Salvaging a Dynasty league - REP

[FinnishFlash]

Looking for some advice - I've been part of what has been a really fun dynasty league the past 5 years, team is in sig. Through a lot of hard work, good drafting and negotiating I have built a true dynasty team. Won 3 of last 4 years, with the one year being suspended due to COVID (I was handily in first that year as well). A lot of managers complaining that the gap is too large now and the league is looking at changes to bring some parity to the league (there are 3 teams that realistically have a shot now), and I don't disagree with their assessment.

I'm firmly in the camp that this is a dynasty league, so it seems pretty ridiculous to me that someone should be penalized for actually building a dynasty however, I do understand that the league may not continue if changes aren't made. I like the group and league and am open to discussing some options (all of which will make me worse) if it means keeping this going long-term. I've been chatting with the commish/co-commish to try to come up with some ideas to help try to even the playing field without dissolving my team (which has been brought forward as a possibility - for the record, I would leave should that be the decision, as I think its absurd).

My initial thought was that setting a keeper limit (say 10), resetting all draft picks and redrafting would be an ok in-between solution where there the gap would be significantly reduced but still allow the teams that succeeded to keep some of their hard work. Anyways lots still being discussed and no real clear path forward yet.

Curious if anyone has been in a similar situation/league and what was done to mitigate and if it actually worked? Will REP wherever I can.

[Dr.Brad]

So I don’t know how this might work in your world, but one of my deep keeper leagues (keeping 12) allows players to keep (based on yahoo rankings…we use end-of-regular-season rankings) one GK, then 2 of each team’s top 4 players, 4 of your next 6 highest ranked, and 5 others. It’s then 11 skaters and one GK, with all others going back into the draft. It does allow bottom-half teams to become competitive faster, without really decimating the top guys. Just an idea - if it’s league survival on the line, you gotta try something.

[YzermansLegacy]

Kudos on building a true dynasty but in looking at your squad (and your success), the issue isn't with the set-up, it's with the "level" of GMs.

You're too strong of a fantasy GM for this league. Full stop.

Sometimes league parity just can't be had when it's "good" group of people/friends (as opposed to more seasoned fantasy GM's). If I'm you, I'm using this league more for the banter/friendliness and laying off on 'killing' it each season while joining a different dynasty with GM's a bit more at your level.

FWIW, the likelihood of you still winning (or coming close) each year even in a keep 10 is still really strong... so I wouldn't rush to change what sounds like a decent set-up.

I play in a keep 8 with friends and it's seriously lopsided (2 GM's in particular) almost every year. We've tried 20+ things over the years to add parity and none have really worked. You just can't stop a GM from not picking a quality rookie, or not keeping a must-keep guy or making a bad trade. Gotta respect each GM's right to do what they want to do with their own team. So I play for fun, the camaraderie and seriously don't care if I win or lose... I save that effort for some of my other pools!

Good luck!

[Reverend of Hockeytown]

Basically if you tear it down, and make changes, the same situation will occur probably between 1-3 years down the line.
So why make all these concessions to appease the weaker GM's? So basically for lack of being strong owners, you are to pay the price here?
Whats the point??

[Moses]

Make lopsided trades with every GM in the bottom half of the league and start over. Gift away your best players to the bottom teams. Have fun with it. Once you have scuttled your team, build it back up again.

[Feenom]

Um, it's a "dynasty" league. It isn't your fault you keep winning. As somebody stated before, looks like you have too many Kevyn Adams types in your league. I wouldn't do anything to compromise your team but protecting less players at the end is a quick solution. Congrats on 3/4 championships and building a very good team. I have been in a league for 20 years with friends and my best friend won the first 5 years in a row. Did we hate it? yes. Is it his fault? No. So the rest tried to understand the pool better, understand how he became good (drafting certain positions, signing FAs that fit our pool etc...) so we adapted. He hasn't won anything for the last 7-8 years because we have caught up. That's why it's a dynasty league. Your other GM's have to be patient and most importantly, competent. Good luck.

[Bubba55]

This is a bit of a drastic move, but in both fantasy and the real world a salary cap flattens the playing field. This doesn't mean the cream won't rise to the top, but it does make things that much more difficult and hopefully those GM's with bottom level teams will see this as an opportunity to get back into the game.

[2014olympicgold]

Set a keeper year limit. You can only keep a player for 3-5 yrs and that's it. I haven't been in a league with this but they are out there and it keeps the league fresh.

It won't necessarily stop top GMs from rolling bad GMs, but it gives a shakeup to teams to the point where bad GMs will end up with McDavid through the draft and it'll keep them quiet.

[roenick27]

This is a bit of a drastic move, but in both fantasy and the real world a salary cap flattens the playing field. This doesn't mean the cream won't rise to the top, but it does make things that much more difficult and hopefully those GM's with bottom level teams will see this as an opportunity to get back into the game.

This..tbh this is why I would only play in a cap league. The challenge of building a winner with constraints. I'm not saying this is the only issue, but it's probably the most easy and clear answer, at least initially.

[Turbo_Supremo]

Never been apart of a league that has used these rules, but the quick thoughts that come to mind are:

- Insert a Salary Cap, which then requires you to likely move players for draft picks or those amazing players still on their entry level contracts
- Reduce it from a 'Keep All' to a 'Keep X' ... this provides parity and allows struggling teams to have a chance to build a strong team even after a weak season
- Put a restriction on how many years a player can be kept. (IE., only allowed to keep McDavid for 3 years and then you either trade him in your last season or let him go back into the pool)
- A modification to a 'Keep X' type of scenario: this is a lot more on the commissioner to keep track of... Each off season, a player is given a draft pick value (determined however, lets say Dobber rankings, or maybe even, the draft order of the previous season), Each GM has their full allotment of picks, 1 through 25 or whatever. To keep a player of a certain pick value requires you to lose that pick. (IE. McDavid is worth a 1st, Marner likely a 2nd, Rust is likely a 10th, etc.). So then the GM can only keep as many '1st round ranked' players as 1st round draft picks they have available (they could always trade away other players and picks to obtain other GM picks, etc.). Then, at the end of the day, whatever players are not kept, and whatever picks are not used to protect a player, all get thrown back into a re-draft.

All in all, you do have a team that would make other GM's likely want to quit. So, in order to keep that league alive, you're likely going to have to give something, likely a lot, in order to keep the league alive. It sucks, but from the sounds of it, look at it like a challenge, tear it down, and see what you can rebuild out of the dust.

[tobias]

Salary cap. $81.5 million. Same cap hits as in real life. Mimic the real thing.

[Rockies & Hockeys]

Loving this discussion and all the ideas in response. Some real great ones! The only idea I'll add is the possibility of making it so the higher you finish, the less keepers you get. So maybe the bottom few teams can keep whoever they want, then the top three teams each year get to keep 8 (1st), 9 (2nd) and 10 (3rd). Something like that.

[jer_33]

How many teams in the league? Any chance for expansion?

Is it a money league? Are GM's griping because they are just feeding your bank account?

[senryu]

An added degree of difficulty that equally constrains everyone is the best solution and a salary cap is probably the best choice. Piecemeal rule additions and tweaks inevitably will be reactions to however your team is situated. If you build a stable of goalies, then they'll limit the number of goalies you can own. And any rule that applies only to you or only to the team that finishes in first will only lead to aggravation. As others have noted, the fault in the league lies not with the rules, but in the limitations of the other owners' acumen. Creating rules to restrict you in order to make the league more even is not much different than putting lead weights on ballet dancers' legs to make them just as graceful as an ordinary person.

[loppantorkel]

I'm in an odd, but good limited keeper league. Several rules to increase parity:
1. 6 true keepers (+2 players dropped by the end of the upcoming season, from last years roster) allowed per season - they must be a draft pick no higher than 11th round and on your roster at the end of the season. The keepers will occupy draft spots 7, 8 for the two that must be dropped, and six spots from 11 to 22 or so for the true keepers.
2. Each keeper will have an added cost of 1 per year (regardless if traded or not).
3. The teams that finish 1-3 have a cap to adhere to.

There are some other rules too, but these revolve around the keepers.