ZiPS Bidding

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:52 pm

I think the system worked nicely. Should we continue it for this offseason?

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Wed Oct 04, 2017 5:32 pm

I think so. If I recall, the only crankiness was from Nils and Bren, who were mad that they didn't get a vote.

I would just suggest a more organized system in the actual message board. As is, we were just filing teams whose zips were filed with a link and in the same board, a player. Maybe we should create subfolders -- one for teams, one for players. Otherwise, I think it accomplished what it set out to accomplish.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:08 pm

Yeah I liked it.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:06 pm

Yup, thoughts on whether we should tighten the budgets to cause more of a spread of players across the league?

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Thu Oct 05, 2017 10:33 pm

I would be fine tweaking the dollar amounts. Some people spent nothing. Others (ahem, Shawn, Brett) dumped all their budget on one guy. Only 14 guys were actually bid on. I could see reducing to $20 or even $15.

Astros · Post by **Astros** » Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:44 am

I'm fine with whatever you guys want to do on this. Shit I'm sounding like Obama in the Senate just voting present

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:58 am

If only 14 guys were bid on, I'm ok with going down to a $20 budget.

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:37 pm

Same budget this year, or do we want to modify it?

Padres · Post by **Padres** » Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:45 pm

Pirates wrote:Same budget this year, or do we want to modify it?

I thought the system worked last season so I see no need to modify it.

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Thu Nov 09, 2017 3:22 pm

I say $20. Last year, people didn't spend a ton. Maybe this makes decisions a little tougher and opens up spending for more teams.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:44 pm

I agree we should drop it with only 14 players bid on last year.

Padres · Post by **Padres** » Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:56 pm

Tigers wrote:I say $20. Last year, people didn't spend a ton. Maybe this makes decisions a little tougher and opens up spending for more teams.

Okay ... I'll be interested to see if it makes any difference.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Thu Nov 09, 2017 9:39 pm

I don't think it really makes any difference how many schrute bucks everyone has, so I'm fine with trying out a smaller number of units of schrute bucks.

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:19 pm

Sure, let's try $20. I'll announce it.

Cardinals · Post by **Cardinals** » Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:11 pm

Clarity: Do you lose your waiver position with a winning bid?

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Fri Nov 10, 2017 6:32 pm

We did not do this last year from what I recall. Since we are using waiver order to determine tiebreakers, you probably should lose your waiver position when making the winning bid though.

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:13 am

We only used waiver position to break a bid tie. We didn't reset waivers based on a tie. I think that would discourage bidding.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:27 pm

Tigers wrote:We only used waiver position to break a bid tie. We didn't reset waivers based on a tie. I think that would discourage bidding.

I do too. It may be fairer to use up your waiver priority, but in light of our effort to encourage lesser teams to compete, I think this is a good avenue to encourage them to stock up on good simmers as much as they can.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:54 pm

Fine by me.

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 7:04 pm

"To add: You will only lose your waiver claim in event of a tie. If you win a player outright, it will not affect your waiver standing"

I could see someone reading "will not affect your waiver standing" as meaning there is a way to affect your waiver standing. Am I the only one who reads it that way? Waiver priority would break a tie, but it won't move you down the waiver list. Is that what you're trying to convey here?

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:09 pm

Yes, what JP said reads to me as "you will lose your waiver position if you win the tiebreaker on a zips bid."

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:10 pm

I read it the same way, but JP’s clarification works.

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:28 pm

Dodgers wrote:I read it the same way, but JP’s clarification works.

Sorry I'm confused. Are you saying we're changing the rule from last year?

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:42 pm

No. The only thing we're changing is $30 to $20. Waiver spot only breaks a tie. You don't move down the waiver list at all.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:49 pm

Rangers wrote:
Dodgers wrote:I read it the same way, but JP’s clarification works.
Sorry I'm confused. Are you saying we're changing the rule from last year?

No, I was saying JP’s latest post in the public thread is accurate.