Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

Zyme wrote:

dd10snoop28 wrote:I mean, this might be too much work, but what if we dropped every players' rating in the league by 5 points and see what that does? By rating, I mean strength/inside/passing etc... things like that. Not the letter rating.

Potential issues:
1. any player already at the minimum rating will benefit since they can't be reduced. Solution: I think this is extremely rare
2. how much would 5 rating points change the inflation? I don't actually know, but the league ratings by 5% seems like it would help a lot


What other issues would there be ?? I can't think of any besides just the time that it would take to reduce every rating for every player by 5. thoughts?

That wouldn’t change the underlying issue, just make the players ratings grade drop. The existing current issue of a lot of B, B- to C+ players that can be starters or 6th men. The only long term solution i see is having weaker back end of draft classes to pull the ratings of the role players down or to cull the FA pool. Perhaps “retire” a number of older players at the end of seaons.

I think we need to narrow down the problem.

Here is where I think the problem(s) lies when it comes to inflation / how the league is setup:

1- Generally, ratings across the league have risen too high for every type of player - including stars, starters, role players, and bench.
2- However, and more specifically, there seems to be a surplus of "fringe starters" in the league.

If those are the two main problems, here is another idea, which is a slight modification of my previous idea:

1. Each team sets aside 4 players (stars/all-stars) who will see a reduction of only -3 for each attribute. 3% deflation
2. The remainder of players of each team + in FA will see -5 reduction for each attribute. 5% deflation

This reduces inflation overall - and also focuses on reducing the amount of "starters/6th men" type players in the league,

I see a lot of holes in this proposal but it's an idea.

Zyme wrote:

dd10snoop28 wrote:I mean, this might be too much work, but what if we dropped every players' rating in the league by 5 points and see what that does? By rating, I mean strength/inside/passing etc... things like that. Not the letter rating.

Potential issues:
1. any player already at the minimum rating will benefit since they can't be reduced. Solution: I think this is extremely rare
2. how much would 5 rating points change the inflation? I don't actually know, but the league ratings by 5% seems like it would help a lot


What other issues would there be ?? I can't think of any besides just the time that it would take to reduce every rating for every player by 5. thoughts?

That wouldn’t change the underlying issue, just make the players ratings grade drop. The existing current issue of a lot of B, B- to C+ players that can be starters or 6th men. The only long term solution i see is having weaker back end of draft classes to pull the ratings of the role players down or to cull the FA pool. Perhaps “retire” a number of older players at the end of seaons.

I think that might actually be a negative, older players on big contracts are one of the few negatives for top teams.
Maybe if we wanted to do that it should be more that anyone who signs a 1 year deal and is over 33 or so retires at the end of the year automatically unless he is re-signed during the re-signing period.
That will solve the problem of all these solid or good vets who get signed year to year for no risk, or end up on MLEs.

Edit- actually I think something like that would be really good for the league, basically it eliminates one of the more unrealistic things that happens in DASL, which is starter or 6th man level players signing year to year.

Zyme wrote:

dd10snoop28 wrote:I mean, this might be too much work, but what if we dropped every players' rating in the league by 5 points and see what that does? By rating, I mean strength/inside/passing etc... things like that. Not the letter rating.

Potential issues:
1. any player already at the minimum rating will benefit since they can't be reduced. Solution: I think this is extremely rare
2. how much would 5 rating points change the inflation? I don't actually know, but the league ratings by 5% seems like it would help a lot


What other issues would there be ?? I can't think of any besides just the time that it would take to reduce every rating for every player by 5. thoughts?

That wouldn’t change the underlying issue, just make the players ratings grade drop. The existing current issue of a lot of B, B- to C+ players that can be starters or 6th men. The only long term solution i see is having weaker back end of draft classes to pull the ratings of the role players down or to cull the FA pool. Perhaps “retire” a number of older players at the end of seaons.

I think both of these ideas warrant some deeper exploring.

I’d be curious to hear jabba and OO’s thoughts on these given they create the drafts/players.

IMO the only rating that is inflated and needs to be toned down is blocking. In my other league we have 3 dudes total over 2 BPG. Here, you need like 3.5 to crack the top 10. If you look at this league and compare it to reality, that stat is the only one that stands out as an absolute outlier.

JB wrote:IMO the only rating that is inflated and needs to be toned down is blocking. In my other league we have 3 dudes total over 2 BPG. Here, you need like 3.5 to crack the top 10. If you look at this league and compare it to reality, that stat is the only one that stands out as an absolute outlier.

I like this. How much does high strength affect shot blocking if any?

pistolpetejr wrote:

JB wrote:IMO the only rating that is inflated and needs to be toned down is blocking. In my other league we have 3 dudes total over 2 BPG. Here, you need like 3.5 to crack the top 10. If you look at this league and compare it to reality, that stat is the only one that stands out as an absolute outlier.

I like this. How much does high strength affect shot blocking if any?

It doesn't do much I don't think. Blocking feels like a mostly stand-alone rating. Height probably plays as much of a factor as strength does, and height doesn't do much either

Maybe there wouldn't be so many 6th man type players in FA pool if
a) there weren't as many tanking teams as there are
b) tanking teams had some reason to take somewhat decent players instead of loading their teams with the worst players

Laphonso Ellis and Bo Outlaw are just examples of bad scouting by gms and tanking teams, who usually have the most money available, not wanting to spend money on a potentially good player.

Want to thin players, change the lottery odds and make it less advantageous to suck so bad.

bellsduck wrote:Maybe there wouldn't be so many 6th man type players in FA pool if
a) there weren't as many tanking teams as there are
b) tanking teams had some reason to take somewhat decent players instead of loading their teams with the worst players

Laphonso Ellis and Bo Outlaw are just examples of bad scouting by gms and tanking teams, who usually have the most money available, not wanting to spend money on a potentially good player.

Want to thin players, change the lottery odds and make it less advantageous to suck so bad.

I think that’s already been done.

Boom wrote:

bellsduck wrote:Maybe there wouldn't be so many 6th man type players in FA pool if
a) there weren't as many tanking teams as there are
b) tanking teams had some reason to take somewhat decent players instead of loading their teams with the worst players

Laphonso Ellis and Bo Outlaw are just examples of bad scouting by gms and tanking teams, who usually have the most money available, not wanting to spend money on a potentially good player.

Want to thin players, change the lottery odds and make it less advantageous to suck so bad.

I think that’s already been done.

I mean make it so even that it's almost negligible. Might encourage some teams to keep players or sign players they'd otherwise not want to sign or keep.

I am aware of this conversation and will be conducting an audit of the league

Once I complete that, it should provide a clear picture of possible inflation and next steps

Oregon Ownage wrote:I am aware of this conversation and will be conducting an audit of the league

Once I complete that, it should provide a clear picture of possible inflation and next steps

Nice. Also, let me know if you need a hand on the nefarious audit. That one has been taking a while, and happy to assist in any way....

Lottery and inflation should be top of the priority for discussions ImVHo.

UOducksTK1 wrote:Lottery and inflation should be top of the priority for discussions ImVHo.

I would agree, but I never see people making comments if they don’t have a bone to pick.

I think inflation should be discussed. The lottery is working exactly as it should, which is to make the rewards for blatant tanking lower.

Cellar-door wrote:I think inflation should be discussed. The lottery is working exactly as it should, which is to make the rewards for blatant tanking lower.

True, but it is frustrating when you have guys like the Grizz get three #1 picks in a row and in some of the strongest drafts in history