On the eve of the start of the fantasy playoffs (in most leagues), let's take a moment to hear from some of you.
I'm fascinated by "fairness" in fantasy leagues. How do we construct rules that put more weight on skill rather than luck. Sure, we can't avoid luck -- good or bad. But we have access to seemingly limitless levers that can be pulled this way or that, producing conditions most likely to benefit talented managers.
For example, in my FF4W Premier Fantasy Football League, where 168 managers compete for division titles and the overall PFFL Championship, I'm continually tweaking rules to (try to) mitigate the impact of luck. The biggest change this year was awarding up to two wins or two losses per week. Out-score your opponent head-to-head? That's one win. Out-score half of your opponents? That's another win.
This way, if you lose 150 to 146, that should still be enough points to give you a W to go with your head-to-head L. Or if you barely squeak by with an 84-82 victory, you've probably finished in the bottom-half of your league's scoring. So you deserve the head-to-head W, but you also deserve the league-based L, because a much higher-scoring opponent arguably is more deserving of the league-based W.
I also require a minimum $1 FAAB bids for all free agent pick-ups. This way when the regular season ends, I can zero-out the FAAB for all non-playoff teams, preventing them from making moves. Why? So that, for example, a last-place manager can't out-bid a title contender on the waiver wire.
What's an interesting rule in your league(s) that values skill over luck?
---