Last Week Of The NFBC Season....Maybe

[Greg Ambrosius]

Best of luck to everyone in the NFBC as we complete this final leg of the marathon we call the NFBC season. This week is the 26th and possibly final week of the MLB season, so best of luck.

I say "possibly" because if there is a tie for any of the divisional titles or for the final Wild Card spots, Major League Baseball will hold a 1-game playoff on Monday. That is considered part of the MLB regular season, so it is also part of the NFBC regular season. This has happened before in the NFBC and stats are included. In fact, it's stated in the first paragraph of our Rules:

"The National Fantasy Baseball Championship (NFBC) is comprised of 15 teams/managers. The NFBC's regular season will extend from Opening Day of the MLB regular season through the final game of the regular season (including one or more season-ending MLB tie-breaker games if needed)."

There will be no FAAB on Sunday if there is a playoff game, but owners can set new starting lineups on Monday if needed. Plan accordingly.

Also, just a heads up that the minimum innings pitched limit in most NFBC leagues is 1,000. Everyone must be above that threshold and if any team isn't above that threshold they will receive just one point in ERA and one point in WHIP. No other teams will benefit from moving up in the standings, but those teams will lose all of the ERA and WHIP points they earned from having a plethora of relievers on their roster throughout the year. Make sure you finish above that mark.

In the NFBC Platinum League, Diamond League and Diamond Auction League the minimum innings pitched level is 1,200 innings. I've contacted every owner in those leagues who aren't above that threshold as of Monday morning to alert them of the consequences. Plan accordingly and good luck.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

The rules are very poorly written in the diamond league at least. Would be tough to enforce the 1200 requirement as the rules are written.

In a side note, it makes no sense as to why everyone wouldn't move up a peg. They beat the teams that don't meet qualifications. Also should be same amount of roto points available for hitting and pitching. It is roto baseball after all.

[COZ]

I know this has been discussed at length previously but I'm too lazy to look it up & read through all the arguments. But by what logical reasoning is it, that, in a contest that aspires to put all competitors on equal competitive footing, that by pure happenstance & good fortune do a certain limited number of competitors stand to not only benefit by a game 163, but also to specially set their line-ups to category-chase for 1 game when the not-so-lucky sit idly by to watch??? Me thinks this a rule borne out of STATS inability to program an end of season 8-game week than by any rational fair-minded logic.

I hereby move to have any future Game 163's hereby deemed null & void from future contests. All in favor??????

[Wolfpac]

Aye

[Greg Ambrosius]

Chris, it has nothing to do with whether someone can program it this way or not. An 8-day week can definitely be programmed. But this is a skill-based contest and thus we should allow owners the right to sit or start players they want to sit or start in a new week, even if that week is one day. Lots of money is on the line and if the MLB has one or even two extra regular-season games on a Monday or a Tuesday owners should have the say in that, not the game operator.

Anyone can disagree with that assessment, but as we all know a lot changes in September and that includes any extra regular season games. So we allow the owners to make those calls. Hope that helps.

[Deadheadz]

I know this has been discussed at length previously but I'm too lazy to look it up & read through all the arguments. But by what logical reasoning is it, that, in a contest that aspires to put all competitors on equal competitive footing, that by pure happenstance & good fortune do a certain limited number of competitors stand to not only benefit by a game 163, but also to specially set their line-ups to category-chase for 1 game when the not-so-lucky sit idly by to watch??? Me thinks this a rule borne out of STATS inability to program an end of season 8-game week than by any rational fair-minded logic.

I hereby move to have any future Game 163's hereby deemed null & void from future contests. All in favor??????

How many times have we lost games due to rainout/snowout and they don't get made up because the outcome won't affect the MLB standings? Not every team gets 162 either so how come you don't complain about that too?

I think these things balance out eventually for everyone.

[COZ]

How many times have we lost games due to rainout/snowout and they don't get made up because the outcome won't affect the MLB standings?

Not sure. Why don't you look it up & report back with the information?

Not every team gets 162 either so how come you don't complain about that too?

I'm sorry DH, I didn't think raising a legitimate rule issue for discussion in a forum specifically designed for such things in an articulate manner without name-calling would be construed as "complaing," but I undersand simple minds are often incapable of such nuanced discussion without resorting to put-downs.

I think these things balance out eventually for everyone.

Your subjective thoughts & feels not backed up by facts & data are not relevant to the discussion. The FACT is, only a certain number of teams by pure happenstance & luck are granted an additional scoring period at the end of the season that other teams are not. And for those fortunate enough to have players in a game 163 to be able to specially reset their line-up while others are not at a time when categories are solidified seems unfair. It's unlikely, but I would hate to see a title decided because of the results of a Game 163 being factored into the equation.

[KJ Duke]

I know this has been discussed at length previously but I'm too lazy to look it up & read through all the arguments. But by what logical reasoning is it, that, in a contest that aspires to put all competitors on equal competitive footing, that by pure happenstance & good fortune do a certain limited number of competitors stand to not only benefit by a game 163, but also to specially set their line-ups to category-chase for 1 game when the not-so-lucky sit idly by to watch??? Me thinks this a rule borne out of STATS inability to program an end of season 8-game week than by any rational fair-minded logic.

I hereby move to have any future Game 163's hereby deemed null & void from future contests. All in favor??????

I would support ending with game 162 ... although I don't completely agree with the fairness premise since all are free to speculate in the final week of FAAB on potential 163rd players.

That said, it's just a cleaner finish to the season to skip that final game and consider it a playoff game, which it is, whether MLB wants to call it that or not.

[Deadheadz]

How many times have we lost games due to rainout/snowout and they don't get made up because the outcome won't affect the MLB standings?

Not sure. Why don't you look it up & report back with the information?

Nine times in the past 2 seasons have teams not completed 162 games

2016
Cubs 103-58
Indians 94-67
Tigers 86-75
Marlins 79-82
Pirates 78-83
Brewers 73-89
Braves 68-93

2015
Indians 81-80
Tigers 74-87

I'm sorry DH, I didn't think raising a legitimate rule issue for discussion in a forum specifically designed for such things in an articulate manner without name-calling would be construed as "complaing," but I undersand simple minds are often incapable of such nuanced discussion without resorting to put-downs.

Perhaps you weren't complaining but it "sounds like" complaining every time someone brings up excuses as to why something isn't "fair" in NFBC.
We all play by the same rules. That makes it fair.

Btw, have you never seen someone put a player in for game 163 and COST themselves a category? I have.
Seems fair to me.

[mdecav]

I hereby move to have any future Game 163's hereby deemed null & void from future contests. All in favor??????

Count me as in favor of dropping all game 163’s from all contests. Just because it’s considered statistically to be part of the regular season doesn’t mean we have to have it count in NFBC contests.

Having teams who only play 161 games is an irrelevant point. Owners lose games throughout the year due to rainouts; usually they’re made up later in the season but sometimes they’re not. Your pitcher just pitches the next day typically. But owners of players who play in Game 163’s get an inherent advantage to start (or purposely reserve) based on information that other owners can’t take advantage of.

[mdecav]

How many times have we lost games due to rainout/snowout and they don't get made up because the outcome won't affect the MLB standings? Not every team gets 162 either so how come you don't complain about that too?

How many current hitters play all 162 games? The loss of a game due to rainout is irrelevant. The additional scoring period for a few select owners is relevant.

[Edwards Kings]

Keep the rules the way they are. If MLB considers the 163rd game "regular season", then the NFBC should.

[DOUGHBOYS]

I have been killed by this rule.
Most notably, I dropped from third to fourth in the Main Event overall in 2007, costing $5000 if memory serves right.
I have also lost a Draft Champions league on a 163rd game.
Still, I believe the NFBC has it right.
Although we could never, ever plan for this, it is a regular season game.

I do believe that the changing of lineups on Monday is unfair however.
The Monday playoff game is an extension of the final week.
Fantasy owners should not be given the power to 'reload' with a new lineup because they were fortunate enough to have playoff players.
That would be better served as a strategy for owners when they make lineup choices going into the final week of the season regarding possible playoff players.
These owners are getting two bites of the fantasy apple in having playoff players and adjusting lineups to accommodate them.

[Wolfpac]

Speaking of this last week, as Doughboys has previously mentioned there is nothing like a Roto pennant race coming down to these final 5 days. This is fun stuff. I'm rooting for guys like Verlander who are not even on my team of Jon's team but his ratio stats might steal a point. Just when i thought i put away a dormant owner in HR and RBI, that owner goes off for 4hr and 18rbi ( I see you McCutchen), while my team comes with 0hr and 3rbi.

And in the end I love it all

[Deadheadz]

How many current hitters play all 162 games? The loss of a game due to rainout is irrelevant. The additional scoring period for a few select owners is relevant.

Great point!
While your players may get their 600 AB in 154 out of 162 games, another manager might get their 600 AB in 154 out of 163 games. It's all the same. We just feel helpless when we have no players with games remaining and someone else in the league does.

I do believe that the changing of lineups on Monday is unfair however.
The Monday playoff game is an extension of the final week.

This we agree on.
What's killed me more than game 163 is the way bottom feeding teams go dormant once NFL drafts begin. A team that's doing well in W and K starts dropping in the standings because the manager doesn't update his lineup. Teams behind me start creeping up and pass me.

I'm so looking forward to playing more Cutline in 2018 so as to avoid all game 163 headaches as well as the September dilution of MLB talent/starts as well as the August NFL swoon.
#bestball

[King of Queens]

...Definitely!

[Greg Ambrosius]

We're good to go for the NFBC season ending today. No MLB playoff spots are on the line today after our Brewers blew a 6-0 lead at St. Louis yesterday, so no 163rd game is in the offing for 2017. Good luck everyone in today's final games.

At this point, the rule will not change for 2018. We have a month to finalize all rules, Schedule of Events and contests and our thinking hasn't changed that an added game is part of the regular season. Hitting titles, home run titles, every individual honor in MLB is also affected by a 163rd game, so at this point we will mirror what MLB does in the regular season.

Thanks all and good luck today.

[mdecav]

At this point, the rule will not change for 2018. We have a month to finalize all rules, Schedule of Events and contests and our thinking hasn't changed that an added game is part of the regular season. Hitting titles, home run titles, every individual honor in MLB is also affected by a 163rd game, so at this point we will mirror what MLB does in the regular season.

Thanks all and good luck today.

While we are stuck with using Game 163's+ for 2018, is it possible we can remove the ability of owners to changing their lineups for those game(s)?

[Ichiban]

I agree with what others have stated here. Keep games 163 as part of the contest, but do away with letting owners make moves for one game. There is zero skill in selecting every player on the two teams that you own, vs sitting everyone else. Which makes it very different from every other week of the competition, where you always have to make lineup choices. Just make the last week the last week, and any additional games added on to that week with no further lineup changes. Thanks Greg, whatever you decide to do.

[Wolfpac]

I agree with what others have stated here. Keep games 163 as part of the contest, but do away with letting owners make moves for one game. There is zero skill in selecting every player on the two teams that you own, vs sitting everyone else. Which makes it very different from every other week of the competition, where you always have to make lineup choices. Just make the last week the last week, and any additional games added on to that week with no further lineup changes. Thanks Greg, whatever you decide to do.

This makes sense allow owners to make those decision for pitchers on monday and hitters on friday with the possible impact of tight playoff races leaning your lineup choices one way or the other for your marginal decisions.

For example lets say you wanted to Play Duda over Reynolds but then you realized well its close and rockies up only 2 games with 3 to go, maybe reynolds gets an extra game. That should be the decision each owner needs to take into account.

[COZ]

At this point, the rule will not change for 2018. We have a month to finalize all rules, Schedule of Events and contests and our thinking hasn't changed that an added game is part of the regular season. Hitting titles, home run titles, every individual honor in MLB is also affected by a 163rd game, so at this point we will mirror what MLB does in the regular season.

And yet, we have absolutely no problem eliminating the entire Week 17 in the NFFC. The fact is, Game 163 is a tie-breaker game akin to a 1-game playoff & not a regularly scheduled game at the time the contest begins. Similiar to Week 17 in football, we should simply restrict the contest to all games REGULARLY scheduled at the beginning of the season as well as announced make-up games & exclude Game 163 consistent with what we do for Week 17 in the NFFC. What MLB calls this game & how they treat the stats from this game should be irrelevant to our Contest. Period.

[JohnP]

At this point, the rule will not change for 2018. We have a month to finalize all rules, Schedule of Events and contests and our thinking hasn't changed that an added game is part of the regular season. Hitting titles, home run titles, every individual honor in MLB is also affected by a 163rd game, so at this point we will mirror what MLB does in the regular season.

Thanks all and good luck today.

First - awesome contest and great year for season long fantasy baseball. So many races that came down to the wire. I was the unfortunate victim of a Fiore 8 point jump on the final day to finish second in a main. Eight points on game 162! Wow. All I could do was hope for a game 163 right? NOOOO......even after that, I did not want a game 163.

The basis for keeping this is because it mirrors what MLB does? That doesn't make sense to me on so many fronts. The NFBC Fortress has been built with pillars of fairness and equity. It is the reason so many were attracted to this contest. No trades. If a hint of collusion - the Ambrosius hammer is swift and firm. When the min inning standard allowed creative bending of roster construction - boom - the change was made without MLB regular season congruity assessment (at least to my knowledge). When the FAAB system left something to be desired in terms of when certain players were available - it was beautifully clarified. This is what I love about the NFBC. The best of the best play here. The playing field is known and fair. The game is run by people that care. The game is run by people we trust. It's a wonderful game to play while we follow the best sport ever created.

How then do we get to the spot where a play-in / play-off game counts as part of this contest? It makes no sense. Furthermore owners are allowed to change lineups? A whole additional period is added to accommodate the extra games? And the reason is - "well - that's what MLB does?". MLB allows roster expansion at a certain point in the season - why not expand NFBC rosters? NFBC cutline only uses part of the year - what?! But the MLB players are still accumulating stats for home run titles, etc. Gasp. As mentioned by someone else - the NFFC skips a whole week of the season. Why? I don't have to list why.

As you said Greg - there is a month to decide. For the good of the game - please consider changing this rule. Or at least give us a better reason than "well - the MLB counts the stats." Who cares if the MLB counts the stats? You have what you call a full season football contest that doesn't include 6 percent of the games. You have a baseball cutline contest that lops off a quarter of the season. Yet you dig your heels in on an extra game for a couple of teams because the stats count for MLB?

In summary - I think "fairness / level playing field" should trump (no - not that one) the other arguments.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Sorry John, but you simplified my thoughts to promote your point. Not accurate at all.

In the NFBC, we've always tried to give you the owners as much power as possible to finish as high in the standings as you can. You know that. We know that. When it comes to the 163rd game -- the final regular season game for some teams -- we do the same thing. Yes, we could eliminate it from the NFBC regular season. Yes, we could force the last week's rosters onto that Monday game if there happens to be one. But here's why we do what we do:

This is a skill-based game and that includes what could be the final game of the season. Everyone is looking at how that game BENEFITS any owner who has a player going in that game, but that's not always the case. Suppose an owner is first overall and is looking at the $125,000 grand prize, but he can move down in ERA and WHIP if his Starting Pitcher goes during that game. Or if he's ahead in Batting Average and now he has additional hitters going in that game. He didn't set his starting lineup on Monday thinking that his pitcher would get another start. Why shouldn't he make the decision to start or sit that player or players in that game? Why should I make that decision for him with $125,000 on the line?

He started that pitcher thinking he would have one more start and then start in the first game of the playoffs. Now he's being used in the regular season final game and he should be able to decide whether he wants to sit or start that guy. So that's the theory behind why we allow lineup changes on that Monday, like it or not.

As for eliminating the final game of the regular season? Again, more thought than you gave us. Some players have only 161 games because of rainouts -- more frequently than a 163rd game -- and thus this final game is just part of the whacky MLB regular season. Yes, it is counted as part of the MLB regular season and so I don't think you should have Aaron Judge with 50 homers in the NFBC and 52 in MLB if he hits two homers in that game. That game is part of the MLB regular season and that's the schedule we use for the NFBC, rainouts, doubleheaders, tie-breaker games, all of it.

Now the argument is: Well, you don't count Week 17 in the NFFC!! C'mon, you've changed that before.

Yes, and people asked us to eliminate the last week of the NFBC season a couple of years ago and even to eliminate the last two weeks. The last two weeks are always chaotic in baseball and the best players don't always play or pitch in those games. We understand it, but we didn't listen to the loud Message Board chants to change our schedule then. This is a marathon and unfortunately those last few yards can be unfair and cruel.

In our 14 years of the NFBC, we've had four seasons where a 163rd game was used. Here were the instances:

2007 NL Wild Card Colorado Rockies 9–8 (13) San Diego Padres
2008 AL Central Chicago White Sox 1–0 Minnesota Twins
2009 AL Central Minnesota Twins 6–5 (12) Detroit Tigers
2013 AL Wild Card Tampa Bay Rays 5–2 Texas Rangers

I wanted more debate on this subject, but maybe it's tougher to stand up for a rule rather than break it down. Sure we could survey the masses and go with the majority, but we feel strongly about using the stats from the entire season (even dumb games like the ones in Australia) and so we play it out through the entire regular season. We could take the Monday game away, the last Sunday game, the last week, the last two weeks away if we wanted to. But it's part of the NFBC season and giving owners the power to start or not start those players in a new week is what we feel is right.

We may be wrong -- God knows I've been wrong so many times -- and others may agree with you. But that's the rationale and it's less simplistic than some people have made it out to be. We think it's the fairest way to handle this game and it's okay to disagree with us. But that's why we use it and why we let you decide whether to start or bench those players. Thanks for a great season and hopefully this makes sense.

[DOUGHBOYS]

To your point, Greg, your thoughts promote points for the other side.
There is nothing, we as owners, can do if a 162nd game is not played for some teams.
As owners, we think, it is what it is.
At the same time, you open the door for teams that are lucky enough to have players on a 163rd game.
Not only do you open the door for them, you feed them by letting them change their lineups for that 163rd game.

The 163rd game is a result of what occurs during the last week of the season. With current rules, it is a boon or large advantage to the drafters who have players for that game.
Not only do they get to have dogs in the hunt for that 163rd game, they get to adjust their players to fit their needs.
To your point again, they can bench players that may hurt ERA's, WHIP, or batting average.
While playing the players who will only help them in the other categories.
You are giving them two bites of an apple, while others have no apple at all.

Yes, players that have these players may be surprised that their pitcher is throwing a regular season 163rd game instead of a playoff game.
So what?
Owners were surprised that Tanner Roark threw relief on the last day of the season...and hurt them
Owners were surprised that Robby Ray threw in relief on the last day of the season and gave up a run.
Surprise is the nature of our beast!
That 163rd game should be, at the least, a part of the final weeks games.
All other games are scheduled by Major League Baseball and the NFBC follows suit with their scheduling.
Even the silly games in Austrailia.
This game is not scheduled, yet the NFBC makes a new schedule for it.
They don't do that for any other games. It's not right.
As is, it is not fair to most owners.

[DOUGHBOYS]

A la Columbo..."Uh, just one more thing, Sir...."

For teams that do have players in the 163rd game, there is little strategy.
If a player can hurt them, he is benched.
If a player can help them, he is played.
That player is given carte blanche to look at the standings, see what his team needs, and play every player who can help him.
No strategy.
A license to kill.

If rules were changed and possible playoff bound teams were part of that final weeks lineups, it opens up new strategies for all players.
We ALL think there is a possibility that some of our players may be involved in a playoff.
We can strategize for that. We know we may get an extra game for a Rockies player, so we may play that player over a non-playoff possibility.
Strategy is what makes playing our game great. It starts on draft day and ends with the last game of the season.
As is, there is no strategy for that last 163rd game of the season.
Just 'open season' for teams that have players for a 163rd game.