Below are 9 proposed changes to our scoring system. We will implement the 2 with the most votes for next year. Each player has 3 votes. Votes can be piled up onto one change (example all 3 of Bab’s votes go for C). Vote by commenting below. Add your name.
A. AP Top 25 win +1 pt. Currently, you receive +2 for a top 10 win. This change would keep the +2 over the top 10, but would add +1 to wins over AP 11-25.
B. Undefeated: +3 pts for an undefeated regular season conference. Currently, no points are allocated for successfully going undefeated in conference play. In 2009, this bonus would have only affected Gonzaga and Memphis. In 2007, Memphis, Cornell, and Davidson would have achieved this.
C. Preseason: Add an additional +1 pt to each pre-season tourney in which points are given. Early season tend to lack significant point action, and increasing preseason tourney values by 25-33% will add a little more early excitement.
D. CBI points: A team that reaches the CBI final receives +2. The team that wins the CBI received +4. In 2009, over ½ of the CBI teams were player teams. At current, no CBI games receive bonuses. Increasing the championship adds a little more significance.
E. NIT points: A team that reaches the Final 8 of the NIT receives +1. A team that reaches the NIT final 4 receives +3. A team that reaches the NIT championship game receives +5. The team that wins the NIT receives +7. At current, you receive +2 for the final 4, + 4 for making the final, and +7 for winning.
F. NCAA points: Add +1 additional point to winners of round 1, 2, and 3. Currently, a round 1 win is worth +2, a round 2 win is worth 5, a round 3 win is worth 8, with a round 4 win jumping up to 13.
G. Conf Grouping & Point Restructuring: Create 3 conference tiers: Major, Mid-Major, and Minor. Major conferences (6 confs) would not change. Mid-Major (9 confs) would consist of Atl 10, Mountain West, Miss Valley, CUSA, Horizon, WAC, West Coast, MAC, & CAA. Minor would consist of the rest (16 confs). Tier one reg season championship: 10 pts; Tier two reg season championship: 8 pts; Tier three reg season championship: 6 pts. A conf tourney champion would receive: 8, 6, and 4. At current, there is no mid-major tier, a team that wins a major conference regular season earns 7 points and a non-major conference regular season earns 6 points; A team that wins a major conference tournament earns 5 points and a non-major 4 points.
H. Trades: Players can trade draft order spots with certain restrictions. Each player must have a draft pick in every round, and each draft order trade must include 2 rounds for each player. For example, Turtle may trade his 3rd pick and 22nd pick for Gunz’s 12th and 13th pick. Selected teams may not be traded.
I. Bad: A loss by an AP top 25 team to an unrated team by over 35 points results in –5 pts.
33 comments:
Okay I'll go first.
I'm going to cast one vote for each of:
E. NIT Points
C. Preseason Tournaments (but also I think we need to give points for all preseason tournaments that meet a set of conditions: not a round-robin, not some team's vanity tournament at home, etc.)
and... hmm. I can't decide yet for my third vote. I'll think about it.
-babs
1 vote for D. CBI points
1 vote for G. Conf Grouping & Point Restructuring:
hmm. i'll think about the 3rd vote.
~ Jutdog
And Boaris has 1 leg cut off. Next its off with Bab's head.
CEO Votes:
1 vote for A
1 vote for G
I too must think of my third vote....
-The CEO
I vote for B, D, and G
anonymous is gunz
I vote for:
B & E. Power to the little People
PROGRESS
www.progressmedia.org
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. I hate college basketball............
BAM! I LOVE IT
I think it should be noted that Jutdog won't be in the Hall of Fame this year. For the record.
Unless we have a category for "Player with the best team that didn't win" or something like that.
Go UCONN, Go UNC, Go Villanova!!
First, congrats to Babs, the CEO, Jaybird, and Hippie D for making the final four. I believe 3 of the 4 are still in contention, no?
Here are my votes:
1. B Undefeated Bonus. It's unlikely that this will happen too often (as noted above) but it's nice to award a team that runs the board for their conference season. The points are a nice bonus, but not game breaking.
2. C Pre-season Points. Adding a little spice to pre-season tourneys sounds fine. Again, this is a minimal change to make the early going a bit more interesting. It also encourages more research and attention paid to the early play which hopefully will equal more engagement as well.
3. H Trading. I like the ability to trade draft picks. Personally, I think it would be better to eliminate round restrictions, which may encourage more trading, and simply keep the numerical restriction in place (i.e. 2 picks for 2 picks). I realize that this could potentially allow for some abuse, but we could also put in a veto clause for 2/3 majority (8 players)veto for any trades that looked suspicious. This would hopefully, prevent any Mitchell Brothers or Iowa Connection shenanigans.
I'll cast my third and final vote toward G I guess. I can see the benefit of three tiers for conferences. There is a world of difference between the Atlantic 10 and the Atlantic Sun.
Also I think it helps players picking teams to consider the differences in tiers - how many third tier teams do you REALLY want? Second tier teams are at least going to play other players, while many third tier teams won't.
But all in all I have to say that I think the point system this year was FAR superior to last year, and I'm not saying that because I got creamed last year and winning this year. Kudos to JUT for the complete overhaul of the rules, with input from Turtle, AKaoni, and myself.
My daughter wants in next year - are people going to play again or hang up their hats? I'm in.
Several of these sound ok to me, although I think our scoring system this year did a pretty good job of accurately reflecting which are the best teams in reality. I'd be interested in seeing a top-50 list to compare with the final various rankings of the teams.
Can I just cast one vote against one of the rule changes? Probably not. If so, I think that rule "G" is a bad idea. Teams in the first two "tiers" of conferences already have plenty of opportunities to accrue points, as they have a chance at winning preseason and postseason tournaments, and play lots of games against other drafted teams. The only points that teams in the third tier can generally gain are for winning the conference and conference tournament. Instituting this rule will further increase the importance of the first three rounds of the draft, which, in my opinion, are already a bit overvalued.
I don't know.. I'm still in disbelief, feeling a bit down.. you know.. of course you all know.. that was you last year. dammit.
Turtle, no no votes. If you want little person points, vote for undefeated conf and vote 2 for CBI pts.
~Jut
I just talked with HippieD - he doesn't think he's in next year. No time for doing any research, and he thinks I cheat.
~ Jut
Before we finalize any voting, I think we should have a bit more debate and discussion. I am also in agreement with Turtle as prop rule change G.
I was trying to think of the fairest and least authoritative process for improving the pt system - hence the voting on suggested pt changes. The proposed change I could find left out was the carry-over factor, as Babs said no. I also adjusted Turtles suggestion of losing 50 pts down to only 5 pts.
Future changes can always take place, too. So when G passes because everyone not from Iowa wants it, and it ends up not being too good, then next year's proposed changes can say "eliminate all conference categories" or something to that nature.
There may be room for some editing after the voting, if constructive suggestions are made and generall agreed upon, such as undefeated should be worth 4 instead of 3 or something like that. Sort of the Line Item veto power of our governing body.
~ Jut
Fine. I vote for A, D and E.
It's worth pointing out that the entire voting scheme is rigged insofar as you can't vote for the status quo. Who decided that there must be exactly two rule changes?
Well I'm moved by the criticisms of Prop G, Jut himself stated that it is worthy for any team to win their conference, so I am going to pull my vote for Prop G and cast it instead for Prop D.
I agree that we could leave things as they are and be just fine, but on the other hand, minor tweaking doesn't hurt.
If I were going to vote AGAINST anything it would be F (NCAA points) although the first 3 rounds are fine I think the final 3 rounds are just a wee bit high. I'm also not too hot on trades just because it seemed hard enough to get 12 people to get their shots together to draft teams - trading and swapping draft picks could be a horror of a mess. But then again maybe not.
So my "new" vote casting is for C, D, & E.
By the way
GO AZTECS! Baylor SuX!
Common Turtle, even with all of your anger for a near-last place finish, there must be one listed change that you could put all of your dice behind.
Rigged? I think you need to re-direct your angst at all of the dirty politicians in your area - you know, those Dems and Repubs. Comon, the only thing rigged was Bab's selection of Phunmunki as the first pick in every round last year.
Anyway, we'll finish our vote, and I'll put together the new rules with the old, and we'll see how we liked it vs how the challenege ended. I really wanted to take advantage of everyone's feedback while we still had their attention.
For instance, I agree with Babs that the NCAA late rounds are too powerfull - especially now that I'm out. Everyone playing might agree next year to reduce those games by 1-2 pts or more. We'll see. This is supposed to by at least somewhat fun.. even if Babbleturd wins.
~jut
stop changing your vote - this might never end otherwise.
Agree with Babs, this year's scoring was vastly superior to last year.
I also agree with Turtle that voting against some/all changes should be an option.
Finally, I veto any new (or old) rules which involve negative points.
That's it.
I'm going to change my votes and put them all on
J: Jutdog Sux
Not sure how that rule will play out.
It causes immediate end to the year, with your disqualification. Jutdog wins! Jutdog wins! Koni, congrats on your 2nd place finish to add to your 3rd place token.
Jaybird claims a.b.f
My final vote is a for B. That means:
Jutdog: B, D, G
Babs: C, D, E
Jaybird: A, B, F
Gunz: B, D, G
Prog: B, E, _
CEO: A, G, _
Akaoni: B, C, H
Turtle: A, D, E
Still waiting on:
Phunmunki:
Boaris:
HippieD:
Musashisan:
Talk to your people.
~ Jut
hippieD - a,b,g, and UConn. 10th place is attainable.
Wait, HippieD gets votes even though he isn't going to participate next year? Not that I actually care.
well, his perspective of this year's scoring is as valuable as any - maybe even more so since the current system failed him...
He may be in - i'm working on it. He has a severe distrust of Babs and Iowa.
~ Jut
Commie
Post a Comment