Log In   -   Register?

2016 Free Agent Tracker!            2016 Free Agent Leaderboards!            Auction Calculator!

ottoneu Suggestions Thread

+3 votes
This thread is not a question, but a chance for ottoneu players who have suggestions about the game to let the folks behind the game (which mostly means Niv Shah) know about their suggestion.

Here is how it will work: If you have a comment/question/suggestion, post it as an answer to this thread. If you want to second a comment/question/suggestion, vote for it. If you want to comment on it (to say something more than "I second this!") reply to the answer. If you have a different comment/question/suggestion, post a new answer.

Niv and I will be patrolling this thread, looking for good ideas, and trying to respond as needed. Hope you have been enjoying playing ottoneu!
asked Sep 18, 2012 in ottoneu Help by Chad Young (30 points)
recategorized Mar 4, 2013 by David Appelman
Do you really think people are going to allocate $11 to those guys? I mean, maybe they would, but only if your team is totally devoid of actual proven talent.

In the test we ran, a total of $8 was given to playes with no MLB experience (Myers got $4, Bundy got $1, Taveras got $2, and Zunino got $1), and I think that will prove to be on the high end. Your trio of $1 players are, more than likely, going to turn into 1 decent player, 1 replacement level guy, and 1 total bust (or something along those lines). If people assigning money to my team put that money entirely towards prospects like those three, I would laugh, cut those guys, buy them back for less at auction, and GLADLY keep the actual, proven players on my roster.

Funds will be allocated to the best values...those three guys are pretty close to fair market price right now and I do not expect that any of them will go up by more than $2-$3....and the chances are at least two of them don't go up at all.
Well, Dexter Fowler is my best MLB player. So I do think my cheap prospects will the the heaviest tax.  I have a virtual who's who of stud prospects and only Fowler and Rizzo and Jarrod Parker worth increasing at the MLB level.
edit for double post
JJDouglas - The reason for the next highest bid +1 is that we are trying to recreate what would happen in a real bidding war, if all owners were perfectly logical (refused to pay more than they thought the player was worth, regardless of what was happening in negotiations) and all players were incentivized on a purely financial basis. So if I am willing to pay $10 and you are willing to pay $5, I have to pay $6 (imagine you offering the player $1, I offer $2, you $3, and so on...). If we both offered $5, the player wouldn't say "well, you were willing to pay more, so I will take your $5 and not his $5."

I see where you are coming from, but you are winning the player because you are willing to pay more - and so you have to actually pay MORE to get that player. In the case of a tie, we can't make one team pay more and we can't presume to know which team the player in question would choose to play for...so we break the tie on standings.
Middle - Based on that, I would guess a) that your biggest increases are to Parker, Rizzo and Fowler and b) that you don't get much allocated to your team. A team with those three and a bunch of guys who won't necessarily be in the bigs next year isn't where I would allocate my dollars. If I wait a year, I can see which of those guys pan out and allocate money to those guys, while ignoring the ones who don't make the cut. Every league will be different, I am sure, but I would not expect much in the way of allocation towards prospects.

8 Answers

+3 votes
  1. Custom scoring categories. Not necessarily manual entry of formulas, but a buffet of stats for those of us with larger leagues.
  2. Data export. This is the one thing CBS has above the rest: XML and CSV export of league data per day, period, and season.
answered Sep 18, 2012 by lightsabr (15 points)
What data export exactly are you looking for? Daily standings? Player stats?
Player stats, chiefly.
+2 votes
The new arbitration system is an excellent addition, and was at the very top of my off season wish list - thank you.  Here are a few other minor suggestions:

1) Allow Commissioners the ability to a) shorten or b) eliminate the 48 hour trade process.  Most owners in our league would vote to eliminate the 48 hour delay, but giving leagues the option (48, 24, 0) to choose may work best.

2) Allow Points Leagues owners to see where they standin in relation to all points leagues

3) For email trade notifications, add "decline" comments in the email itself

4) When exporting "Standings" to excel, all stats export correctly except the actual point totals, which is critical.

5) Add a "History" tab that keeps track of trophies, league champions, and other misc. league awards, etc.

6) Allow for owners to "chat" on a seperate page (trade discussions, etc.) and keep a history by owner.
answered Sep 18, 2012 by Trey Baughn (14 points)
I like the History tab idea. If nothing else, listing league champions. Flags fly forever -- show it!
1) I think one of the advantages of the window is that it makes it hard to cheat the system. The incentive to collude is really low if you know that everyone in the league is going to see the deal and have plenty of time to discuss it. But maybe there are ways to allow a league to bypass this.

2) I am curious about this too...have to look into how it can happen. If nothing else, maybe I can get an article together after the year that looks into that.

3) For this, you mean the email you get when another owner declines your trade, right?

4) We'll look into that.

5) Some sort of trophies or badges could be fun. Have to look into how that works.

6) There is the "email owner" functionality that I think serves this purpose. I'd be interested to know if other people want this - personally, I would rather have all my trade talks in my email account.
6) The email owner is passably workable but when you reply, no history of the conversation is included. So every message you get as a reply has no context. I deal with hundreds of emails daily between personal accounts and work. I simply cannot remember all the context from multiple simultaneous email threads with different people in different leagues. I think the "keep a history" part of the original suggestion is the key here.
+4 votes
Here are my biggest peeves:

1. When setting my lineup for tomorrow, the opposing pitcher is usually not listed. There is no shortage of places to find tomorrow's probable starting pitchers, but apparently wherever ottoneu gets their data from is not one of them.

2. I really want to be able to customize the stats I see on the lineup page. All I get are season stats. I want to be able to select the timeframe, like last 7 days, last 30 days.

3. Now and then, DL status gets lost. This is important for teams with a player on the 60-day DL and a full roster since they will temporarily be in an illegal state and cannot edit their lineup.

4. Lack of news on players. If I want to see recent news on a player, I have to go elsewhere, hunt, and come back. Time consuming.
answered Sep 18, 2012 by edwinblume (14 points)
I'd like to strongly second the customizable lineup stats. The last 10 games thing on the player's profile page is useful, but opening each player's page gets cumbersome. Would be nice to be able to filter as described so that you can easily see all your players' recent stats side by side.
1) We'll have to figure this out with our data provider.

2) Again, someting we can discuss with our data provider. For what it's worth, I think I would never show 7 day stats since they are totally meaningless, but a couple window's is not a bad idea.

3) Agreed. Working on this.

4) The player pages have news feeds on them if anything recent was posted. And the ottoneu player pages have links to the FanGraphs player pages with more links to articles both on FG and elsewhere.
4) I'm in leagues this season with ottoneu and ESPN. Yes, with a sufficient number of mouse clicks, I can get from my ottoneu lineup page to a linked article mentioning player X. At ESPN, I can open up a little dialog box with 1 click that gives any recent notes (not full articles) that often indicate news impacting things like a player's available for today's game. I just can't get that here.
+5 votes

Here's a proposal. Tier it.

No Pos Player or Pitcher who has yet to appear in a MLB game can have any extra arb dollars voted on to him.

Any Position Player with 1-500 MLB PA, Any SP with 0.1-150 MLB IP, Any RP with 1-30 MLB appearances, can have only as much as $1 voted to them by any one owner.

Any Position Player with 501-800 MLB PA, Any SP with 150.1-300 MLB IP, Any RP with 31-60 MLB appearances, can only have as much as $2 voted to them by any one owner.

Any player exceeding that directly above can have the full $3 allotted to them by an opposing owner.

What does this do? It puts more power in owners hands, like the new system. It also replicates real baseball a bit more. Players in the minors cannot have arb increases, just the token dollar. Players with limited service time have limited increases, which ramp up with service time. 

Everyone smart enough to own Trout entering this year is losing Trout or having his salary go up anywehre from somewhere between 65% and 700% or so. They should get another year to profit from their good early drafting. Ottoneu is supposed to be a long game, not a one-and-done league. Something like what I've spelled out above I believe honors that long-game approach (a HUGE part of the allure of Ottoneu), rewards prospecting and gets us closer to a real structure.

answered Sep 19, 2012 by themiddle54 (24 points)
this is along the lines of what I was saying above, but in much more detailed, fleshed out form - seems like the right way to go.
While this is an attractive alteration, I'm not sure how easy it would be to implement a tiered approach. I would be happy enough with a simple change to prevent any allocation dollars going to players with 0 mlb service time.
It might not be easy. But why does it have to be easy? The commish might need to monitor the votes and use the Commish tools to make corrections on illegal votes. But a good commish should be dedicated to doing that, IMO.
Why do you think the Commish would have the power to edit other teams' allocations? I would certainly hope not. If I'm the Commish, and I am in one of my leagues, if it isn't easy it isn't going to happen. It is not up to me to enforce ottoneu's rules. I have too many other things to do in my life.
Becuase I'm commish of my $100 buy in league and I know that I can go remove players from rosters, and add players to rosters while assigning salaries, and stop trades, and do a whole bunch of other stuff.

So if, in the plan outlined above, I downloaded spreadsheets from bbref with PA, IP, Appearances, and sorted them by that and sent them to my league in tiers and said: "Here's who you can not add money to, here's who you can do up to a buck, here's who you can do up to two dollars" and then monitored the votes, it would be, frankly, pretty easy and about 20 minutes of my time for the spreadsheet and 20 minutes of my time to look at the few borderline cases where someone voted on a player on the cusp of the above benchmarks.
Yes, I'm aware that a Commish can edit other teams' rosters. I don't think they should be able to, but anyway I don't see how that applies here. I have seen no part of the proposed arbitration rule changes that stated or implied that the Commish could edit other owners' allocations. So instead of just making assumptions, we need some clarification from Niv/Chad/etc....
I think this idea is the best representation of a real MLB arbitration system. If you were lucky enough to get Mr. Trout for anything under $20, then why should you be penalized for either seeing or being lucky enough to have to pay a 200+% increase? This is not how it works in MLB. Even in the old system you were given the $5 discount to help you buy the player back cheaper. In my league Trout is $39 this year. He will (with this new system) probably go from $41 to $70+. The owner would essentially be forced to drop him, and not have a discount at the auction. It's unfair to penalize people who played with an eye on the future, especially when they essentially willingly made the decision to punt this year, and possibly for a 2-3 year window, with plans on having a juggernaut for 4-5 years straight. It may be difficult, or percieved as difficult, but I agree with middle54, as good as ottoneu leagues are, doing things to improve the league, no matter the difficulty shouldn't be ignored, right?

I'm not advocating commishes making arbitrary changes to the system. My big hope is that Niv and Chad look at this and correct the new system by blacking out minor leaguers from being eligible for arb money votes at the very least, the same as those players are blacked out from accumulating points.

The Royals have to go to arb with Getz and Bourgeois and Maier and Blake Wood next year even though those guys stink, because their service time is what it is. They don't have to do that with Sal Perez or Wil Myers because those players are not arb eligible. Similarly, Perez and Myers should not be open to arb in Ottoneu the same as Getz and Bourgeois et al, or more practically Votto and Verlander and Felix and Halladay.

The Angels don't have to give Trout a raise to $20MM next year because every other team in baseball says "Well, we missed on him in the draft, so we should be able to tax Los Angeles for striking gold with him." That's what this new system does with the arbitrary amounts owners can put on other players's teams. If Trout were voted off in the old system, he'd go for market value, or market minus five for the hometown discount. In the new system he goes up to an arbitrary amount that's mostly punitative tax.

You put Trout or Myers or Perez to different tiers, to slow the inflation of their salaries in their first couple years, and you have a vastly superior system to one that overwhelmingly punishes an owner who hits big on a prospect. If an owner has to
Lot's of stuff in this thread. First of all, I absolutely support leagues taking this into their own hands. Personally, I think young players should be able to be hit with increases and it does not bother me if someone wants to assign money to my prospects. That is part of the game. But I understand that other leagues won't feel the same and I think that other leagues should handle this as they see fit. My recommendation would be to set a clear guideline that is easily researched - something like "never appeared in an MLB game" rather than "is rookie eligible" or something. But, regardless, there are no limits on how you can limit this within your league. By keeping is 100% open, we allow every league/team to make their own call.


Re; the $39 Trout - if I had a $39 Trout and people put $32 on him and he went up to $73, I would cut him and laugh at all the other owners for wasting so much of their cash. My fear wtih a $39 Trout would be what happens if he gets allocated like $15 and is now $56? Is he worth $56? Maybe, maybe not. Is he going to be a perrenial MVP candidate? Or is he going to drop off a bit next year?
0 votes
Here's another suggestion that hasn't been mentioned yet:  How about allowing for customizable league and roster sizes?  I know one of the appeals is having super-deep rosters, but not everyone is qutie that interested in going so deep into the player pool but still want to take advantage of all of the incredibly cool features of Ottoneu.  Thanks!
answered Sep 27, 2012 by mkirshenbaum (22 points)
League sizes are interesting, but I think the 40 man roster size is unlikely to change or be customized any time soon. Maybe some day, but the depth is one of the primary things that drives people to use ottoneu, and so there are other features that i think we would start with before messing with roster size.
Thanks for the reply.  Perhaps I can take one more shot at convincing you: if it's a complicated change to program, I totally understand that you have other priorities for the core ottoneu players who are groovy with the super-deep rosters.  But if it's realtively easy to allow for customizable roster / league sizes, then why not?  It would open up the game to a lot more people who don't quite have enough time to develop a good knowledge of the entire universe of players (majors and minors, really), but who really want to enjoy all of the other super-interesting and unique features of ottoneu.  I, and a number of members of a long-term Yahoo league I'm in, would love to be able to participate and get involved with all of the unique functionality of ottoneu, but just don't have the time to go quite as deep as the set-up currently requires.

Thanks for listening!
0 votes

Better league on the block information.

Having to go to each team's OTB page separately makes it very hard to get a picture of the market, and just takes up a lot of time when you get serious about trading. (Clicking through page after page to see who's selling SS...) Would love a single league OTB page that showed every team's OTB reports. 

Also, it would be nice to have a list of my players, their salaries, and positions while I'm updating my OTB. This is lower priority, as I can always have two windows, but it would be handy.


answered Oct 4, 2012 by philosofool (104 points)
0 votes

Live Standings on the live scoring page. It's fun to see that you hitters are doing well, but it's more fun to see yourself gaining on the competition. 

Live standings should include total pitching points, total batting points, total points, and the change in each of those during that day; during the last seven days would be cool too (gives a sense of the current trajectory.) It's as much misinformation as information, but it's dramatic and fun. I play for fun.

answered Oct 5, 2012 by philosofool (104 points)
0 votes
I have one fairly basic suggestion. Replace saves and holds with shutdowns and meltdowns. This is just a matter of preference but I've found the present set up pushes up the premium on closers to a significant degree. This possibly mirrors actual baseball but I think shutdowns and meltdowns are a better way to evaluate relievers.
answered Oct 6, 2012 by David (5 points)