Just now, mr_hunt said:

it's currently set to start 3 utility players...meaning any position. i can lower than to 1 or 2 if you guys think we have too many starting positions. we currently have 10...so that's 120 players for our 12 teams.  let me know. 

 

 

The NFL has 192 starters on offense that are ball carriers/eligible receivers (5 WR/RB/TE + QB). In a regular 12 team fantasy football league, ignoring K and DST, we start 84 players. Leagues don't even start half the starting players in the league, and those 192 starters don't include the Kareem Hunt, Pollard, Melvin Gordans, etc. that are backups who people draft. Having 120 starting players in NBA fantasy seems silly 

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

30 NBA teams / 120 players would be the top 4 of every NBA team starting.  I think it is OK, especially if there is a transaction limit.

i'm good either way. i think i have until an hour before our draft to make these kind of changes so let's see if anyone else gives a sheet about it. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

or i can get rid of the G and F starting positions and leave the 3 utility spots...makes things a little more flexible. we'd start 8 players instead of 10.

I suggest getting rid of the utility spots, keep G and F, and maybe add a F/C spot

2 minutes ago, Agent23 said:

The NFL has 192 starters on offense that are ball carriers/eligible receivers (5 WR/RB/TE + QB). In a regular 12 team fantasy football league, ignoring K and DST, we start 84 players. Leagues don't even start half the starting players in the league, and those 192 starters don't include the Kareem Hunt, Pollard, Melvin Gordans, etc. that are backups who people draft. Having 120 starting players in NBA fantasy seems silly 

i can kill the 3 utility spots....doesn't matter to me

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I suggest getting rid of the utility spots, keep G and F, and maybe add a F/C spot

or do this, which brings us to 8 starting spots. 

Since C is so think in the leage, I would be fine havng it be PG - SG - SF - PF - PF/C as the 5 "main" spots. Its hard to even find 12 legit Cs for all owners to start, and heaven forbid a second one since teams with basketball will want 2 players minimum for each position to slot into weekly lineups. 

3 minutes ago, Agent23 said:

Since C is so think in the leage, I would be fine havng it be PG - SG - SF - PF - PF/C as the 5 "main" spots. Its hard to even find 12 legit Cs for all owners to start, and heaven forbid a second one since teams with basketball will want 2 players minimum for each position to slot into weekly lineups. 

12 teams, each needing two centers.  We will have 120 players with the current format.  The 24th ranked eligble player at center is Donovan Mitchell, ranked #95.

3 minutes ago, downundermike said:

12 teams, each needing two centers.  We will have 120 players with the current format.  The 24th ranked eligble player at center is Donovan Mitchell, ranked #95.

the 6'1 guy that spent half a decade in Utah!?!

I am looking in the ESPN site now - they have gotten about 10x as liberal as who they assign a "C" designation to versus 5 years ago, so I guess having a starting C spot will actually be just fine

 

1 hour ago, mr_hunt said:

not that i already had a kate scott team name or anything.      

 

 

that's okay...you can have it. 

Oh youre too cool. 

Ill take the kate scott part out and just be Toe Bias.

imo, the more flexibility in roster slots, the better.

You cant really control how many games are on the slate for each night.

There may be nights where you have a guard or SF on your bench and he has a game that night. But you have an empty C spot because there are no centers from your team on the slate that night.

util spots allow you to play as many of your players as possible each night.

 

7 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Oh youre too cool. 

Ill take the kate scott part out and just be Toe Bias.

doesn't matter...I already changed mine. 

I think you guys, agent and DUM, are overthinking and overcomplicating the rosters with all your math and how many good centers there are.

Most leagues are standard, with the regular pre-set rosters. I dont think it should require this much tinkering. If I draft a great center, then you are going to have better guards than me. Ill still have to play my crap guards. Whats the difference?

2 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

doesn't matter...I already changed mine. 

then Ill keep it.

btw, alaa "liked" the toe bias meme I made & posted on twitter.

I remember it now. That was good.

Have we decided on a scoring system yet? Default Categories vs Rotisserie?

If its rotisserie, is it the new scoring system with 4 points for blocks and such? Or is it the old system?

These things affect pre-rankings.

commish's responsibility to supply the championship trophy for his league.

I like these ones.

https://www.trophysmack.com/products/26-36-silver-basketball-trophy?variant=14089961668669

https://www.trophysmack.com/products/26-36-silver-basketball-trophy?variant=14089961668669

4 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

commish's responsibility to supply the championship trophy for his league.

I like these ones.

How about you let the winners decide what trophy they get.

13 minutes ago, downundermike said:

How about you let the winners decide what trophy they get.

winnerS? Im not talking about participation trophies. You can pick that out.

i killed 2 of the utility positions so now we only have 1.  so it's 8 starters & 4 bench guys per roster.  also a limit of 3 player acquisitions per week. 

Is this set up in ESPN? I'm not seeing it.

19 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Is this set up in ESPN? I'm not seeing it.

yep. i reactivated the old espn league. 

25 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Is this set up in ESPN? I'm not seeing it.

https://fantasy.espn.com/basketball/team?leagueId=378553&teamId=9&seasonId=2023

@Gannan  if you changed the email you use on espn, that could explain it. if that's the case, just pm me your new email address. 

Draft a few days away. I presume the scoring settings will remain as they are right now. Correct?