![]() On the other end of the spectrum, consequences severe enough to serve as a deterrent will often make things difficult for the league. Minor consequences such as commissioner warnings or having someone else set their lineups will not serve as a deterrent to a motivated tanker. The first problem is creating a consequence that hurts the individual owner without hurting the entire league. The problems with crafting consequences to discourage tanking are twofold. ![]() These consequences can be as mild as a commissioner warning or as severe as forfeiture of a first round pick or outright dismissal from the league. The first way to discourage tanking is to have negative consequences for owners who engage in tanking. Tanking is taking actions an owner otherwise would not have taken if draft order was not a consideration. Just as a reminder, here is the definition of tanking I will be using for the remainder of this article: If your league no longer rewards losses the same way, you will no longer have teams intentionally trying to lose. Owners tank because they want a higher draft pick, and tanking is the way to get it. ![]() The second way to discourage tanking is to change the motivation structure of dynasty leagues. If the anticipated consequences were not quite so rosy, fewer owners would tank. Owners tank because the consequence of tanking- better draft position- is considered to be positive. There are two basic ways to deal with tanking in a dynasty league. Today, I’d like to take a deeper look at what leagues can do to address the problem of tanking that is so pervasive in dynasty leagues. What is it, why is it a problem, what can we do about it? Well, okay, I wrote about the first two points. Earlier this week, I wrote about tanking.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |