Playoff seeding scenario

[Valhalla]

I'm posting this to point out potential flaws in the clarity of your rules. Sort of a brain teaser, too, but there are multiple answers based on how you define certain terms.
Hopefully some of you will have fun with this and realize where the flaws in vagueness reside in your league rules. This scenario is highly unlikely, but I put it together in this way to point out multiple potential disagreements in one example.
Here's the scenario:

Four teams finish the season with a 7-5-1 record. None are division winners (auto-seeds). There are two playoff spots available.
Playoff seeding is determined by (in order): winning percentage, head to head, total points, points against.
Draft order for the bottom 6 teams is determined by record followed by points scored with the least amount of points getting the higher pick. For playoff teams (top 6) draft order will be determined by order of finish, followed by record and points scored. The 13th pick will be awarded to the consolation champion.

Team A finishes with 1100 points with a win over teams C and D and two losses to team B.
Team B finishes with 1400 points with two wins over A and a loss to C and D.
Team C finishes with 1200 points with a win over B, a loss to D and A, and a tie with D.
Team D finishes with 1050 points with a win over B and C, a loss to A, and a tie with C.

The 5 and 6 seeds of the championship playoff bracket both lose week 1 of playoffs. The 1 seed loses to the 2 seed in the final week of the consolation bracket.

Who makes playoffs, and how are the teams seeded in their respective brackets? How are the picks assigned? Post your results. Also post where you see potential for a different interpretation of the rules, if you wish.

[CGW]

Seems like the issue is coming from the head to head aspect? Why not just have points as the 1st tie breaker as it would be nearly impossible to have teams with the same number of points.

In your rules, there is no clear advancement based on record. Each team has a head to head win over one of the other 4, so there is no clear tie breaker here. Points scored awards the advance to team B and C (1400 and 1200 respectively), and there is no further tie so points against is disregarded.

[Valhalla]

Seems like the issue is coming from the head to head aspect? Why not just have points as the 1st tie breaker as it would be nearly impossible to have teams with the same number of points.

In your rules, there is no clear advancement based on record. Each team has a head to head win over one of the other 4, so there is no clear tie breaker here. Points scored awards the advance to team B and C (1400 and 1200 respectively), and there is no further tie so points against is disregarded.

Here's one of the issues. Is head to head only used as a tie-breaker when someone has a sweep and otherwise disregarded as a tie-breaker? Or is head to head winner the most wins within the head to head games? Or is it the best winning % (which can be different than the total wins with ties involved).

Side issue not presented in my example:
If head to head winner is the best win % within the head to head games, well then the issue of how to calculate a tie is also presented. Some people say throw the ties out. Others would say count it as half a win and half a loss. That potentially makes a difference, as not all teams in a record tie-break necessarily have the same number of games played within the tie-break teams. One team may be 2-1-1 and another 2-1. If you throw out the tie, they have the same win% and the next tie-break is used. If you calculate the tie as half a win and half a loss, well then the 2-1-1 team has 2.5/4=62.5% for a win%...lower than the 66.6%. So leagues should clarify how they calculate a tie.

[Jigga94]

Before I get into this, I'll start by saying, this is why I'm for Total points for being the tiebreaker after overall record. Draft order, the team with worst record gets 1st and if 2 teams have same record, the lowest points for gets better pick... Each round of the playoffs someone is eliminated, they fill in the next group of spots in the draft and tiebreaker is usually regular season points for...

I did play with the OP rules (or close to it) for a few years until we realized 1. The head to head or inter division records aren't usually fair to someone. 2. They barely ever have the same games played against each other and it gets thrown out the window and points for is used anyway lol

So anyways...

Winning % is all the same (Win% is the first requirement in 99% of leagues)
H2H...They all played each other 4 times (this would need to happen, or else the next tiebreaker would be used. If that isn't a clause in the rules, then you're bound for arguments over someone who is 1-0 being better than the 2-1 team).
Team D has the best record at 2-1-1. They are 5th seed
The next 2 teams are A and B at 2-2, while C is at 1-2-1

This is where things are interesting to me. Personally, I think A and B are the only ones eligible to move to the next tiebreaker, in which B wins. However, I could see some argue that since the H2H didn't determine the 6th seed, that team C should also be eligible to partake in the points for tiebreaker. However, you gave team C less points than B anyway lol so it's B either way.

So draft goes 1-6 based on worst record and tiebreaker of less points for. Team D gets 7th based on losing 1st round and least points for, B gets 8th.

I'm confused on the consolation bracket, who is involved and who the 1 and 2 seed are in this scenario. Feel like that part is missing detail.

[Jigga94]

Seems like the issue is coming from the head to head aspect? Why not just have points as the 1st tie breaker as it would be nearly impossible to have teams with the same number of points.

In your rules, there is no clear advancement based on record. Each team has a head to head win over one of the other 4, so there is no clear tie breaker here. Points scored awards the advance to team B and C (1400 and 1200 respectively), and there is no further tie so points against is disregarded.

Here's one of the issues. Is head to head only used as a tie-breaker when someone has a sweep and otherwise disregarded as a tie-breaker? Or is head to head winner the most wins within the head to head games? Or is it the best winning % (which can be different than the total wins with ties involved).

Side issue not presented in my example:
If head to head winner is the best win % within the head to head games, well then the issue of how to calculate a tie is also presented. Some people say throw the ties out. Others would say count it as half a win and half a loss. That potentially makes a difference, as not all teams in a record tie-break necessarily have the same number of games played within the tie-break teams. One team may be 2-1-1 and another 2-1. If you throw out the tie, they have the same win% and the next tie-break is used. If you calculate the tie as half a win and half a loss, well then the 2-1-1 team has 2.5/4=62.5% for a win%...lower than the 66.6%. So leagues should clarify how they calculate a tie.

I mentioned in my post above, but I think it has to be 1. H2H between the same teams and 2. Same amount of games played. Since this usually doesn't happen, I'd just throw out H2H completely unless used to determine between only 2 teams

[repkllrs]

H2h is used as a tiebreaker when determining which of 2 teams get in, when it’s 3 or more it defaults to most points

[Valhalla]

H2h is used as a tiebreaker when determining which of 2 teams get in, when it’s 3 or more it defaults to most points

In your mind, sure. I don't think that's necessarily wrong, either. But I can guarantee you that's not how everyone sees it. That's the issue I'm trying to bring to light. Clarity might be needed in your rules, here.

[Valhalla]

Seems like the issue is coming from the head to head aspect? Why not just have points as the 1st tie breaker as it would be nearly impossible to have teams with the same number of points.

In your rules, there is no clear advancement based on record. Each team has a head to head win over one of the other 4, so there is no clear tie breaker here. Points scored awards the advance to team B and C (1400 and 1200 respectively), and there is no further tie so points against is disregarded.

Here's one of the issues. Is head to head only used as a tie-breaker when someone has a sweep and otherwise disregarded as a tie-breaker? Or is head to head winner the most wins within the head to head games? Or is it the best winning % (which can be different than the total wins with ties involved).

Side issue not presented in my example:
If head to head winner is the best win % within the head to head games, well then the issue of how to calculate a tie is also presented. Some people say throw the ties out. Others would say count it as half a win and half a loss. That potentially makes a difference, as not all teams in a record tie-break necessarily have the same number of games played within the tie-break teams. One team may be 2-1-1 and another 2-1. If you throw out the tie, they have the same win% and the next tie-break is used. If you calculate the tie as half a win and half a loss, well then the 2-1-1 team has 2.5/4=62.5% for a win%...lower than the 66.6%. So leagues should clarify how they calculate a tie.

I mentioned in my post above, but I think it has to be 1. H2H between the same teams and 2. Same amount of games played. Since this usually doesn't happen, I'd just throw out H2H completely unless used to determine between only 2 teams

I agree on total games needing to be the same, and I think the W% is the best way to go...but someone could easily argue to only use it with a 100% sweep and otherwise disregard it. And this interpretation changes a lot in the above example on who gets seeded where in playoffs and who gets which picks.

[Hottoddies]

I think the moral of the story is that head to head tie breakers are potential landmines that should be scrapped altogether. This is the worst time of the season to deal with grey areas of undefined meanings of ambiguous rules. It's better to stand on the solid foundation of total points than the slippery slope of head to head matchups.

[MEuRaH]

Just FYI, the "head to head' tie-breaker in NFL standings reads as follows:

Three or More Clubs
Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs).

D has a 2-1-1 record using this method so they advance.
A & B tie for the 6th spot, so it goes to total points which is B.

So B & D if I had to vote.

[M-Dub]

Just FYI, the "head to head' tie-breaker in NFL standings reads as follows:

Three or More Clubs
Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs).

D has a 2-1-1 record using this method so they advance.
A & B tie for the 6th spot, so it goes to total points which is B.

So B & D if I had to vote.

I agree with this, but not for the same reason. Since we’ve already eliminated D from the tiebreaker and advanced them to the playoffs, the remaining tie between A and B should still be decided by H2H (the stated first tiebreaker). B advances because they swept A. This would’ve been a more interesting conundrum had A swept B, but B still had more points.

Ultimately, as others have said, this is primarily a good example of why total points should be the first tiebreaker. The likelihood of two or more teams scoring an identical amount of points through the regular season is almost unheard of in fantasy, where we typically score down to the hundredth of a point.

[remedy29]

I too say D & B with D being the 5ht seed and B being the 6th seed. For the same reason as dlf_mikeh.

I do not follow the rest of the questions.

[Yarnith]

Err did I miss something? Shouldnt it be..

Overrall record, Division record, Division head to head, Points for?

Ignoring division records and confining playoff spots to divisions begs why do you even have divisions? Using them eliminates 99% of your issues. You also show some teams with 2 wins and some with 1 loss is that a split of 2 games played? if its not you cant use head to head at all unless all teams play all teams an equal number of times.

As it reads though

Team B gets seed spot 1. he beats out a with 2 wins and out points c and d.
Team c gets in next because A is not divisional and c d are you cant use head to head for 1 game played vs 2 games played. This gives C the seed for points.

I cannot stress how divisional head to heads are essentially mandatory.

[ThunderTung]

In any case, just stick to pf as the first tiebreaker. It would be so rare for them to be the same. Also helps if you use more decimals (.000) so you can get more accurate scores. imo h2h tiebreaker is silly for fantasy. too many variables and the only thing that really determines a teams talent is PF

[Valhalla]

Just FYI, the "head to head' tie-breaker in NFL standings reads as follows:

Three or More Clubs
Head-to-head (best won-lost-tied percentage in games among the clubs).

D has a 2-1-1 record using this method so they advance.
A & B tie for the 6th spot, so it goes to total points which is B.

So B & D if I had to vote.

This is how I'd personally interpret it as well. D is the 5 seed, then B is the 6 seed. Then despite A having a better record in the HTH than C, they are out of playoffs...so A gets the higher pick. C gets pick 6, A gets pick 5. Also, despite having been seeded higher, D gets pick 7 and B gets pick 8, because they both lost week 1 and then the lower total points gets the higher pick.

But the real point of the original post was to point out what this thread is demonstrating. There's a difference in opinion of how these rules should be interpreted, and everyone seems to think that their way is definitely right. This is why you should either put some real clarity into what your league means by HTH, or use points as a higher tie breaker. Also, should the pick 7 be awarded to the lower playoff seed or the lower in-season point scorer?
Specifically, define if HTH only counts with a sweep of all involved teams and is otherwise discounted, or if it's the team with the highest win%. If it's a sweep, well what about a team that wins over every team and then both wins and ties a team...is that still a sweep? If HTH is win%, define whether HTH needs to be the same number of games played to count.