL+ was created for COVID and now its just being abused.

[bwgood77]

I don't see a problem with either. If a guy is DTD you don't know if he's going to play. We've always allowed people to pick up guys after the draft. And I'm pretty sure it was waivers immediately for a day anyway. But people deserve to fill in injured slots with players before the season.

If a DTD guy comes back, they immediately have to drop a guy anyway.

[sunskerr]

Oh boy. Would have been nice to know the season actually opened for waiver pickups and such. Seems to have given an advantage to managers who are actively checking the yahoo site. Last year I don't believe the waiver season opened until the first games and all free agents were on the waiver wire so that all managers had a fair chance at them by using their position in the waiver list. Certainly needs to be addressed for next season.

Edit: I certainly would have put in a claim for Tillman or Aldama

Well yes, being active is going to be an advantage. All players came off waivers like a day ago too. Last year we finished the draft literally the day of or the day before the season began, so that's why they came off waivers at the start of the season.

Also moving GTD guys to IL+ slot and then picking up waiver guys is just bogus. As far as I'm concerned all the IL+ slot should be eliminated and we only have IL slots. Have three or four IL slots. The IL+ was created for COVID and now its just being abused.

We are not allowing healthy players, especially stars, to stay on IL/IL+ this year after what happened last year. If a significant player is on IL while healthy that will incur the tanking penalty.

IL+ in general though is much fairer because it eliminates randomness of players missing games due to crap like stepping on a lego, so we will probably move to 3 IL+ next year.

[bigfoot]

Oh boy. Would have been nice to know the season actually opened for waiver pickups and such. Seems to have given an advantage to managers who are actively checking the yahoo site. Last year I don't believe the waiver season opened until the first games and all free agents were on the waiver wire so that all managers had a fair chance at them by using their position in the waiver list. Certainly needs to be addressed for next season.

Edit: I certainly would have put in a claim for Tillman or Aldama

Well yes, being active is going to be an advantage. All players came off waivers like a day ago too. Last year we finished the draft literally the day of or the day before the season began, so that's why they came off waivers at the start of the season.

Also moving GTD guys to IL+ slot and then picking up waiver guys is just bogus. As far as I'm concerned all the IL+ slot should be eliminated and we only have IL slots. Have three or four IL slots. The IL+ was created for COVID and now its just being abused.

We are not allowing healthy players, especially stars, to stay on IL/IL+ this year after what happened last year. If a significant player is on IL while healthy that will incur the tanking penalty.

IL+ in general though is much fairer because it eliminates randomness of players missing games due to crap like stepping on a lego, so we will probably move to 3 IL+ next year.

A simple announcement for everyone would have been nice.

[PerkinsFor3]

Seems to have given an advantage to managers who are actively checking the yahoo site.

That sounds like it could make sense.

[PerkinsFor3]

Btw if a healthy Player is in IL+ and loses the NA or INJ tag, you can not make any moves until you remove aaid player from that IL+ position. So a lot of fuzz about nothing, really.

[sunskerr]

Make an announcement about things we've been doing for multiple seasons now? Once the draft is over everybody knows to check yahoo and make sure their rosters are ok. The title of the thread also literally says that the draft is over check your rosters on yahoo, and has for the last 3-4 days.

Yeah, it sucks that you missed out on a rotation player. But we shouldn't get hung up on the timing being before the start of the year. I'd wager Perkins would have been able to pick up Tillman regardless of when Adams injury report came out simply because he's one of the most active managers and his timezone might match up to when we are working and he is free.

Look, I'll keep a note of it for next year and then we'll see what we can do to make it more equitable for our busier managers. But time constraints before the start of the season, depending on when we finish the draft may simply mean it's effectively the same result.

Maybe Aldama/JJJ/Tillman split time at C like last year and Aldama/Tillman are mid (again!). Who knows lol.

Btw if a healthy Player is in IL+ and loses the NA or INJ tag, you can not make any moves until you remove aaid player from that IL+ position. So a lot of fuzz about nothing, really.

Not quite, we've had managers with healthy stars on IL for extended periods. This will trigger tanking penalties if it is serious enough (I may discuss whether to implement penalties with the cocommishs if discussion is necessary). And I also had ~4 players on IL/IL+ that were not significantly better than my bench guys, so there was no need to take them off. Essentially I had like 16 rosterable players.

So most of the time its not really a big deal but when it matters it can be a bit silly.

[PerkinsFor3]

Not quite, we've had managers with healthy stars on IL for extended periods. This will trigger tanking penalties if it is serious enough (I may discuss whether to implement penalties with the cocommishs if discussion is necessary). And I also had ~4 players on IL/IL+ that were not significantly better than my bench guys, so there was no need to take them off. Essentially I had like 16 rosterable players.

So most of the time its not really a big deal but when it matters it can be a bit silly.

You cant pick up any players when you have a healthy player in an IL spot. I know you can play a smart game by using IL(+) spots, but it rewards active managers and you still have to move healthy (untagged) players out of the slots if you want to add so.eone to your roster. I believe Yahoo even made it more strict now with not being able to offer trades unless you address healthy olayers in IL(+) spots.

So the penalty then probably would be moreso about being inactive and letting healthy players sit in IL spots, than anything else.

[dmastro32]

Not quite, we've had managers with healthy stars on IL for extended periods. This will trigger tanking penalties if it is serious enough (I may discuss whether to implement penalties with the cocommishs if discussion is necessary). And I also had ~4 players on IL/IL+ that were not significantly better than my bench guys, so there was no need to take them off. Essentially I had like 16 rosterable players.

So most of the time its not really a big deal but when it matters it can be a bit silly.

You cant pick up any players when you have a healthy player in an IL spot. I know you can play a smart game by using IL(+) spots, but it rewards active managers and you still have to move healthy (untagged) players out of the slots if you want to add so.eone to your roster. I believe Yahoo even made it more strict now with not being able to offer trades unless you address healthy olayers in IL(+) spots.

So the penalty then probably would be moreso about being inactive and letting healthy players sit in IL spots, than anything else.

For football at least it locks the whole roster and you can’t even make subs. Maybe different with IL+

[sunskerr]

You cant pick up any players when you have a healthy player in an IL spot. I know you can play a smart game by using IL(+) spots, but it rewards active managers and you still have to move healthy (untagged) players out of the slots if you want to add so.eone to your roster. I believe Yahoo even made it more strict now with not being able to offer trades unless you address healthy olayers in IL(+) spots.

So the penalty then probably would be moreso about being inactive and letting healthy players sit in IL spots, than anything else.

Yeah, I understand that aspect of it but quite frankly it was ridiculous sitting on 16 rosterable players last year though. I was also near (I think at that time I was #1 or #2) the top of the leaderboard, so I didn't have to make a trade. And yeah, I did do my homework last year but when you really max it out like I did last year and are a winning team, it's absurdly strong.

And on the bottom of the ladder, when it comes to rebuilding teams who have no incentive to win, they can just park their healthy guys on the IL+ and pick up prospects for nothing, and they can have no reason to activate healthy players or make trades because they aren't really trying to be competitive.

If we go down to 3 next year it becomes slightly less of an issue.

So the problem is when it is taken to its logical extreme, if an individual manager is working to their fullest, their roster size is essentially 16 instead of 12. Applied on a league wide scale, if every single manager is doing this, people will just vacuum the entire waiver wire, which it goes without saying the waiver needs to have some chance of yielding a player you can actually use.

It really is not that hard to get around to be honest, which is why I was doing it in the first place last year - and got called out for it.

For football at least it locks the whole roster and you can’t even make subs. Maybe different with IL+

You can get around this by setting lineups in advance, before players get healthy again.

Im inclined to not really give a **** about this whole issue, but its come up before and a lot of people really don't like it.

[bwgood77]

You cant pick up any players when you have a healthy player in an IL spot. I know you can play a smart game by using IL(+) spots, but it rewards active managers and you still have to move healthy (untagged) players out of the slots if you want to add so.eone to your roster. I believe Yahoo even made it more strict now with not being able to offer trades unless you address healthy olayers in IL(+) spots.

So the penalty then probably would be moreso about being inactive and letting healthy players sit in IL spots, than anything else.

Yeah, I understand that aspect of it but quite frankly it was ridiculous sitting on 16 rosterable players last year though. I was also near (I think at that time I was #1 or #2) the top of the leaderboard, so I didn't have to make a trade. And yeah, I did do my homework last year but when you really max it out like I did last year and are a winning team, it's absurdly strong.

And on the bottom of the ladder, when it comes to rebuilding teams who have no incentive to win, they can just park their healthy guys on the IL+ and pick up prospects for nothing, and they can have no reason to activate healthy players or make trades because they aren't really trying to be competitive.

If we go down to 3 next year it becomes slightly less of an issue.

So the problem is when it is taken to its logical extreme, if an individual manager is working to their fullest, their roster size is essentially 16 instead of 12. Applied on a league wide scale, if every single manager is doing this, people will just vacuum the entire waiver wire, which it goes without saying the waiver needs to have some chance of yielding a player you can actually use.

It really is not that hard to get around to be honest, which is why I was doing it in the first place last year - and got called out for it.

For football at least it locks the whole roster and you can’t even make subs. Maybe different with IL+

You can get around this by setting lineups in advance, before players get healthy again.

Im inclined to not really give a **** about this whole issue, but its come up before and a lot of people really don't like it.

I think it would be a bigger issue if a rebuilding team is not playing it's best players and intentionally tanking by playing lesser players. If they are leaving better players on IL. Now your scenario that you did is bad too because you are preventing other teams, maybe your direct competitors that may have a lot of valid injuries, from picking up guys they could maybe play...especially considering they are probably better than whom they can get on waivers.

[bwgood77]

I've done it unintentionally but kicked myself, because regardless, I always try to compete and I will realize I left a guy on IL when he had gotten healthy and he of course kills it and I miss out on those stats. It's usually probalby only a day or two unless I get busy and don't check for awhile because of work...since I usually set my lineup for a couple weeks.

[sunskerr]

I think it would be a bigger issue if a rebuilding team is not playing it's best players and intentionally tanking by playing lesser players. If they are leaving better players on IL. Now your scenario that you did is bad too because you are preventing other teams, maybe your direct competitors that may have a lot of valid injuries, from picking up guys they could maybe play...especially considering they are probably better than whom they can get on waivers.

Those teams who leave their best/significant players on the IL will receive tanking penalties i.e. moving down a draft tier

As a side note, on the topic of draft tiers, I think we will look into not having tiers for the best 8 teams. The tiers would just be for the bottom 8 guys.

[bigfoot]

You cant pick up any players when you have a healthy player in an IL spot. I know you can play a smart game by using IL(+) spots, but it rewards active managers and you still have to move healthy (untagged) players out of the slots if you want to add so.eone to your roster. I believe Yahoo even made it more strict now with not being able to offer trades unless you address healthy olayers in IL(+) spots.

So the penalty then probably would be moreso about being inactive and letting healthy players sit in IL spots, than anything else.

Yeah, I understand that aspect of it but quite frankly it was ridiculous sitting on 16 rosterable players last year though. I was also near (I think at that time I was #1 or #2) the top of the leaderboard, so I didn't have to make a trade. And yeah, I did do my homework last year but when you really max it out like I did last year and are a winning team, it's absurdly strong.

And on the bottom of the ladder, when it comes to rebuilding teams who have no incentive to win, they can just park their healthy guys on the IL+ and pick up prospects for nothing, and they can have no reason to activate healthy players or make trades because they aren't really trying to be competitive.

If we go down to 3 next year it becomes slightly less of an issue.

So the problem is when it is taken to its logical extreme, if an individual manager is working to their fullest, their roster size is essentially 16 instead of 12. Applied on a league wide scale, if every single manager is doing this, people will just vacuum the entire waiver wire, which it goes without saying the waiver needs to have some chance of yielding a player you can actually use.

It really is not that hard to get around to be honest, which is why I was doing it in the first place last year - and got called out for it.

For football at least it locks the whole roster and you can’t even make subs. Maybe different with IL+

You can get around this by setting lineups in advance, before players get healthy again.

Im inclined to not really give a **** about this whole issue, but its come up before and a lot of people really don't like it.

This is what happens. Too many playable reserves sitting on managers teams with 16 players. Then managers with real injuries can’t pickup a decent player on waiver. I brought this up last season and we seem to have forgotten to address it.

[Qwigglez]

What is the recommendation Bigfoot?

I feel this year many teams and players should be healthy entering the season, so we could possibly lower the IL+ spot to just one, or none at all, or one IL and one IL+. Maybe towards March we can raise the limit back up since that is when NBA teams start tanking and resting players.
Additionally, there is a maximum players acquisitions for an entire season that could be toggled on Yahoo. I just calculated last year the average moves a team made was 21.75, I had the most at 47, and the least was DMastro who had 3. The season before that the average was 20.25. We could potentially have the maximum player acquisition be set to 25, though I feel many won't like this restriction. (If something like this is done, we could reset everyone that has made a transaction or acquisition back to 0 to start over).

[sunskerr]

This is what happens. Too many playable reserves sitting on managers teams with 16 players. Then managers with real injuries can’t pickup a decent player on waiver. I brought this up last season and we seem to have forgotten to address it.

Yeah. There are several remedies that I will think about this year, to implement next year.

They include things like:

-15 players flat per team, no IL or IL+ (maybe increase number of keepers by 1)
-13 or 14 players per team, 2 or 1 IL, no IL+
-12 players per team, 3 IL, no IL+
-12 players per team, 1 IL+

They all have their own strengths, weaknesses.

15 flat is interesting because it just removes all pretenses about IL/IL+ and your roster is your roster - nobody gains any sort of advantage from having injured players, but you still are able to cover for both long and short term injuries because of the extra roster spots.

We also cut the roster size from "16" to "15", although the average waiver wire player probably gets worse - but you do your diligence drafting and we remove the "luck" associated with scrambling to the waiver wire for pickups when a guy gets injured. So the luck just gets transferred from the guy who happened to be on his phone to the person who drafted the backup.

For example, instead of Mitchell Robinson getting injured and everyone trying to get lucky and pick up Hartenstein, the guy who got lucky was just the person who drafted him. Removes the potential time zone/work related scenarios. This is actually massive and why 15 is worth serious consideration.

Anyway, I could write even more paragraphs but these are the types of things that I think about and discuss with bw a lot in dms. Hardly any of them ever make it to this thread

What is the recommendation Bigfoot?

I feel this year many teams and players should be healthy entering the season, so we could possibly lower the IL+ spot to just one, or none at all, or one IL and one IL+. Maybe towards March we can raise the limit back up since that is when NBA teams start tanking and resting players.
Additionally, there is a maximum players acquisitions for an entire season that could be toggled on Yahoo. I just calculated last year the average moves a team made was 21.75, I had the most at 47, and the least was DMastro who had 3. The season before that the average was 20.25. We could potentially have the maximum player acquisition be set to 25, though I feel many won't like this restriction. (If something like this is done, we could reset everyone that has made a transaction or acquisition back to 0 to start over).

One thing I thought about doing, since we cannot change the IL/IL+ spots because our season has started, was to record everyone's roster, reset the league/teams, set the IL/IL+ to 3 and then fix everyones teams back to normal with commish tools. Since nobody has gone past 3 IL/IL+ it's technically viable, but it feels scummy because 1) people are expecting 2/2 IL+ and 2) we already began the league in the first place.