RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

2021-2022 Fantasy League?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 1:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
Queenie wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Thank you so much for organizing! I would also volunteer to help with the administrative side as needed -- just let me know.

I was wondering about imposing more limitations on rosters. Like for example, you have to have a certain number of players from mid-major teams, or you have to have players from various conferences, etc. Just throwing an idea out there, take it or leave it! Let me know if this has or hasn't worked in the past. (edit: maybe this happens naturally enough that an extra rule isn't needed!)


Because the nature of the game emphasizes stats, not who said stats are against, mid-major studs are more desirable than solid but unspectacular P5 players. When the husband and I played, Damika Martinez at Iona was our go-to.

And there's usually a good conference spread to have as many active players available as possible. There was a conference with Wednesday games that always had more than its share of picks.


do join us again! this game is a bit different so if you do poorly one week, there is always hope for the next week. And I think the rules are fairly set so there shouldn't be the haggling that some people seemed to torture us with in the old days.


As a former haggler, I plead guilty.

We’d love to have you on board! Even if you just take all your players from the MAAC!


Hoopsmom



Joined: 05 Apr 2017
Posts: 680



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 3:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Just to get an idea, what stats do you go by? Is it purely offensive stats? Or do you take into account rebounds, blocks, steals, etc.?


Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 3:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The statistical categories are: Points, Rebounds, Field Goal Percentage, FT Percentage, Assists, Turnovers, Blocks, Steals, and Three Pointers Made. So, a number of categories you could focus on to get a win!


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 5:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Coyotes wrote:
The statistical categories are: Points, Rebounds, Field Goal Percentage, FT Percentage, Assists, Turnovers, Blocks, Steals, and Three Pointers Made. So, a number of categories you could focus on to get a win!


and 3%.
Be sure to get someone who gets lots of TOs [giggle].
Ok, to be clear, that's a negative category. We used to do fouls too as a negative but decided that since fouling can be used strategically, especially at the end of games, it got removed from our game.


Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 5:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

That’s what I get for trying to type that out on my phone.


undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2862



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 5:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So when are we drafting? Twisted Evil



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
adamj95



Joined: 09 May 2014
Posts: 2301
Location: East Grand Forks, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 6:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What is the exact draft order? Do we want to do in order of when people joined or random? I'm ready to start if I am picking first. It does not matter to me.



_________________
4 time WNBA Champion, 3rd all time in Assists, Minnesota's own: LINDSAY WHALEN.
Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 7:37 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think I am going to give until the end of the day Friday to join before we start drafting. I will enlist a randomizer in GEF to provide the draft order and we’ll start a rolling draft unless anyone has any objections.


Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18013
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 9:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
Queenie wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Thank you so much for organizing! I would also volunteer to help with the administrative side as needed -- just let me know.

I was wondering about imposing more limitations on rosters. Like for example, you have to have a certain number of players from mid-major teams, or you have to have players from various conferences, etc. Just throwing an idea out there, take it or leave it! Let me know if this has or hasn't worked in the past. (edit: maybe this happens naturally enough that an extra rule isn't needed!)


Because the nature of the game emphasizes stats, not who said stats are against, mid-major studs are more desirable than solid but unspectacular P5 players. When the husband and I played, Damika Martinez at Iona was our go-to.

And there's usually a good conference spread to have as many active players available as possible. There was a conference with Wednesday games that always had more than its share of picks.


do join us again! this game is a bit different so if you do poorly one week, there is always hope for the next week. And I think the rules are fairly set so there shouldn't be the haggling that some people seemed to torture us with in the old days.


I'm reading that head-to-head rules change thing and it is way too much for me. Thanks, but no thanks.



_________________
All your Rebecca are belong to the Liberty.

(now with spelling variations)
GEF34



Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14102



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/21 10:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Coyotes wrote:
I think I am going to give until the end of the day Friday to join before we start drafting. I will enlist a randomizer in GEF to provide the draft order and we’ll start a rolling draft unless anyone has any objections.


I will the final list for who is participating and I can send Coyote the list so they can post it, or if they don't mind I can post it early Saturday, assuming Friday at 11:59pm is the cut off.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 11:04 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

two minor clarifications:
The wording is bit vague on this: can a TF be 6'2" or does she have to be 6'2-1/2" or over. I think we used 6'2" before.

And if a player is listed as a G/F and is 6'2" can she also be a TF? My inclination would be to say no, but I think we should make it clear in the rules.

you da boss, so whatever you say goes.

I absolutely don't have enough time to do my usual thorough research. I won't be surprised if I draft someone who isn't even playing this year. In my initial poke around, there are a hellava lot of 5th year seniors or grad students on teams. Good for them getting the extra year of education and play!


tbinta



Joined: 29 May 2013
Posts: 656
Location: Bay Area


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 12:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Keep simple

TF start at 6-2 (no 6-2 + half)
TF/GF if player GF and 6-2 should be able play both

didn’t we make TF because not enough straight C in league
Or NCAAW WBB

I think good idea so let’s continue to roll with it



_________________
The Bay Is iN The Area
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 12:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

yes, we made the TF designation because quite a few F's were actually playing the center position and very few were labelled C. My thought on GF is that even if they are tall, they are unlikely to be playing the center position. But I will go with whatever y'all decide.


undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2862



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 1:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I would say the TF position should start at 6'2'' -- case in point is Naz Hillmon, one of the most productive true posts in WCBB who definitely plays the 5 but is only listed as 6'2''.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the spirit of TF "position" is someone who plays the 5. But since many players who spend a majority of time at the 5 are listed simply as F (rather than F/C or just C), y'all said a 6'2'' F could count for our game. A player listed as G/F will not be primarily playing the 5. For that reason, my gut reaction is that someone listed as G/F should be ineligible to play "TF" for our purposes.

An interesting potential counterexample is Maryland. Their tallish (at least 6'2'') players include:
Mimi Collins 6'3'' F
Emma Chardon 6'2'' F

Chloe Bibby 6'3'' G/F
Angel Reese 6'3'' G/F

Shyanne Sellers 6'2'' G
Diamond Miller 6'3'' G


Now we can all agree that Collins (who is their actual starting 5) and Chardon should qualify as TF. And we can all agree that Sellers and Miller do not qualify, even though they meet the height requirement. So what to do with Bibby and Reese?

Well, Bibby started at the 4 last year and mostly plays on the perimeter due to her 3 point shot. BUT, when Collins came out of the game, either Bibby or Reese would usually slide over to the 5. Granted, Maryland's 5 doesn't function like a true C because they relied a lot on fast break points and a 5-out, "positionless" type offense. But defensively at least, they would guard the other team's 5. So I can see us going either way. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Despite this counterexample, my personal opinion is that a >6'2'' player listed as G/F should not count as a TF for us. (In short, I agree with myrtle.) But I'll be happy either way. Very Happy



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
tbinta



Joined: 29 May 2013
Posts: 656
Location: Bay Area


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 3:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
yes, we made the TF designation because quite a few F's were actually playing the center position and very few were labelled C. My thought on GF is that even if they are tall, they are unlikely to be playing the center position. But I will go with whatever y'all decide.


Oh I thought we were just use height to identify who “could” play C position not who has played the position but were not labeled C

Which means I don’t know… I still think anyone 6-2 or taller should be eligible for TF (C ) designation…

So if this is case, only F 6-2 and up can play TF position?



_________________
The Bay Is iN The Area
Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 3:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'll codify the rulings as follows barring any objections to make it simple.

1. A TF must be 6'2'' or taller. She must be listed as one of F/C/P on the roster. A player who is listed as a F and over 6'2'' can play either F, U, or TF.
2. A G/F or G over 6'2'' does not qualify as a true forward.

My thoughts are as follows -- a G/F already has a great deal of flexibility in which position they can play. It doesn't seem quite right that they'd be able to play TF/C as well for our purposes.

I am going to propose for the rolling draft, that if someone doesn't make a pick within 48 hours, we will move on to the next player -- and they can make their pick when they return. If anyone has any objections, let it be known. If people want to PM me their e-mail, I'm happy to try and send e-mail reminders when a pick comes up. I will expressly use this e-mail for league purposes only. If you know that you're going to be away from Rebkells for a few days, you are more than welcome to send me a PM with instructions on who to pick on your behalf along with backup options in a list order. I will do my best to follow those instructions and steal players from my own wishlist.

@GEF -- I am okay with you posting the draft order on Saturday morning as soon as you have it. I will be out that morning at coffee with a friend, but will post reminders as soon as I get back. I

For our current roster we have:

1. Adamj
2. OKStateGuy
3. UCBart
4. Undersized_Post
5. Tally
6. Hoopmom
7. Coyotes
8. Cooper2009
9. HoopSmom
10. Myrtle
11. Tbinta
12. I'm really hoping that Matt comes back for another season or someone else (Calbearman?!?!) jumps in. I haven't heard from him. Sad

I'm going to start making templates for schedules and saving them below. This is a proposed 12 Week Schedule as a starting point -- You can all ignore this, I'm mainly doing this as a starting point as a I figure out the best way to schedule this. My thought is that there might be six weeks where players play two games, and we use the extra five weeks to finish a double round robin season so you play each player twice. Now, that number could change depending on whether we get a twelfth or not.

wk 1: Nov 9 - Nov 15
P1 v P2
P3 v P12
P4 vs. P11
P5 vs. P10
P6 vs. P9
P7 vs. P8


wk 2: Nov 16 - Nov 22
P12 vs. P2
P1 vs. P7
P8 vs. P6
P9 vs. P5
P10 vs. P4
P11 vs. P3

wk 3: Nov 23-29
P5 vs. P8
P6 vs. P7
P12 vs. P1
P2 vs. P4
P3 vs. P10
P4 vs. P9

wk 4: Nov 30 - Dec 6th
P8 vs. P2
P9 vs. P12
P10 vs. P11
P1 vs. P5
P6 vs. P4
P7 vs. P3

period 5: Dec 7th-13th

P12 vs. P8
P2 vs. P7
P3 vs. P6
P4 vs. P5
P10 vs. P1
P11 vs. P9

period 6: December 14th-December 20th

P4 vs. P2
P5 vs. P12
P6 vs. P11
P7 vs. P10
P8 vs. P9
P1 vs. P3


wk 7: December 21st-December 27th

P8 vs. P1
P9 vs. P7
P10 vs. P6
P11 vs. P5
P12 v. P4
P2 v. P3

wk 8: December 28th - January 3rd 2022

P11 vs. P12
P6 v. P1
P7 v. P5
P8 v. P4
P9 vs. P3
P10 vs. P2


wk 9: January 4 - January 10th

P4 vs. P7
P5 vs P6
P1 vs. P11
P12 v. P10
P2 vs. P9
P3 vs. P8

wk 10: January 11th - January 17th

P7 vs. P12
P8 vs. P11
P9 vs. P10
P4 vs. P1
P5 vs P3
P6 vs. P2

wk 11: January 18th - January 24th

P11 vs. P 7
P12 vs. P6
P2 vs. P5
P3 vs. P4
P1 vs. P9
P10 vs. P8

week 12: January 25th-January 31

Schedule TBD

week 13: Feb 1-Feb 7th

Schedule TBD

wk 14: Feb 8th - Feb 14th

TBD.

Week 15: Feb 15th-February 21


Week 16: Feb 22-March 5th



The draft order will be a snake draft:

Round 1.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Round 2

11.
10.
9
8.
7.
6.
5.
4.
3.
2.
1.

Round 3

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

and so on.


tbinta



Joined: 29 May 2013
Posts: 656
Location: Bay Area


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 3:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I’m with it..

Thanks Coyotes, GEF, myrtle and everyone joining and getting this going again..

The commentary and competition is very enjoyable and useful to me

😊



_________________
The Bay Is iN The Area
undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2862



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 3:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Not me thinking TF stood for "tall forward" Laughing



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 3:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

undersized_post wrote:
Not me thinking TF stood for "tall forward" Laughing


Tall Forward, True Forward, Tree Forward, Tennessee Forward. SO MANY possible variations.

Yeah, I think we're all going to have to do our best to catch players who aren't playing this year or who are still around. We'll have tons of fun with the mess that the past year has brought us.

For example, I KNOW that the Wirth Twins from Gonzaga aren't back this year, but I could be wrong.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 4:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

yeah, for instance I saw an article that Micaela Kelly (CMU) was back, and I got excited since she was a studette for me....but she's not back. It's all crazy.

One thing to mention is that since it's a "friendly" game (sort of), if someone drafts a player that you know is not with a team, or is injured and out for the year, it's good sportsmanship to speak up so that fantasizer can make a different pick. It's especially important for the first 4 or 5 picks since that will be the core of our team.

I've already decided on my first three picks, so NOBODY BETTER TAKE THEM! Sometimes I find players that I think nobody will take, and right away someone (usually Coyote) snatches her right out from under my nose. grrrrrr.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 7:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
myrtle wrote:
Queenie wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
Thank you so much for organizing! I would also volunteer to help with the administrative side as needed -- just let me know.

I was wondering about imposing more limitations on rosters. Like for example, you have to have a certain number of players from mid-major teams, or you have to have players from various conferences, etc. Just throwing an idea out there, take it or leave it! Let me know if this has or hasn't worked in the past. (edit: maybe this happens naturally enough that an extra rule isn't needed!)


Because the nature of the game emphasizes stats, not who said stats are against, mid-major studs are more desirable than solid but unspectacular P5 players. When the husband and I played, Damika Martinez at Iona was our go-to.

And there's usually a good conference spread to have as many active players available as possible. There was a conference with Wednesday games that always had more than its share of picks.


do join us again! this game is a bit different so if you do poorly one week, there is always hope for the next week. And I think the rules are fairly set so there shouldn't be the haggling that some people seemed to torture us with in the old days.


I'm reading that head-to-head rules change thing and it is way too much for me. Thanks, but no thanks.


Ma'am, for a jeopardy maven, this is a piece of cake! Simple version: Each week you have one opponent. You pick 8 players from your roster to play that week and your opponent picks 8 players from his/her roster to play that week. Each of your 8 players only plays one game that week that counts. There are 10 categories in which your players can excel. If your players win at least 6 categories, then you win the matchup. The next week you start over with a new opponent. In the end, the fantasizer with the most wins, wins. wahoo.

c'mon down and join our craziness! Or send Happie!


Hoopsmom



Joined: 05 Apr 2017
Posts: 680



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/21/21 8:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I would just like to clarify, on some posts it says TF is over 6’2”. But other posts it says 6’2” or over. I think starting 6’2” or over is correct???


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32326



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/22/21 12:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hoopsmom wrote:
I would just like to clarify, on some posts it says TF is over 6’2”. But other posts it says 6’2” or over. I think starting 6’2” or over is correct???


yes. coyote has agreed to 6'2" or over. I think he will put it in the official rules when he gets time.


Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/22/21 11:06 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What's it going to take for us to lure that elusive 12th player?

In any case, I'm curious to see who will be drafted starting tomorrow!


Hoopsmom



Joined: 05 Apr 2017
Posts: 680



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/22/21 11:12 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Given that games start in about 2 weeks, do we really want to give people 48 hours to make a choice? Should we say 24 hours? If you’re going to be away, send somebody - administrator or whatever - your next few choices and they can make your pick for you or you can make it when you return to the site.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin