CT Fantasy Baseball - Interested?

[Quincy Varnish]

As nothing else is happening, this seems like a good time to start discussing next year’s league.

The possibility of converting to a money league was discussed late in the season, and I’d like to hear the opinions of those who plan to return next year.

I was thinking a small buy-in could keep managers more engaged throughout the season… maybe $10. Others have suggested more, but I’d rather it not be enough to scare off participants, or inspire some to resort to dirty tricks (collusion, etc.)

So what do you guys think would be a reasonable buy in?

20 would be cool. Payoffs for 1 - 3 rd place?

We could make it so the top 5 receive payouts. Assuming it’s $20 and we have 15 managers, it could look something like this…

1st - $125
2nd - $75
3rd - $50
4th - $30
5th - $20

[mattmitchl44]

I like the simplicity of draft & trade. If everyone is really interested in making it a keeper league by an overwhelming majority, that’s what we’ll do… but I’ll probably want a co-commissioner to keep track of that aspect.

If memory serves, Imadamnman was in the 10-12 range early on and ended up 2nd. I guess it depends on the manager, but having some skin in the game (whether or not it’s a significant amount) will heighten the interests of most.

I guess what I hope to establish is what constitutes “too much”. We probably have a few managers that wouldn’t hesitate to throw in $10-20, but $100 might be too much… particularly if they haven’t finished well in previous years.

I *think* my suggestion could be implemented in a way that isn't any more complicated than draft and trade.

If it were in place for this season, we would spend this offseason identifying our one keeper (e.g., I might take Cal Raleigh who was drafted in the 8th round of the 2025 draft; ima might take Crow-Armstrong who was drafted in the 11th round; you might take Ohtani (pitcher) who was drafted in the 12th round; etc.).

Once everybody has their one keeper, then when we get to the 2026 draft, every manager just has to go through and draft their designated keeper with their 1st round pick. All the keepers come off the board and the "new" 2026 draft starts with Round 2 instead of Round 1. Then we just proceed as normal.

I think if we were to implement it next year, our keeper options should be limited to players we drafted in 2025 and NOT determined by the standings. I think we’ll have some departures & new arrivals next year, so that would present a challenge… but I suppose they could be designated a 2025 draft position, and choose from that pool.

Honestly I do not see much reason to do all this for one keeper.

As noted, I'm trying to find a motivation for managers to want to keep playing into September to move up from 15th to 10th, or 10th to 5th, even if they are basically mathematically eliminated from winning the league. Allowing you a bigger pool of keepers to choose from based on a higher finish should do that. Basically every spot you can move up or down becomes at least a little important to your ability to compete the next year.

But I don't want to overly stack the deck in favor of the manager who won the prior season either. So limiting it to one keeper should give the higher finishers some advantage, but not a prohibitive one going into the next season.

And if manager leave and new ones are added, the ones who sign on first just take over the slots of those who departed in a descending fashion. So if, for example, if Jeffy (5th), Trader (9th), and Dirty (15th) decided to get out for next year, the first new manager to commit gets "Jeffy's team" and the right to a keeper consistent with it having finished 5th the prior season, the next gets "Trader's team", and so on.

Also "AVG delenda est" (if you know your Cato) and replaced with OBP.

[RichieRichSTL]

As nothing else is happening, this seems like a good time to start discussing next year’s league.

The possibility of converting to a money league was discussed late in the season, and I’d like to hear the opinions of those who plan to return next year.

I was thinking a small buy-in could keep managers more engaged throughout the season… maybe $10. Others have suggested more, but I’d rather it not be enough to scare off participants, or inspire some to resort to dirty tricks (collusion, etc.)

So what do you guys think would be a reasonable buy in?

20 would be cool. Payoffs for 1 - 3 rd place?

We could make it so the top 5 receive payouts. Assuming it’s $20 and we have 15 managers, it could look something like this…

1st - $125
2nd - $75
3rd - $50
4th - $30
5th - $20

Sounds reasonable.

[mattmitchl44]

As nothing else is happening, this seems like a good time to start discussing next year’s league.

The possibility of converting to a money league was discussed late in the season, and I’d like to hear the opinions of those who plan to return next year.

I was thinking a small buy-in could keep managers more engaged throughout the season… maybe $10. Others have suggested more, but I’d rather it not be enough to scare off participants, or inspire some to resort to dirty tricks (collusion, etc.)

So what do you guys think would be a reasonable buy in?

20 would be cool. Payoffs for 1 - 3 rd place?

We could make it so the top 5 receive payouts. Assuming it’s $20 and we have 15 managers, it could look something like this…

1st - $125
2nd - $75
3rd - $50
4th - $30
5th - $20

Sounds reasonable.

If we're really doing this to keep people engaged, I'd at least spread it a little deeper.

1st - $100
2nd - $60
3rd - $40
4th - $30
5th - $30
6th - $20
7th - $20

And I'd move from the beginning that all money paid to be part of the league eventually be donated to charity if/when this league ever folds. I don't know if QV would think it was more or less work, but I'd just as soon not have to be shuttling money back-and-forth every year. Once everyone pays their initial $20 for 2026, if you take 1st that year, you have a $100 credit that will be put towards your entry for the next five seasons. If you decide to leave before all of that $100 is used up, you just forfeit it into the charity fund. I'd trust QV to keep a little ledger of who has what balance from year-to-year.

That way, if everyone comes back for 2027, QV only has to collect an additional $20 from the eight managers who finished 8th to 15th in 2026. After a few years, if the top finishes get spread around, maybe we have enough money flowing that QV doesn't have to collect new money that often and it is just an update to the ledger book every year.

[An Old Friend]

I like the simplicity of draft & trade. If everyone is really interested in making it a keeper league by an overwhelming majority, that’s what we’ll do… but I’ll probably want a co-commissioner to keep track of that aspect.

If memory serves, Imadamnman was in the 10-12 range early on and ended up 2nd. I guess it depends on the manager, but having some skin in the game (whether or not it’s a significant amount) will heighten the interests of most.

I guess what I hope to establish is what constitutes “too much”. We probably have a few managers that wouldn’t hesitate to throw in $10-20, but $100 might be too much… particularly if they haven’t finished well in previous years.

I *think* my suggestion could be implemented in a way that isn't any more complicated than draft and trade.

If it were in place for this season, we would spend this offseason identifying our one keeper (e.g., I might take Cal Raleigh who was drafted in the 8th round of the 2025 draft; ima might take Crow-Armstrong who was drafted in the 11th round; you might take Ohtani (pitcher) who was drafted in the 12th round; etc.).

Once everybody has their one keeper, then when we get to the 2026 draft, every manager just has to go through and draft their designated keeper with their 1st round pick. All the keepers come off the board and the "new" 2026 draft starts with Round 2 instead of Round 1. Then we just proceed as normal.

A “keeper” is literally a player you “keep” from year to year. You can’t keep someone that wasn’t on your roster at season end.

[Quincy Varnish]

As nothing else is happening, this seems like a good time to start discussing next year’s league.

The possibility of converting to a money league was discussed late in the season, and I’d like to hear the opinions of those who plan to return next year.

I was thinking a small buy-in could keep managers more engaged throughout the season… maybe $10. Others have suggested more, but I’d rather it not be enough to scare off participants, or inspire some to resort to dirty tricks (collusion, etc.)

So what do you guys think would be a reasonable buy in?

20 would be cool. Payoffs for 1 - 3 rd place?

We could make it so the top 5 receive payouts. Assuming it’s $20 and we have 15 managers, it could look something like this…

1st - $125
2nd - $75
3rd - $50
4th - $30
5th - $20

Sounds reasonable.

If we're really doing this to keep people engaged, I'd at least spread it a little deeper.

1st - $100
2nd - $60
3rd - $40
4th - $30
5th - $30
6th - $20
7th - $20

And I'd move from the beginning that all money paid to be part of the league eventually be donated to charity if/when this league ever folds. I don't know if QV would think it was more or less work, but I'd just as soon not have to be shuttling money back-and-forth every year. Once everyone pays their initial $20 for 2026, if you take 1st that year, you have a $100 credit that will be put towards your entry for the next five seasons. If you decide to leave before all of that $100 is used up, you just forfeit it into the charity fund. I'd trust QV to keep a little ledger of who has what balance from year-to-year.

That way, if everyone comes back for 2027, QV only has to collect an additional $20 from the eight managers who finished 8th to 15th in 2026. After a few years, if the top finishes get spread around, maybe we have enough money flowing that QV doesn't have to collect new money that often and it is just an update to the ledger book every year.

If using Yahoo’s pay system, the simplest way (and probably best) to do this, I think the maximum number of payouts is five. Yahoo has a “wallet” so the payouts could be used any way a manager wants - withdraw all of it, use it for future league dues, other leagues, etc. Yahoo takes a small percentage of the pool, and distributes the rest… so I wouldn’t be involved in the bookkeeping, and there is no element of trust.

[mattmitchl44]

I like the simplicity of draft & trade. If everyone is really interested in making it a keeper league by an overwhelming majority, that’s what we’ll do… but I’ll probably want a co-commissioner to keep track of that aspect.

If memory serves, Imadamnman was in the 10-12 range early on and ended up 2nd. I guess it depends on the manager, but having some skin in the game (whether or not it’s a significant amount) will heighten the interests of most.

I guess what I hope to establish is what constitutes “too much”. We probably have a few managers that wouldn’t hesitate to throw in $10-20, but $100 might be too much… particularly if they haven’t finished well in previous years.

I *think* my suggestion could be implemented in a way that isn't any more complicated than draft and trade.

If it were in place for this season, we would spend this offseason identifying our one keeper (e.g., I might take Cal Raleigh who was drafted in the 8th round of the 2025 draft; ima might take Crow-Armstrong who was drafted in the 11th round; you might take Ohtani (pitcher) who was drafted in the 12th round; etc.).

Once everybody has their one keeper, then when we get to the 2026 draft, every manager just has to go through and draft their designated keeper with their 1st round pick. All the keepers come off the board and the "new" 2026 draft starts with Round 2 instead of Round 1. Then we just proceed as normal.

A “keeper” is literally a player you “keep” from year to year. You can’t keep someone that wasn’t on your roster at season end.

I know, but I'm proposing to modify the idea. Call it a phased one round pre-draft if you prefer.

What to call it isn't really the point. The point being would it keep managers engaged if it meant something to finish 7th or 8th instead of 14th or 15th? IMO, it would.

[Quincy Varnish]

I like the simplicity of draft & trade. If everyone is really interested in making it a keeper league by an overwhelming majority, that’s what we’ll do… but I’ll probably want a co-commissioner to keep track of that aspect.

If memory serves, Imadamnman was in the 10-12 range early on and ended up 2nd. I guess it depends on the manager, but having some skin in the game (whether or not it’s a significant amount) will heighten the interests of most.

I guess what I hope to establish is what constitutes “too much”. We probably have a few managers that wouldn’t hesitate to throw in $10-20, but $100 might be too much… particularly if they haven’t finished well in previous years.

I *think* my suggestion could be implemented in a way that isn't any more complicated than draft and trade.

If it were in place for this season, we would spend this offseason identifying our one keeper (e.g., I might take Cal Raleigh who was drafted in the 8th round of the 2025 draft; ima might take Crow-Armstrong who was drafted in the 11th round; you might take Ohtani (pitcher) who was drafted in the 12th round; etc.).

Once everybody has their one keeper, then when we get to the 2026 draft, every manager just has to go through and draft their designated keeper with their 1st round pick. All the keepers come off the board and the "new" 2026 draft starts with Round 2 instead of Round 1. Then we just proceed as normal.

A “keeper” is literally a player you “keep” from year to year. You can’t keep someone that wasn’t on your roster at season end.

I know, but I'm proposing to modify the idea. Call it a phased one round pre-draft if you prefer.

What to call it isn't really the point. The point being would it keep managers engaged if it meant something to finish 7th or 8th instead of 14th or 15th? IMO, it would.

We don't need to reinvent the wheel.

I’m mostly trying to establish if having a buy-in will shrink the league.

[HorseTrader]

My half cent worth.

If you do a pay league, keeping the money to pay future fees doesn't make me want to be a part of it. Nor would it entice me try to move from 9th to 8th or whatever.

The proposed keeper deal does nothing for me. It won't entice me to try to move in the league. In fact, it would do more to discourage me. You're telling the guys like Dirty Paws this past season, "well you lost so you don't get an equal shot at who can keep". If nothing else, that would would make me change leagues. Sorry Matt I know you are trying hard.

Every league has always had a problem with teams basically shutting down when they felt they had no chance. I doubt that there really is a solution. Here's an idea to consider. Raise the buy in to $25. Use $20 of each person as you've talked about whether you pay to 5 or 3 teams. Reserve the other $5 per team to pay out to teams 10-13. Or maybe to the 3 teams who are sitting in the bottom 5 on August 1 (or whatever date) who gain the most points by year end. So basically you are giving the bottom 5 a reason to move.

Would it work, hell if I know.

[Quincy Varnish]

My half cent worth.

If you do a pay league, keeping the money to pay future fees doesn't make me want to be a part of it. Nor would it entice me try to move from 9th to 8th or whatever.

The proposed keeper deal does nothing for me. It won't entice me to try to move in the league. In fact, it would do more to discourage me. You're telling the guys like Dirty Paws this past season, "well you lost so you don't get an equal shot at who can keep". If nothing else, that would would make me change leagues. Sorry Matt I know you are trying hard.

Every league has always had a problem with teams basically shutting down when they felt they had no chance. I doubt that there really is a solution. Here's an idea to consider. Raise the buy in to $25. Use $20 of each person as you've talked about whether you pay to 5 or 3 teams. Reserve the other $5 per team to pay out to teams 10-13. Or maybe to the 3 teams who are sitting in the bottom 5 on August 1 (or whatever date) who gain the most points by year end. So basically you are giving the bottom 5 a reason to move.

Would it work, hell if I know.

Agree with you regarding the keeper & rolling over league dues.

I’m not sure giving payouts to teams 10-13 makes much sense if teams 6-9 get nothing.

I’m trying to keep it simple, and think the 1-5 payouts would be sufficient to get people more involved. As you suggested, , there isn’t a total solution… managers will drop out if they know they’re out of it, but this could make it a more difficult decision. I think it might also motivate others to sign up, if we have some that aren’t interested b/c of the buy in.

[Dazepster]

I am in for whatever the group decides.

[Dazepster]

Haven't read through it all. Wanna clear up what appears to be some Keeper confusion.

In a Keeper League you are allowed to Keep or hold over one or more players from your prior years roster.

You are not required to Keep any player at all.

Those that keep say 1 player ultimately forfeit their first round pick.. Those that choose not to keep a player advance up in the draft order if applicable, and make a 1st Round pick. On to Round 2.

There is usually a timeframe as to how long you may control a player. I have often seen 3 years. You cannot keep a player for more than 3 seasons as a Keeper. But you can draft the same player year on year out in perpetuity. If you so choose.

[An Old Friend]

My half cent worth.

If you do a pay league, keeping the money to pay future fees doesn't make me want to be a part of it. Nor would it entice me try to move from 9th to 8th or whatever.

The proposed keeper deal does nothing for me. It won't entice me to try to move in the league. In fact, it would do more to discourage me. You're telling the guys like Dirty Paws this past season, "well you lost so you don't get an equal shot at who can keep". If nothing else, that would would make me change leagues. Sorry Matt I know you are trying hard.

Every league has always had a problem with teams basically shutting down when they felt they had no chance. I doubt that there really is a solution. Here's an idea to consider. Raise the buy in to $25. Use $20 of each person as you've talked about whether you pay to 5 or 3 teams. Reserve the other $5 per team to pay out to teams 10-13. Or maybe to the 3 teams who are sitting in the bottom 5 on August 1 (or whatever date) who gain the most points by year end. So basically you are giving the bottom 5 a reason to move.

Would it work, hell if I know.

Agree with you regarding the keeper & rolling over league dues.

I’m not sure giving payouts to teams 10-13 makes much sense if teams 6-9 get nothing.

I’m trying to keep it simple, and think the 1-5 payouts would be sufficient to get people more involved. As you suggested, , there isn’t a total solution… managers will drop out if they know they’re out of it, but this could make it a more difficult decision. I think it might also motivate others to sign up, if we have some that aren’t interested b/c of the buy in.

$50

[Alex Reyes Cy Young]

Q thanks for all your hard work in this. I appreciate it brother.

I dropped the ball on my end but I still loved it. 2026 should have less transitions in it for me…

Anyway thanks again.

[HorseTrader]

My half cent worth.

If you do a pay league, keeping the money to pay future fees doesn't make me want to be a part of it. Nor would it entice me try to move from 9th to 8th or whatever.

The proposed keeper deal does nothing for me. It won't entice me to try to move in the league. In fact, it would do more to discourage me. You're telling the guys like Dirty Paws this past season, "well you lost so you don't get an equal shot at who can keep". If nothing else, that would would make me change leagues. Sorry Matt I know you are trying hard.

Every league has always had a problem with teams basically shutting down when they felt they had no chance. I doubt that there really is a solution. Here's an idea to consider. Raise the buy in to $25. Use $20 of each person as you've talked about whether you pay to 5 or 3 teams. Reserve the other $5 per team to pay out to teams 10-13. Or maybe to the 3 teams who are sitting in the bottom 5 on August 1 (or whatever date) who gain the most points by year end. So basically you are giving the bottom 5 a reason to move.

Would it work, hell if I know.

Agree with you regarding the keeper & rolling over league dues.

I’m not sure giving payouts to teams 10-13 makes much sense if teams 6-9 get nothing.

I’m trying to keep it simple, and think the 1-5 payouts would be sufficient to get people more involved. As you suggested, , there isn’t a total solution… managers will drop out if they know they’re out of it, but this could make it a more difficult decision. I think it might also motivate others to sign up, if we have some that aren’t interested b/c of the buy in.

My thought is that those in 6-9 are probably in a position to try for 5th place until very late in the season. That was my intention for a part of Sept.

Then the ones in 14 and 15 would be looking at maybe a payoff for finishing in 10-13.

One thing I think needs to be done, is put in a trade deadline. Maybe Sept 1. If you have money on the table it increase the possibility of #2 and #15 getting together during last month on deals. I know you have a veto system but I don't think it will work very well unless someones trading Judge for Pozo.

[mattmitchl44]

The proposed keeper deal does nothing for me. It won't entice me to try to move in the league. In fact, it would do more to discourage me. You're telling the guys like Dirty Paws this past season, "well you lost so you don't get an equal shot at who can keep". If nothing else, that would would make me change leagues. Sorry Matt I know you are trying hard.

Understood.

My intent was certainly not to skew this "modified keeper" approach, or whatever to call it, so much that the teams that finished 1, 2, 3 the prior year would have a prohibitive advantage the following year based on who they were allowed to keep.

Trying to come up with something that was meaningful, but not overwhelmingly decisive for the following season.