Hear me out, because you have to. The latest debate here at LFP FFB headquarters has to do with the excessive use of free agency "contingency" bidding. It is the consensus by a small group that contingency bidding somewhat waters down the entire process of auction bidding, and that it is no longer necessary with the revisions that have been made. Since there is a five minute window after the last bid, and the free agency deadline has been voted on and moved to 5:00pm on Saturdays, I see no reason that people can't just focus in on their primary bids, and guess what, if you lose your auction, tough luck, that's how auctions go. The forum looks ridiculous with people bidding on 42 kickers and 18 defenses just to be sure they don't have to actually pay attention to anything, and I think this needs to be addressed as soon as possible. So I guess in the spirit of fair-play I would like to have some input on this via blog response, so let's hear it and we might get to a vote in the coming week.
disagree. some people may have plans on saturday at 5pm so they can't be there to try and out bid. and what if later in the season the bidding goes higher than the amount of dollars you have available, you are just SOL becuase this didnt happen until 5:02 and bidding on new players is closed. Though Jared's contingencys this week were excesssive with 4 kickers I think it is vital to the process
ReplyDeleteMy contention is the fact that it is completely against the idea of auction free agency, where you win or lose and it's not a guarantee. Free agency was that much more exciting when people actually lost players to other teams and had to make adjustments instead of knowing that if they didn't get their guy they had others lying in wait. Plus, we've moved the deadline to a time that everyone voted on for availability purposes, one which I have been and will be unavailable for every week but three of the season, yet I still don't think I should have that kind of guarantee every week. The whole point of free agency being run this way is to win your auction by out-bidding the other owners, and I think the only concern being addressed by having contingencies is saving your money. Spending money is how you guarantee your player makes it on to your roster, you shouldn't get an easy out by just bidding $1 on several players. If you're not willing to put money on the line to pick up your guy, obviously it isn't an important move for you and you should lose that auction. Something needs to be done to correct this or I feel it undermines the whole idea.
ReplyDeleteAddressing the possibility of missing out on players later in the season because you don't have the necessary funds at the deadline, who should be held responsible for that? Contingencies are just free passes for not wanting to spend on the player you want or another owner outmaneuvering you to get that player. They make it so you don't have to worry, when the whole idea of auction free agency is to increase strategy instead of having the same old free agency systems that every other league has.
ReplyDeleteI can see where it feels like contingencies are free passes to not pay attention or pay very much for a free agent pickup. But at the same time, the whole reason they were implemented in the first place was to allow people to do the necessary CYA in case they couldn't be at their computer to watch the auctions all the way through to the deadline.
ReplyDeleteI like the auction format vs. the regular first come first served waiver wire in normal fantasy leagues, but I think that being able to cover my ass with this format is necessary as well. The perfect example is last Saturday. I knew I wouldn't be able to be at my computer at the deadline, so I put down a ridiculous $12 on Glen Coffee in hopes that no one would bid more than that (because this was THE RB I wanted for the week). If someone was willing to bid higher, however, I would have been totally effed for the week, so I really needed to be able to have a contingency plan in place.
Perhaps I am biased by my 0-4 start, but I would feel incredibly discouraged if I wasn't allowed to perform the due diligence I deem necessary to try to field the best possible team each week. I would not support a system that does not have a plan in place to allow people to prevent a hole in their lineup.
Contingency bids certainly are annoying to pick through (while placing bids, and even more so when sorting out which transactions actually took place). But at the same time, I find them necessary, and really, it still requires people to do the research and figure out in which priority they will bid on players.
TL;DR-
Contingency bids are kind of annoying, but I find them necessary for this format of free agency to work.
whether we end up deciding to adjust the contingency system or not, I think you need to leave people with a backup plan. If I have my TE on a bye and I bid $10 on a replacement and can't be there at 5pm and my opponent bids $11 just to screw me out of a roster spot that week then I am fucked when in reality I would take any of three guys. just needing to fill my spot. And I don't buy the argument of 'you should be willing to spend the money to get the guy you want'. I may have wanted Glen Coffee last week, but not for $13 dollars. Ahamd Bradshaw for $3 is a better value than double digits for Coffee or Choice (just to pull a real example)
ReplyDeleteI think if you are hell bent on changing the FA there are 3 viable options
1. You basically make people pay for all their contingencies that they win and then decide which ones to drop. so for example Jared would win each kicker this week for $1 each and then he would by the roster submission deadline have to tell you who he wants to keep on his roster and which ones he releases to FA. this should dissuade people from using them as much since it would drain funds pretty quickly.
2. Change to a 24 hr FA window where basically any player can be nominated any day from FA opening to friday at 5 pm and their individual auction ends the following day at 5 (or 6 so people can get home from work) so if you nominate a guy on tuesday and lose out on wednesday then you can open a new auction the following day and try and get someone else. This gives a back up plan and would encourage more league participation
3. There was a third idea,but I was watching TV while I was wrting and I forgot
im picking up two kickers, so there is one back up contingency for each one.
ReplyDeleteThere isnt ever going to be a time when everyone can make it every week no matter when the auction is. Saturday is a day for night life, college football, and all kinds of errands and social life shit and 5pm just cant happen a lot of the time. The contingency offers a way for a committed owner to field a full team every week. if you arent willing to throw the necessary money at a player, you get a player you want less. what is wrong with that? anything that would fuck people out of filling roster spots would be awful for the leauge in my opinion.
because of the rules surrounding the utility position and bye weeks, there is a lot of wheeling and dealing with kickers, defenses, and tight ends right now. there are several times in a season where you dont care immensely about WHO you get, just that you have a satisfactory placeholder for your position. I dont want to have to bid $5 on Matt Prater, who I will surely drop after this week. I want whichever competent player I can get for the minimum so I have 1) a full roster this week and 2)maximum money to bid on a player I actually give a shit about in future weeks.
I adjusted my schedule after i took over last season to be at my computer by 8:55. I know you guys are young and crazy, but try telling your friends (mine don't get my obsession at all) every Saturday that you have to be back to bid on fantasy football free agency. Makes for some weird conversations. I am not for contingencies, but maybe it could be limited, so an owner can't bid on every friggin free agent available. That is ridiculous! Compromise is the key.
ReplyDeleteThe entire idea behind this free agency system is summed up by the actual sentence it was born out of: "if you want someone, you bid for him; highest bid wins," it is literally supposed to be that simple. If you've drafted a team where you won't have a valid roster in QB, RB, and WR spots because of bye weeks, your draft strategy was flawed. Injuries are different and create dire situations where you need to man up with free agency money to get your guy. If you bid $5 on a kicker and your opponent chooses to pay $6 or more to screw you, he just lost a player of his own and $6 to do so. The entire idea is risk & reward, just like every fantasy football game ever played. I get that everyone needs to fill holes for kickers, defenses, and even tight ends, but if you're going after a pretty studly fill-in at those positions aren't you already accounting for competition? So instead of bidding $1 knowing that John Doe is a sick ass kicker and other people will want him, would it be worth bidding that $5 to get the guy you want? If not, bid on someone else and save yourself the drama. I've tried free agency ending Thursdays when people aren't as busy and everyone voted for a change, so I don't know why we have changed it to a day and time that availability is apparently the worst. We don't need everyone to be available every deadline, but when you are the one in desperate need, it's up to you to make yourself available isn't it? The 5-minute rule is great for fairness in each individual auction, but it's all based on availability too. I like the rule, but I remember having a ton of fun and anxiety at the deadline trying to see if I would be the high bidder on my guy, and with that hard deadline, perhaps there could be another 5-minute window to start those emergency stop-gap measure auctions just to fill a roster.
ReplyDeletei guess i just dont see why its annoying or ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteTHis week has more contingencies than any so far this year. Im rearranging 3 roster spots and have 4 contingencies. Similarly, JJ is rearranging 2 spots with 2 contingencies.
6 contingency players doesnt seem like all that much of a big deal at all. and that is the most we have had all year. 2 kickers, a qb, 2 rbs, and a def.
if a draft strategy that isnt flawed with the rules in place becomes flawed should the rules change, then the rules shouldnt be changed until the next draft.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletepossible solution to add to Kyles
ReplyDeleteno contingencys, but fixed rates by position to fill roster spots after the deadline. If you dont get your player, you can pay for an available free agent between FA deadline and roster submission (with the new Sunday 9:30 time I dont think this would be any problem)
for example, at 5pm today until 9:30 AM tomorrow, owners can buy available players at these rates
QBs, RBs, WRs-$5
TEs, K, DEF-$1
Drafting 2 QB's, 3 RB's, or 3 WR's with the same bye week is always flawed, in any league. As far as contingencies go quantity-wise, that's not my issue, it's that it devalues the idea of the auction process. I am filling 2 empty slots this week without even being home from the time I posted until midnight so I don't buy the excuses either.
ReplyDeleteit isnt flawed though. many people like to draft for value picks or high risk-reward players in later rounds. And why shouldnt they when they were under the impression that they could get a serviceable replacement or fill-in for market value when they need it? Making owners put all their eggs into one basket strongly overvalues the auction, and will diminish the quality of the games when owners can't maximize their team's assets. The good thing about an auction system is that every player has market value. If you think stakes are too high on one guy, you can get a different guy at a value you think is more fair. i personally think the system that we have is one of the things that makes this way better than any other leauge Ive done.
ReplyDeleteyou cant get rid of contingency auctions, they are still auctions on players all the same. Anyone can still bid on those players, so i dont see the problem really? Seems like craig/kyle/jared et al hit on all the reasons.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that there is any free agency system at all allows people to make decisions that may leave them without a full team in one week or another because of a bye, so I'd have to throw that argument out the window because it doesn't apply. Without contingencies are you then really convinced that you can't get a serviceable player at market value? Because really, it doesn't change anything, it's just not as convenient for you to guarantee yourself safety. The real complaint about not having contingency bidding would be the lack of convenience when it boils down to the nitty gritty. As for them being auctions, I think a bid Tony made saying he wanted to bid $1 if the original poster acquired their original player and $2 if they didn't acquire the players before them in the contingency order was a pretty good example of why it's a flawed system to have contingencies. It has a lot of potential to add mass confusion and serves as a bailout for someone who doesn't vigorously want any particular player and doesn't feel they should have to compete to get their guy. Concerning the "they are still auctions" thing, yes anyone can bid on those players, but anyone can bid on anyone in the first place so the point is null.
ReplyDeleteWeek 5 Free Agency results based on contingencies:
3 Contingencies actually won by their original contingency poster. Jared's Harrison bid, Tony's contingency bid placed on Jared's original bid for Hightower which forced the Harrison contingency into action, and J.J.'s winning Sidney Rice because he was actively participating in bidding and posted too late to win his Sims-Walker bid.
2 Contingencies won by other parties using those players as primary bids. J-Jak getting Kasay without actually raising the bid price, and Craig actively outbidding to get Mendenhall.
5 Contingencies that never came in to play.
So all in all there was one natural contingency bid that mattered because of non-participation in bidding.
I will agree with one thing you said in this thread. I think bids like Tony's should be outlawed. You need to make one bid for a player not one amount if this and a second amount if that
ReplyDeleteI didn't realize how attached everyone was to contingency bidding, you guys make it sound like a doomsday situation without it. Especially after bye weeks are over there's hardly a use for them, and they're basically just a luxury. I'll be interested to ever see someone bid more than a dollar on anyone when they're using contingency bids again. I'm impressed that we got half the league to participate in a discussion about such a trivial part of the league though, hopefully next hot topic we can get everyone in.
ReplyDeleteThat is fine by me, I wasnt sure the correct process for FA drafting but so I was just throwing it out there.
ReplyDeleteAside from that, sounds like we need to finalize some additional rules/guidelines about FA. Personally, I do like the option of a contingency bid to CYA and fill out your roster, but I could probably go either way as long as it is agreed upon by all. Ultimately, we need to come to a conclusion whatever that may be so that everyone is on the same page when it comes to FA drafting.
agreed with kyle...only one bid amount per player - none of the 'if this' one bid amount, 'if that' another bid amount...
ReplyDeletei think it is safe to say that a handful of us at least don't find contingency trivial, but necessary, even if it rarely comes down to a contingency bid, it has to be there for that one person who needs it that week to feel like they have fielded the best team possible.
to minimize the primary vs. contingency confusion when it comes to bidding, perhaps it would be best if contingency bids weren't entered until Friday or Saturday, so that everyone has time to put in their primaries. It isnt likely that people would make many of their contingency bids in existing primary topics already drawing bids.
ReplyDeletei realize Im among the primary offenders of contingency bidding (didnt know it bothered anyone), so Ill ease up on both the amount and early entries to reduce confusion...