How do you deal with tanking?

[abloom]

The easiest way to address tanking is to just boot any owner that is tanking.

If you want less subjective ways:
1) use potential points for non playoff teams
2) use all play format
3) use a victory point format
4) use best ball format

[Pac_Eddy]

The easiest way to address tanking is to just boot any owner that is tanking.

If you want less subjective ways:
1) use potential points for non playoff teams
2) use all play format
3) use a victory point format
4) use best ball format

It's not as easy as you say you determine if someone is tanking their lineup. If they do the entire lineup, yes. But only a few should spots? Might be playing the matchups.

All play & victory points don't make tanking any less likely.

[ThunderTung]

PP isn't sitting well with me. Yes, it might prevent owners from selling off dynasty assets in order to tank and negates tanking by sitting players, but it still seems "off".

Would racking non-playoff teams in order of points scored, or is that on the same order as what I proposed in the OP?

(FWIW, tanking was only a blatant issue once or twice a few years ago in this league. One owner has rebounded (Zeke) and another has moved on.)

There are 2 different types of "tanking" the first type is the one that I personally think is unhealthy for leagues. This being when a team purposefully sits better players to lose games. Its dishonest and doesn't accurately represent how good their team is.

The 2nd type of tanking, I believe should be allowed for the most part, Which is selling off assets for picks/ younger players. If your going to sell off your studs for youth, and draft picks I don't think there is anything wrong with that. If you're good at trading, the value you hold won't change much. As long as your playing to your teams best ability I don't have an issue with this.

I think the thing to understand is that you'll never truly be able to stop tanking. The key is to not incentivize it. There are a few ways you can do this.

1. Lottery for the top 4 picks
2. Last place monetary punishment (or humiliation)
3. Loser bracket

I think its important to separate the bottom 4 of the league from the rest, that way no matter what at least whoever gets the 1.01 is one of the worst teams.

I personally use a loser bracket of 4, the loser's advance. Last place has to pay an extra $50

I would have preferred a lottery, but my league voted against it. Regardless I think your format would be pretty frustrating for others in the league, and would discourage any new members from taking over a bad team if a spot opened up.

[AussieMate]

wow thats a terrible way to decide draft order, imagine trying to build a dynasty with the worst team and not getting the 1.01.

[hoos89]

I personally like potential points among all teams out of the money (so teams 4-12 in many formats), then 3rd, 2nd, 1st.

Giving the 1st overall pick to middling teams is going to make it very difficult for bad teams to get better and generally risks putting you in a spot where you have a couple terrible teams that just give everyone wins every year and may ultimately have trouble finding owners for them.

Why should teams be rewarded for just missing the playoffs? You're judging the worst teams, saying that they shouldn't be rewarded for doing nothing. In my experience the worst teams are often (though not always) the most active teams in the league. In my experience it's the teams in the middle of the pack who are often the least active...they often try to compete every year even if their team isn't that strong and essentially have 0 long term strategy. I can pretty much never buy productive vets off these teams, and even if they're willing to deal they ask for a major overpay. Imo your rules penalize teams executing a longer term strategy (the kind that should be encouraged in dynasty formats), and rewards teams with a redraft mindset.

[Hottoddies]

How do you (other commissioners) or your leagues deal with tanking?

I instituted a change in which the draft pick order of non-playoff teams (10th thru 5th) is inverted, so trying to "tank" would essentially net you the 6th or 5th overall pick in order to prevent teams from not setting their lineups. There have been no objections thus far, but one team did inquire if the rule could be relaxed for an orphan team owner. It ends up looking like this:

• League Winner: 10th Draft Position
• 2nd Place Finish: 9th Draft Position
• 3rd Place Finish: 8th Draft Position
• 4th Place Finish: 7th Draft Position
• 10th Place Finish: 6th Draft Position
• 9th Place Finish: 5th Draft Position
• 8th Place Finish: 4th Draft Position
• 7th Place Finish: 3rd Draft Position
• 6th Place Finish: 2nd Draft Position
• 5th Place Finish: 1st Draft Position


Not only does tanking detract from the competitive integrity of the league, but teams that play the tanking teams more than others get an unfair advantage by getting "free" wins.

I brought this rule up in another thread and it didn't seem to be well-received, so I'm curious, how do you all deal with tanking?

So with this system a 4th or 5th place team could tank the last game of the regular season to miss the playoffs to secure the 1.01?

[abloom]

The easiest way to address tanking is to just boot any owner that is tanking.

If you want less subjective ways:
1) use potential points for non playoff teams
2) use all play format
3) use a victory point format
4) use best ball format

It's not as easy as you say you determine if someone is tanking their lineup. If they do the entire lineup, yes. But only a few should spots? Might be playing the matchups.

All play & victory points don't make tanking any less likely.

#1 I didn't say it was easy to decide who was tanking, I said it was the easiest way to deal with it.
#2 there are two concers with tanking, first that it will improve a teams draft position, and second that it will benefit someone else. So if you use potential points for draft position AND use VP or all play, you can address these concerns.

[PTW32]

PP isn't sitting well with me. Yes, it might prevent owners from selling off dynasty assets in order to tank and negates tanking by sitting players, but it still seems "off".

PP doesn't prevent owners from selling off assets.

What don't you like about it?

I think it 1) eliminates the incentive to set losing lineups and 2) is the best measure of strength of teams, making it great for setting for draft order.

It doesn't "prevent" owners from selling off assets, just makes it counterintuitive when those pieces you could/would pawn off for pennies on the dollar in order to help you tank would also net you a better draft position, no?

I don't like the fact that it doesn't require any skill or action on the owner's part; it's too reminiscent of best ball to me, which to me defeats the purpose of playing FF. (I think Roster Options fall into this category as well.)

I think you are completely missing the point.

The idea of pontential pointsis this:

You take all the non playoff team and rank them in order by potential points (the score they would have had if they played the perfect lineup)

The LOWEST SCORING team gets tthe 1st pick.

This takes away incentive to not start your best lineup.

It rewards the actual worth roster (the goal should be some parody in leagues)

And it gives teams incentive to sell off aging productive players while they tank instead of benching them.

I think potential points is a pretty good solution but for me i wouldnt use it unless the platform i used had the capability of tracking it.

Another option is to use something similar to what you do now but use the results of the consolation bracket and award "pink pong balls"

In other words the winner of the losers bracket has the best chance at the 1st pick but nothing is garenteed.

A few of my leagues do this and it seems to keep teams engaged.

[Pac_Eddy]

The easiest way to address tanking is to just boot any owner that is tanking.

If you want less subjective ways:
1) use potential points for non playoff teams
2) use all play format
3) use a victory point format
4) use best ball format

It's not as easy as you say you determine if someone is tanking their lineup. If they do the entire lineup, yes. But only a few should spots? Might be playing the matchups.

All play & victory points don't make tanking any less likely.

#1 I didn't say it was easy to decide who was tanking, I said it was the easiest way to deal with it.
#2 there are two concers with tanking, first that it will improve a teams draft position, and second that it will benefit someone else. So if you use potential points for draft position AND use VP or all play, you can address these concerns.

Ah, copy that. I must've misunderstood your angle. FWIW, I like victory points standings over straight head to head. And I think potential points is the best for non-playoff teams even w/out tanking issues.

Lastly, I think we should refer to the practice of selling off players for draft picks & young prospects as a "accelerated rebuild" or something similar. Tanking refers to setting an intentionally losing lineup IMO.

[CGW]

Lastly, I think we should refer to the practice of selling off players for draft picks & young prospects as a "accelerated rebuild" or something similar. Tanking refers to setting an intentionally losing lineup IMO.

Yeah it may be helpful to separate the two types of tanking- true deceitful tanking and rebuilding. If rebuilding isn't allowed, count me out. It's a necessary part of all leagues. It's when teams are starting a roster full of injured guys while they have Alvin Kamara's on the bench that hurts a league.

Even NFL teams rebuild (aka tanking without calling it tanking). They still play their best players every week, but they ship off anything of value for picks. Miami seems to have done it successfully and Tanksonville might be right behind them. Just like in the NFL, our fantasy leagues should want this type of balance and parity.

Offering the 1.01 to a potential top 4 team that decided to intentionally lose week 14 does not promote parity. The wrong kind of tanking will continue in that type of format.

[abloom]

It's not as easy as you say you determine if someone is tanking their lineup. If they do the entire lineup, yes. But only a few should spots? Might be playing the matchups.

All play & victory points don't make tanking any less likely.

#1 I didn't say it was easy to decide who was tanking, I said it was the easiest way to deal with it.
#2 there are two concers with tanking, first that it will improve a teams draft position, and second that it will benefit someone else. So if you use potential points for draft position AND use VP or all play, you can address these concerns.

Ah, copy that. I must've misunderstood your angle. FWIW, I like victory points standings over straight head to head. And I think potential points is the best for non-playoff teams even w/out tanking issues.

Lastly, I think we should refer to the practice of selling off players for draft picks & young prospects as a "accelerated rebuild" or something similar. Tanking refers to setting an intentionally losing lineup IMO.

I only consider tanking starting rosters that you know are sub optimal. Dumping players with poor long-term value that you are unable to trade for a rebuilding team is just a good move and should be encouraged for rebuilding teams.

[Straycatz2]

• League Winner: 10th Draft Position
• 2nd Place Finish: 9th Draft Position
• 3rd Place Finish: 8th Draft Position
• 4th Place Finish: 7th Draft Position
• 10th Place Finish: 6th Draft Position
• 9th Place Finish: 5th Draft Position
• 8th Place Finish: 4th Draft Position
• 7th Place Finish: 3rd Draft Position
• 6th Place Finish: 2nd Draft Position
• 5th Place Finish: 1st Draft Position

So with this system a 4th or 5th place team could tank the last game of the regular season to miss the playoffs to secure the 1.01?

This is the funniest thing lol....

[Straycatz2]

Potential Points is by far the best way to deter tanking for those outside the playoffs.

By taking your best lineup starters or bench, effectively eliminates anyone trying to create a sub optimal lineup. Doesn't affect standings, but only draft position.

Not only that, you can't just sell off pieces like AJ Green or Mark Ingram to get a better draft position because those guys don't affect your best lineups and wouldn't contribute to PP. To actually get better draft spot with PP, you have to trade away guys that make significant impact in points, and those are the guys ppl tend to want to keep.

[Black Adam]

So with this system a 4th or 5th place team could tank the last game of the regular season to miss the playoffs to secure the 1.01?

No, only the 5th and 6th place teams could secure the 1.01 and you are correct, you could effectively tank that very last game to go from 1.02 to 1.01.

[Black Adam]

In other words the winner of the losers bracket has the best chance at the 1st pick but nothing is garenteed.

This is exactly what my current system does, but the 1.01 is guaranteed.

Also, my current platform doesn't track PP as far as I know (NFL).