Potential Points (POLL) : Yay, nay, whatever?

[Phaded]

So - potential points has popped up as a discussion in three recent threads.
It seems to typically come up around this time of year when seeding is being determined, people have discussions about tanking, or whatever it might be.

Anyone who has been paying attention knows how I feel about it.

That said, I am kind of curious how the general public feels about it overall.

Vote in the poll, and feel free to discuss or debate it if you like.
I personally won't add my feelings about it as I already did in another thread - but this might be a good place for it rather than it taking over all these separate threads.

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

I understand why some leagues would want this, but I'm not a fan. There should be no need for potential points as long as the bylaws state that best lineups should be set through Week 13, and the commissioner is on top of things.

[mild]

We use it to determine draft order as an anti-tanking measure. That's it.

Definitely don't think it should be used for determining any form of playoff seeding.

[Pac_Eddy]

We use it to determine draft order as an anti-tanking measure. That's it.

Definitely don't think it should be used for determining any form of playoff seeding.

I've never seen it used for playoff seeding. It's great for non playoff team draft picks though.

[thebeast]

Yeah, I’ve never seen it used for playoff seeding. We use it for rookie draft order for non-championship bracket teams. Basically the team who had the worst possible starting lineup despite good or bad management gets the first pick, which I think serves its purpose to get the weakest team the best pick. No idea why it would be controversial.

[Hottoddies]

As a commissioner I don't really want to play the role of the cop. Using potential points to determine the draft order for non-playoff teams is a great hands-off method to render tanking useless.

[Big Al]

As a commissioner I don't really want to play the role of the cop. Using potential points to determine the draft order for non-playoff teams is a great hands-off method to render tanking useless.

This is how it is used in one of my leagues, non playoff teams draft order. I wish my other leagues went to it.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

As a person who clearly had the worst team in the league a few years ago I got 5 wins on a fluke, I feel like potential points should be used for the non playoff seeding. The worst team should always get the best pick, and so on and so forth. It also prevents tanking or any suspect lineup decisions. Even in high integrity leagues, like I said the worst teams should get the best picks, makes the entire league more healthy and competitive.

[Straycatz2]

How does potential points work and how to calculate?

[qazxswedcvfrtgbnhyuj]

How does potential points work and how to calculate?

It means that no matter how you set your lineup, the site also counts the points that your best possible lineup could have gotten as well. So your end of season potential points will be what you would have ended up with had you set your perfect lineup every week. Sites likw MFL calculate it for you.

In all leagues I've seen it is used separately from regular standings, strictly to determine the draft order for non playoff teams. It's a good prevention method for tanking because it makes it impossible, as your lineup does not matter.

Personally I'm all for it. It just helps the actual worst teams out a bit, which is what you want imho. Nothing worse than having the worst points for and worst potential points but not getting the 1.01 because your terrible team randomly got a win or two.

[_yeti]

I voted indifferent but also want to point out a potential unintended consequence.

I am in a league with no taxi and no IR that uses potential points for draft order. I will roster a lot of good players on IR that were dropped by other teams or rookies I believe in that aren't playing or playing much yet. These will be my back of the roster slots while I start my core group of players.

There are other owners who may not realize their team isn't very good or needs work or even as we all see, take the approach of rostering veteran players too long or players that aren't really able to be started with high confidence who have random big games while on their bench. I have no need for that type of player in any league, but we all see rosters that aren't competing filled with veteran guys who the owner won't trade or drop. Those type of teams might end up with higher potential points off of players they didn't even start and get a worse pick because of it while it may slightly help a team that has a strong core group but uses their end of roster differently. It's not a huge deal and probably only moves teams a pick or two but that difference can be huge.

At the end of the day, probably less variance to use potential points than just going off standings but it isn't perfectly "fair" either. Does do a lot to destroy any ideas owners might have of tanking or micro-tanking (a term I just made up) when they can't affect their pick by W/L record.

[Cult of Dionysus]

I voted indifferent but also want to point out a potential unintended consequence.

I am in a league with no taxi and no IR that uses potential points for draft order. I will roster a lot of good players on IR that were dropped by other teams or rookies I believe in that aren't playing or playing much yet. These will be my back of the roster slots while I start my core group of players.

There are other owners who may not realize their team isn't very good or needs work or even as we all see, take the approach of rostering veteran players too long or players that aren't really able to be started with high confidence who have random big games while on their bench. I have no need for that type of player in any league, but we all see rosters that aren't competing filled with veteran guys who the owner won't trade or drop. Those type of teams might end up with higher potential points off of players they didn't even start and get a worse pick because of it while it may slightly help a team that has a strong core group but uses their end of roster differently. It's not a huge deal and probably only moves teams a pick or two but that difference can be huge.

At the end of the day, probably less variance to use potential points than just going off standings but it isn't perfectly "fair" either. Does do a lot to destroy any ideas owners might have of tanking or micro-tanking (a term I just made up) when they can't affect their pick by W/L record.

Great post.

I personally feel the benefits of Potential Points far outweighs the negatives.

Id also point out that Win Loss records can be extremely deceiving in that a team with a poor roster and substantially fewer Points For and Potential Points can easily be up 2 or even 3 wins over a handful of better teams just because it won a couple of fluky matchups.

There is no perfect weight to allocate draft picks. However, Potential Points all but ELIMINATES conventional tanking (guys benching good players and/or starting guys who are hurt or on bye). Furthermore, it also partly eliminates the damage caused by an inactive owner.

And for those who argue that tanking can be kept in check with anti-tanking rules...

First, it is human nature to tank. The benefit and appeal of a higher draft pick are far too great a temptation for our weak wills. Throw 12 or 16 managers into a league, and theres a good chance more than one will take a bite from the .

Second, done carefully, it's hard to determine when an owner is tanking. This is especially true in with large rosters.

Third, unless you run a "one strike and you are out policy" and reverse all bad starting lineups (very slippery slope), draft order WILL be influenced each year by some form of tanking or inactivity in just about EVERY league.

Why deal with all that crap when you can avoid it?

Also, if a team is rostering a lot of veterans, that team has a lot of additional value which could be converted into future late picks. So I don't necessarily agree that such a team is getting penalized by the Potential Points system over a team with a shallow roster or a stars and scrubs/prospects roster.

Phaded, are you coming around yet on PPs?

[Pac_Eddy]

Does do a lot to destroy any ideas owners might have of tanking or micro-tanking (a term I just made up) when they can't affect their pick by W/L record.

Micro-tanking is a great term.

I think this is what potential points handles that Phaded's policy ignores. His policy is to harshly deal with blatant tanking. The less obvious stuff is (rightly) ignored as it's near impossible to distinguish between micro-tanking and playing matchups and/or your gut feels.

[_yeti]

Good points CoD.

To your point of W/L being deceiving in my sig league we go on standings. I traded for a first with our oft-ired "likely high pick" in the offseason. I was thinking it could go 1.1 or 1.2. He made a blockbuster deal trading OBJ for Godwin, Kirk, and some other pieces. He STILL finished 9th in scoring but with our divisions and some luck he made the playoffs so my pick ends up 1.9. Literally the people who scored 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 11th, and 12th all didn't make the playoffs but he scored 9th overall and DID. So the pick is 1.9.

Potential points would have made a big difference there. Also, if he still had his pick, with PP he would be around 1.4 bc it is very unlikely he wins in the postseason, but based on standings he would still have 1.9 off the fluke W/L record.

As an aside I traded two firsts (had three at one point) for what I projected as 1.1 and THAT pick did end up 1.1 either standings or PP, so there is some justice in the world =)

[_yeti]

Does do a lot to destroy any ideas owners might have of tanking or micro-tanking (a term I just made up) when they can't affect their pick by W/L record.

Micro-tanking is a great term.

I think this is what potential points handles that Phaded's policy ignores. His policy is to harshly deal with blatant tanking. The less obvious stuff is (rightly) ignored as it's near impossible to distinguish between micro-tanking and playing matchups and/or your gut feels.

Absolutely. Human nature if a person is eliminated early in the year and has nothing to play for but pick position, if there is a gut-call, an on-the-fence pick for a starter, it takes a lot of commitment and integrity to not start the player that might do worse.