Proposed:
- Change the lottery ballot weighting so that the higher you finish, the more ballots you get. 1st place gets 12, 2nd gets 11, etc down to last place gets one.
Implementation:
- Starting 2010-11 season
Rationale:
- The prospect draft already rewards lower placing teams with tools to build for the future (unless they decide to trade them away) by way of high PrD picks. We don't need to do the same for the lottery.
- This way, there is incentive to finish as high as possible, so trading away buckets o' stuff at year's end needs to be tempered by potential for lost ballots in the lottery
15 comments:
I think the "Herbivore Bonus" is a relic from a time when the prospect draft was not seen as being so significant. I agree that that is the proper place to promote the clubs that need more help. (On this point, however, ought we to consider some mechanism to deter "tanking" for a prospect. I don't believe it has ever been a problem in the FunHL but that is perhaps because the Ovechkins and Crosby's were selected as underagers.)
As for Dan's proposal, I would like to pose an additional question. Is the issue simply one of weighting the lottery in order of finish?
Is the difference between finishing 11th or 10th that big a deal? Obviously the Herbivore is punishment enough for finishing last but the goal is to keep as many GMs engaged for as long as possible.
The race for the Predator Cup, by the end of the season, rarely involves more than 3 teams - and often only two (though this season Brian and I pulled away unusually early).
The race to avoid the Herbie is, again, usually a two team one (though some times it can have as many as 3 teams).
Could the weighting of the lottery reflect a bigger "prize" for one's ranking in positions 3-9 than those from 1-2 or 10-11? And how would one do it?
There definately should be a change to it. The herbie hardly seems like a deterant and i dont recall teams trying to sell their way out of last place besides myself in my first year.
Didnt richard try to push for a lotto change awhile back that had more of an incentive to finish higher up than the current plan?
Maybe something like the nhl style where u can only move up 4 spots... for example i finish 8th and i am the first chip out of the bag i can take 4th or higher and i am boxed out of the higher picks completely.
Chris, that is an interesting idea. The lottery isn't to determine the slot selection per se but rather is a modification of the slot selection order. Hmmmm, this has posibilities.
Dan's motion is a good one, and in principle I support it.
But, I'd weight the ballots based off relative (rather than ranked) standing at the finish... so just finishing up high is rewarding.
If you want people to stay in the race, then you can't harshly punish them for finishing in sixth ... 20 points behind first.
So, Something like 1st place always gets 21 chips, and 12th place always gets 1 chip. The range is divided into 20 equal portions, and GMs assigned chips according to their finishing position.
If you really want to reward the pred cup with something greater than glory, then you could say that no one, other than them, can have more than 20 chips.
Richard.
FWIW, the chip system, with my proposal for 2010-11 would have resulted in:
Bladerunners: 21 chips
Highlanders: 18 chips
Knights Templar: 9 chips
PV, Shadowmen: 8 chips
Scourge: 7 chips
Edge, Great Whites: 6 chips
Ramapithicenes: 5 chips
Wolves, Severed Heads: 4 chips
Lost Boys: 1 chip.
Seems to me something like that would incentivize everyone to fight until the end... the % of ballots you'll get in the bag is entirely relative to your performance... not your teams rank.
How about something that awards partication.
1 chip to start
1 chip for the first active player trade made with a GM that season. Off season and prospect and/or draft pick trades do not count.
1 chip for each draft participated in either online or in person.
1 chip for each week you win.
I disagree with Richard's idea.
First, there are many factors that can lead to a low standing at years end that are completly out of our control, such as injuries, death, slumps etc.
I do however think that Rob's idea has merit, but I think it should be tweeked as such...
Each GM starts the season with 26 chips (one for each week of the FuNHL season).
+1 chip for highest weekly point total(in case of ties each gets a chip).
-1 chip for lowest weekly point total (in case of ties each looses a chip).
At the end of the regular season, the GM with the most chips chooses his slot first and so on down the line.
In case of equal number of chips, selection is based on total points with highest choosing first and so on down the line.
Since in theory, we all start each season equally, based strictly on points (0), we each have the same chance at winning and loosing chips.
From a historical perspective the 'Herbivore bonus' was the relic of a time period where a particular GM who was persistently finishing poorly suggested that the system was perpetuating that low level of performance by repeatedly forcing the last (and lower) place teams into poor slot selection spots. Since then we rejigged the system to give the worst place team the most ballots, followed by the 1st place, 2nd, etc.
Personally, I'd be all for dumping the weighted lottery and moving to a more simple unweighted one (I like simple). Every team has a fair shot through the Royal Crown Bag of Fate to have their favored slot selection, and while it takes away from some incentive to finish higher rather than lower, I have trouble thinking that such incentives prick the conscience of our GMs more than our brute competitive natures already do.
I dont think there should be equal opportunity to get the coveted 1st overall pick. As is stands now ppl are into the pool for a month or two and then its determined they arent in a run so things kinda quiet down until its time to dump their team at the end of the year... I would like to see some sort of heavier weighted system like richards that rewards you for trying to hit 6th place instead of barely submitting your lineups and settling for 9th place.. last definately doesnt need the most chips with the prospect bonus they currently receive.
I agree that a change is necessary. I like Richard's and Chris' ideas. Not sure if I like them together though...
I think a chip system weighted for activity is too onerous to track, especially given the work involved to track trades, prospects, draft picks, and stats already.
I'd also be happy with a straight "sequence" of slot selection where the baseline is first selection to 1st place finisher, through last selection to Herby winner but with a modification along the lines of what Chris suggests...but:
The challenge is what do we want to reward? If the default is first slot selection to 1st place, last selection to last place, what is the lottery for? To give lower teams a chance to move up? If so, it defeats the purpose, as we then start rewarding lower place finishers with better odds to move up.
And if the intent is to give more weight to higher finishers, why do we need to do more than giving slot selection in order of finishing? Why should 2nd or 3rd place have a chance to supercede 1st place for first slot choice? (aside from the interest factor of having a lottery itself)
Finally we run the risk of dynasty's if we favour winners too heavily - do we want the winner to potentially always have the option of the 1st overall pick next year? That could be a heavy factor in perpetuating a winning franchise continuing to win, which though nice, can be less than encouraging to the other 11 teams...
I still think we should consider something based on a win/loss scenario.
1 chip (WIN) for each weekly win
-1 chip (LOSS) for each weekly loss
This can be done in par with the Challenge Cup.
This format makes it possible for a team not finishing in the top 2 or 3 Predator Cup standings to actually finish the season with the most chips (WINS), therefore garnering that GM the first choice of ED slots.
This also reflects, more accuratley, how good or bad a frannchise performs over the season. And one's fate is not being pulled randomly from the perverbial "Crown Royal bag of fate (or chance)".
Mike.
I dont think your chip method really works. What if, however unlikely it is, my team wins the pool but happened to run into a hotter team every week during the h2h games and i lost every week. So i would have the best team but would end up with the least amount of chips.
Yes.
I believe that is called Parity?
You won the Predator Cup though.
What more do you want?
I do like the current system as I do not think first place should necessarily get the most chips but nor should last. I could go for a system that gives each person 1 chip and that is it. But to me a system that rewards participation is ideal.
1 chip to start.
1 chip for first place in a week (not H2H)
-1 chip for last place in a week.
1 chip if you win an award (Predator, H2H, Omnivore, Herbie)
1 chip for each draft you do yourself. Lists not included.
I still like the idea of one chip for the first active player trade with each GM (max 11 chips as 11 other GMs) but agree it would have to be tracked.
Post a Comment