Max Games Played. Is it a good rule in Fantasy Leagues?

[Wonko]

I am a diligent fantasy owner, and as such I always try to maximize games played in my leagues. I try to draft players from teams like Anaheim, Calgary, Washington and the Rangers. I carefully align my line up to make sure not too have to many players at each position (especially from the same team), and keep a good distribution of all positions. My league also allows for 2 FA pick ups a week which I often use to drop a waiver wire player who has a 1 game week for somebody who has say a 4 game week. I try not to do this too often as it can also bite you in the ass when you lose a guy or two to IR and you have already used up that weeks picks or god forbid your starting goalie goes down and you can't pick up the back up. The worst

So, I have won my league for the last two year in a row and I am winning again this year and one of the other owners noticed that I have 60 more games played than the second place team and it drops off from there. Thus, he has proposed that we put a maximum on games played to eliminate this part of the game. Just to be clear it is a level playing field for all, but obviously the less diligent owners will not get in as many games played as those who stay on top of their rosters. For example, in my other league (exact same set up) all the top 5 teams are within 30 games played of each other. Obviously the owners in this league are more diligent and or more savy about their line ups.

At any rate, I have heard of sites (I use fantrax) maximizing games played but I am not sure how one would put this in practice.

Could somebody explain to me how max games played would work in a cumulative scoring league and what type of parameters they use.

Do others prefer this system to the one I mention above that makes maximizing games played part of their fantasy strategy?

Not sure if we will implement this but some feedback on the ins and outs of maximizing games played would help me present it to the other GM's in the league.

Thanks,

Wonko.

[renello]

Your winning is not just maximizing games played. It is also a product of good decision making in redraft and trading. I can not see how limiting games played is of benefit to the league.

[Jouko-Pouko]

I don't like max games because it's such a difficult thing for GMs to track each week. "I have just one RW game left, I need to save it for my stud who plays on Sunday." And then on Sunday you notice he isn't playing.

And it's the same thing if you put max games for season. You save some games in the middle of the season and then realize you're not getting to the max in the end because your players are injured or scratched for whatever reasons.

What you're doing is perfectly fine and other GMs are just being a bit lazy if they're not doing the same.

[butch]

If I'm reading this right its a points only league , not head to head , not roto . From past experience in a casual public league setting at yahoo these leagues normally cap games played per position x the amount of games in a season . i.e , each forward position will be X 82 games , in baseball it would be 162 etc. Obviously , anyone can create a private points only league at fantrax or yahoo and not impose any gp limits or modify it so its a bit higher than 82 .

however , if its not in your league rulebook to cap games played then your not doing anything wrong by using the strategy you've used .

if its just a casual league that your playing in and the fellas want to trim it to 82 per position then theres nothing really wrong with that suggestion on their part ---but only if its a points only league .

if its h2h , no dice -keep gp limits away unless you need goalie minimums

[GSD]

First congrats on being an active owner. I have the same philosophy as you and constantly stream. Max games played is dumb. It helps lazy gms and penalizes active ones. Bad rule.

Ps how do you see games played? Is it yahoo? I used to see it on Yahoo, but not any more.

[butch]

First congrats on being an active owner. I have the same philosophy as you and constantly stream. Max games played is dumb. It helps lazy gms and penalizes active ones. Bad rule.

Ps how do you see games played? Is it yahoo? I used to see it on Yahoo, but not any more.

its not uncommon for ''points only'' leagues to have a cap of 82 games played per position

its actually a strategy in itself not to blow gp's on players slumping etc.

[GSD]

I see the strategy angle, just don't like it. Really don't see what any "cap" accomplishes.

[butch]

I see the strategy angle, just don't like it. Really don't see what any "cap" accomplishes.

I'm all for streaming in h2h . I just think points only is a different animal and if a league chooses to have 82 gp limits its pretty common

[horrorfan]

I see the strategy angle, just don't like it. Really don't see what any "cap" accomplishes.

In my opinion it makes it more of a challenge, using your bench as a bench (subbing in for slumps, injuries etc), rather than just plugging in all players who are playing that night.

[horrorfan]

At any rate, I have heard of sites (I use fantrax) maximizing games played but I am not sure how one would put this in practice.

Could somebody explain to me how max games played would work in a cumulative scoring league and what type of parameters they use.

Do others prefer this system to the one I mention above that makes maximizing games played part of their fantasy strategy?

Not sure if we will implement this but some feedback on the ins and outs of maximizing games played would help me present it to the other GM's in the league.

Thanks,

Wonko.

Maximum games (per positional slot) in a cumulative scoring league (e.g. points, roto) is very common. Usually, from my experience, it's 82 games per positional slot, so that if you start 3 centres for example, then you have 246 games available for that position. Once you hit the max, you don't accumulate points for that position for the rest of the season. So, strategy is important on who you start, rather than just plugging in whoever is active that day in an available slot.

I much prefer maximum games, as mentioned above, because of the challenge of having to make those decisions. And I like that it's the same for everyone. There are different strategies e.g. some plug and play early and go above pace, but then strategically bench players to get back to pace. Others manage pace, keeping it close (not too far above or below pace), and others save games early, especially if there are injuries/slumps, and then make up the games later in the season.

[GSD]

I'm all for streaming in h2h . I just think points only is a different animal and if a league chooses to have 82 gp limits its pretty common

Agree with that statement Butch.

[GSD]

In my opinion it makes it more of a challenge, using your bench as a bench (subbing in for slumps, injuries etc), rather than just plugging in all players who are playing that night.

That is why you cap the number of moves. Also understand every time you pick someone up you put someone on waivers and risk loosing it. A definite risk/reward scenario.

[horrorfan]

That is why you cap the number of moves. Also understand every time you pick someone up you put someone on waivers and risk loosing it. A definite risk/reward scenario.

I don't agree with max moves. Things happen e.g injuries and prefer not to have managers limited on who they can pick up because they're saving it for later in the season. As long as everyone is on a level playing field with regards to games played, then managers should have the flexibility to make moves as and when they see fit.

[YzermansLegacy]

Seems like a few different conversations are emerging here.

As for the OP - kudos on being active and implementing a solid strategy based on your league. That's the ideal.

As for H2H, agree that max gps isn't all that beneficial (on the whole). As long as there are other limits in place (e.g. # of adds/drops, waiver priority, etc.), it's not necessary.

In ROTO or pts leagues, I am a HUGE fan of it, with the caveat that it 100% on the quality of GMs playing in that league. If you've got a great bunch of active GMs who all know their stuff, it's a fantastic added level of strategy to incorporate. Additionally, I find it helps boost trade activity since someone is typically over-pacing in one position and someone else is under-pacing at another (due to suspension, injury, etc). I'm usually for anything that helps boost trades but that's just me.

If you don't have quality GMs, then you wind up consistently dominating that league (which somewhat sounds like the OP's situation), not only because you play more games, but also because you're likely more "on it" meaning you typically draft better and "win" more trades. That, in and of itself, is fine. Congrats on being a great GM. But you're asking the question because you likely know that if this continues "as is", the league won't continue very long.

Maxing GPs isn't going to make all the difference if you've got less enthusiastic GMs, but it "can" help create some additional parity to try and bring those "weaker" GMs closer to the pack (or contention), which can make for a more enjoyable pool experience, especially if it's a bunch of friends.

Like any league, there's no "best" set-up imo. It's 100% dependent on who the GMs are that make it up. Good luck finding your league's "best" set up Wonko!

[Wonko]

Lots of great responses. Thank gents. As commissioner, I will present the idea to all the GM's in the league and if we find a majority would appreciate incorporating max games played we will consider making the change for next season.

Since this league is a group of friends and co-workers with varying degrees of commitment max games might equalize the playing field somewhat. At the end of the day this hobby is meant to be fun and if some owners find they are not enjoying their fantasy experience I am more than open to ideas that will help make the majority of folks happy.

Again, great discussions guys. Repped where I could.