INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • FDRep

    • FanDuel Representative

    Hi everyone, Nik here. We’re excited to share with you a big change to our NBA formatting for this season.

    If there’s one consistent frustration we’ve heard from NBA players, it’s the handling of inactive players. Whether it’s Pop late scratching LMA or a top-secret undisclosed mystery injury, it’s an awful experience when you’re drawing dead before the games even start. We call these events “avoidable zeroes”, and they’re the absolute worst.

    Over the summer we prototyped and tested a few different solutions and one thing became crystal clear – if we were going to make a change, we needed to make sure that the change was a fair change for everyone, and didn’t disadvantage one user segment while giving an advantage to another. I obviously can’t speak for every user, and while I’ve got a very loving (and patient!) wife at home, she’s got a limit to how much I’m glued to phone when we’re together. I’ve got friends who have kids, work nights, love the gym, and a whole host of different reasons why late swap simply doesn’t work for them. The division on the topic on the RG forums alone convinced us that it wasn’t the solution.

    Instead, we’re announcing a simple, yet powerful change: we’re dropping your lowest score. Call it best ball, call it a gimme, call it whatever you’d like. Bottom line, if a player puts up a zero, the score won’t count. Positions stay the same, scoring stays the same; we’ll simply only count your top 8. You don’t have to stay glued to your phone; you can pick that West Coast GTD with confidence and even he doesn’t go, you’re still in the running.

    Give it a try, and feel free to shoot me any feedback: nik.bonaddio@fanduel.com. Good luck!

    - NB

  • bhdevault

    • Lead Moderator

    • Blogger of the Month

    @noddy said...

    Hey bhdevault. Now that both dk and fd have changed and they are different which site do you prefer?

    Honestly,

    I don’t know yet. I am fairly certain I will start 100% of my action on Fanduel, and see how the new format treats me. If I struggle with the new 8/9 man format, I may just lower my action significantly and just do a lineup here and there for kicks and stop playing NBA Daily, for the most part.

    I have no idea how the new format will be and if I’ll still have an edge or not. I simply cannot do DK and late swap on a nightly basis, and still have an edge, it’s not fair to my family.

  • noddy

    @bhdevault said...

    Honestly,

    I don’t know yet. I am fairly certain I will start 100% of my action on Fanduel, and see how the new format treats me. If I struggle with the new 8/9 man format, I may just lower my action significantly and just do a lineup here and there for kicks and stop playing NBA Daily, for the most part.

    I have no idea how the new format will be and if I’ll still have an edge or not. I simply cannot do DK and late swap on a nightly basis, and still have an edge, it’s not fair to my family.

    Well good luck on FD. They are 2 different animals for sure.

  • Puma103185

    An example of why Fan Duel was in the right to do this. I was about to make a large deposit on Draft Kings for college football and NFL this weekend. They have a way better college setup then Fan Duel but because I won’t be playing NBA on Draft Kings I will be depositing today on Fan Duel instead. I prefer to have most of my action on one site at a time.

  • gaelicgirl

    @bhdevault said...

    I have no idea how the new format will be and if I’ll still have an edge or not.

    I suspect it’s going to throw everything into a cocked hat at first. You may have seen that one of our NBA thread guys took down the Shot last night with a nice, balanced LU. Since he posted the link I went there to see how he would have fared if the new format was already in place. As some on here have warned would happen, the guy that came in 3rd would have won instead since the winner’s lowest score was higher than his.
    Extremely anecdotal evidence and smallest possible sample size, but this would seem to lend credence to the idea that most people will simply roster a 0 in one spot and then stack the other 8 spots. Time will tell, I guess.

    I do still wish they’d just left well enough alone.

  • ccole00

    FanDuel is like the girlfriend that cheats on you but you still take her back. Knowing that she isn’t good to change 😂😂😂😂

  • scott33

    @ccole00 said...

    FanDuel is like the girlfriend that cheats on you but you still take her back. Knowing that she isn’t good to change 😂😂😂😂

    lol

  • moped_jones

    @cburg74 said...

    I think you will see that most people will now just roster a min. priced guy at the thinnest position(essentially take a “zero”), and then use the extra salary to load up the other 8 players. Just my 2 cents….

    Agreed. That was my first thought as well. It punishes people for staying informed and making good picks.

    This idea was beyond stupid.Bring back late swap or make people just accept getting “Popped” (late scratch).

    I’m going to be pissed the first time I lose b/c my lowest score was higher than someone else’s and now they pass me b/c of this stupid (unnecessary) change. I’ll be going back to Draftkings if this doesn’t go away after the first week. I’ve been looking forward to the start of NBA all summer. This idea is awful.

  • moped_jones

    @Puma103185 said...

    An example of why Fan Duel was in the right to do this. I was about to make a large deposit on Draft Kings for college football and NFL this weekend. They have a way better college setup then Fan Duel but because I won’t be playing NBA on Draft Kings I will be depositing today on Fan Duel instead. I prefer to have most of my action on one site at a time.

    It being convenient for you doesn’t make the idea any less stupid.

    Let’s see how you feel when you lose a GPP b/c your lowest score was higher than the person behind you.

    Let’s say you did great and your lowest score was 35 pts. The person behind you’s lowest score was 0. They are 5 pts behind you. They now beat you by 30 even though you beat them by 5. Oh yeah, and 9 other people have now passed you and instead of winning a GPP you are in 10th place.

    Sounds fun, right?

  • moped_jones

    @FDRep said...

    If there’s one consistent frustration we’ve heard from NBA players, it’s the handling of inactive players. Whether it’s Pop late scratching LMA or a top-secret undisclosed mystery injury, it’s an awful experience when you’re drawing dead before the games even start. We call these events “avoidable zeroes”, and they’re the absolute worst.

    You fix this by having late swap or you leave it alone.

    Wait until someone loses a GPP b/c of this. Wait until someone drops from 1st all the way down to 12th b/c his lowest score was 35 and the 11 people behind him lost 0 pts.

    This might be one of the worst ideas I’ve seen from you. At the very least offer normal slates and these “lowest score gone” slates separately. Offer similar prizes and contest sizes and then see which ones fill up the fastest. That’s your winner

  • scott33

    @moped_jones said...

    At the very least offer normal slates and these “lowest score gone” slates separately. Offer similar prizes and contest sizes and then see which ones fill up the fastest. That’s your winner

    Exactly my friend

  • Njsum1

    @moped_jones said...

    Let’s say you did great and your lowest score was 35 pts. The person behind you’s lowest score was 0. They are 5 pts behind you. They now beat you by 30 even though you beat them by 5. Oh yeah, and 9 other people have now passed you and instead of winning a GPP you are in 10th place.

    Sounds fun, right?

    I just can’t anymore with this thread, I just can’t. Like the change or hate it, everyone is entitled to their opinion/preference, yet you need to understand the change. I’ve seen these sentiments echoed many times throughout this thread, and it shows a complete lack of understanding of the mechanics of the change.

    To be helpful, I will properly explain the mechanics of the change.

    The only score you will see posted is your top 8 players. You will never see the score of your best 9 players, only your best 8. And this will be reflected in the standings. So you will never be up by 30, than your lowest score of say 35 gets dropped and now you drop 500 spots in the standings, as the score that will be shown will always be your best 8. All anyone needs to know is that now it is essentially an 8 man roster. Think of the 9th spot as either cap saver or an insurance policy that will only count if that 9th spot outscores one of your other 8. Your goal is NOT TO MAKE THE BEST 9 MAN ROSTER, ITS TO MAKE THE BEST 8 MAN ROSTER!!! And the score you see throughout the night will be that of your best 8 players at all times!! Again, the leaderboard and standings will NEVER show the aggregate of 9 roster spots, it will only show the top 8 for everyone’s lineups.

  • SkateFiend

    @moped_jones said...

    It being convenient for you doesn’t make the idea any less stupid.

    Let’s see how you feel when you lose a GPP b/c your lowest score was higher than the person behind you.

    Let’s say you did great and your lowest score was 35 pts. The person behind you’s lowest score was 0. They are 5 pts behind you. They now beat you by 30 even though you beat them by 5. Oh yeah, and 9 other people have now passed you and instead of winning a GPP you are in 10th place.

    Sounds fun, right?

    Your lineup could be the one that’s 5 points behind the frontrunner in this scenario. Players will construct lineups at FD with this kind of outcome in mind. Things will even out in a full season.

    If the two lowest scores of your lineup add up to 25-35 points because you totally gave up on one spot, (to the point of playing someone like Ian Mahinmi at center), then that lineup, along with thousands of similar lineups, is likely finished or resigned to min cash fate. It would be unrealistic to expect the other 7 spots to pull their weight. Some balanced lineups might have a slight advantage over boom or bust lineups that went bust.

    At the top of my head – If someone’s regularly punting one spot, they need above average production from 8 other spots every night. I’m looking at past contests and you need something like 400 points to even sniff the top 20. The lowest score of the winning lineup was 28, and the lowest score for my non cashing lineup with Mario Hezonja at 15. It hardly made a difference.

  • tonytone1908

    @SkateFiend said...

    Your lineup could be the one that’s 5 points behind the frontrunner in this scenario. Players will construct lineups at FD with this kind of outcome in mind. Things will even out in a full season.

    If the two lowest scores of your lineup add up to 25-35 points because you totally gave up on one spot, (to the point of playing someone like Ian Mahinmi at center), then that lineup, along with thousands of similar lineups, is likely finished or resigned to min cash fate. It would be unrealistic to expect the other 7 spots to pull their weight. Some balanced lineups might have a slight advantage over boom or bust lineups that went bust.

    At the top of my head – If someone’s regularly punting one spot, they need above average production from 8 other spots every night. I’m looking at past contests and you need something like 400 points to even sniff the top 20. The lowest score of the winning lineup was 28, and the lowest score for my non cashing lineup with Mario Hezonja at 15. It hardly made a difference.

    I actually tried looking at some slates I played last year and while I’ve only gotten a chance to look at a few so far, I’ve yet to find one where the winner would not have won anyways. If someone else can show me an example of this actually happening, please post us a link. In a 2 or 3 game slate I don’t see this happening at all. If anything I see a lot more ties at the top coming since most times it’s that 9th score that separates the rest. I think where this is going to have the most effect is probably around the cash line.

    IDK why people think it’s as easy as just punting one spot altogether. You’re not exactly opening up tons of cap space and most big winners have at least 2 min salary guys anyways. You still need to find a min salary guy that approaches 10x to have a chance at winning regardless and if that guy is your punt and knocks out whatever you got from Nic Batum at 7k you considerably dropped your actual salary spent and that’s not helpful at all. Using 2 min salary punts is the only way to attempt to avoid that situation.

    But please, someone find me an example from last year where someone would lose with the new rules. Until then I think it’s a moot argument.

  • mtdurham

    @Njsum1 said...

    I just can’t anymore with this thread, I just can’t. Like the change or hate it, everyone is entitled to their opinion/preference, yet you need to understand the change. I’ve seen these sentiments echoed many times throughout this thread, and it shows a complete lack of understanding of the mechanics of the change.

    To be helpful, I will properly explain the mechanics of the change.

    The only score you will see posted is your top 8 players. You will never see the score of your best 9 players, only your best 8. And this will be reflected in the standings. So you will never be up by 30, than your lowest score of say 35 gets dropped and now you drop 500 spots in the standings, as the score that will be shown will always be your best 8. All anyone needs to know is that now it is essentially an 8 man roster. Think of the 9th spot as either cap saver or an insurance policy that will only count if that 9th spot outscores one of your other 8. Your goal is NOT TO MAKE THE BEST 9 MAN ROSTER, ITS TO MAKE THE BEST 8 MAN ROSTER!!! And the score you see throughout the night will be that of your best 8 players at all times!! Again, the leaderboard and standings will NEVER show the aggregate of 9 roster spots, it will only show the top 8 for everyone’s lineups.

    yeah i dont really understand that argument either…. i mean it’s not like they are changing the rules mid slate…everyone is playing by the change and should be WELL AWARE of it besides perhaps a handful of people who dont notice the first time they play or simply dont take the time to understand the mechanics…

    you’re not going to win and then lose because of the change… you always lost because you werent playing under the old format…

  • superjon

    @Njsum1 said...

    I just can’t anymore with this thread, I just can’t. Like the change or hate it, everyone is entitled to their opinion/preference, yet you need to understand the change. I’ve seen these sentiments echoed many times throughout this thread, and it shows a complete lack of understanding of the mechanics of the change.

    To be helpful, I will properly explain the mechanics of the change.

    The only score you will see posted is your top 8 players. You will never see the score of your best 9 players, only your best 8. And this will be reflected in the standings. So you will never be up by 30, than your lowest score of say 35 gets dropped and now you drop 500 spots in the standings, as the score that will be shown will always be your best 8. All anyone needs to know is that now it is essentially an 8 man roster. Think of the 9th spot as either cap saver or an insurance policy that will only count if that 9th spot outscores one of your other 8. Your goal is NOT TO MAKE THE BEST 9 MAN ROSTER, ITS TO MAKE THE BEST 8 MAN ROSTER!!! And the score you see throughout the night will be that of your best 8 players at all times!! Again, the leaderboard and standings will NEVER show the aggregate of 9 roster spots, it will only show the top 8 for everyone’s lineups.

    Not sure what’s worse.

    1. People that don’t understand this.
    2. People that think punting a random min salary guy just to have his score dropped is a good idea.

  • kb03

    @tonytone1908 said...

    I actually tried looking at some slates I played last year and while I’ve only gotten a chance to look at a few so far, I’ve yet to find one where the winner would not have won anyways. If someone else can show me an example of this actually happening, please post us a link. In a 2 or 3 game slate I don’t see this happening at all. If anything I see a lot more ties at the top coming since most times it’s that 9th score that separates the rest. I think where this is going to have the most effect is probably around the cash line.

    I just scrolled through my Fanduel history and randomly grabbed a couple of NBA slates, all 2-game slates, because I play those the most.

    First 2 I picked – 1st place would’ve been knocked out by 2nd place
    3rd slate – 1st and 2nd place would’ve tied
    4th and 5th slates I picked – no changes to standings by dropping the lowest score

    I wasn’t sure how to paste the links properly to send them out as examples but I’m sure if any of you comb through your history you will find similar results.

    As others have stated, we’re now building our lineups differently so that we maximize 8/9 so take past roster builds/results with a grain of salt, but there will clearly still be times you either get screwed or helped by this change, adding a little more luck into the equation, which I think is exactly what FD wants.

    I hope to back test some past slates next to see what optimal builds would look like trying to maximize 8 player teams, but not sure when I’ll get around to doing that.

  • moped_jones

    @Njsum1 said...

    I just can’t anymore with this thread, I just can’t. Like the change or hate it, everyone is entitled to their opinion/preference, yet you need to understand the change. I’ve seen these sentiments echoed many times throughout this thread, and it shows a complete lack of understanding of the mechanics of the change.

    To be helpful, I will properly explain the mechanics of the change.

    The only score you will see posted is your top 8 players. You will never see the score of your best 9 players, only your best 8. And this will be reflected in the standings. So you will never be up by 30, than your lowest score of say 35 gets dropped and now you drop 500 spots in the standings, as the score that will be shown will always be your best 8. All anyone needs to know is that now it is essentially an 8 man roster. Think of the 9th spot as either cap saver or an insurance policy that will only count if that 9th spot outscores one of your other 8. Your goal is NOT TO MAKE THE BEST 9 MAN ROSTER, ITS TO MAKE THE BEST 8 MAN ROSTER!!! And the score you see throughout the night will be that of your best 8 players at all times!! Again, the leaderboard and standings will NEVER show the aggregate of 9 roster spots, it will only show the top 8 for everyone’s lineups.

    I do understand the change. Two things happened..

    1. FD got rid of something they shouldn’t have (late swap)

    and then….

    2. people who are bad at DFS and too lazy to dig a little deeper and find out starting lineups cried b/c they got a few DNPs.

    Guess how many times I got popped by late scratches last year? Zero. Maybe I was lucky, or maybe when I had two players I liked equally I go with the person who’s game is earlier so I can minimize the chances of a late scratch hurting me.

    I figured they wouldn’t show the 9 man scores. But you can see your own scores and you can click on the winners lineup to see if you would have beaten them the old way. From there it’s just math. You’ll feel differently about the change if it hurts you. Reading through the comments on here it seems most people think this is pretty stupid and unnecessary.

  • moped_jones

    @kb03 said...

    As others have stated, we’re now building our lineups differently so that we maximize 8/9 so take past roster builds/results with a grain of salt, but there will clearly still be times you either get screwed or helped by this change, adding a little more luck into the equation, which I think is exactly what FD wants.

    If they want to pass this off as a game of skill they need to eliminate some of the luck, not add more to it.

    But yeah, would suck to have a great 9 man lineup and lose to someone who picked a worse lineup.

  • moped_jones

    @mtdurham said...

    yeah i dont really understand that argument either…. i mean it’s not like they are changing the rules mid slate…everyone is playing by the change and should be WELL AWARE of it besides perhaps a handful of people who dont notice the first time they play or simply dont take the time to understand the mechanics…

    you’re not going to win and then lose because of the change… you always lost because you werent playing under the old format…

    The point is it’s an unnecessary change. They avoided this before by having late swap. Then they took that away b/c people complained about having to pay attention after the games start. So they took a situation that had no (real) problems………….then created a real problem………..then “solved it” by making it worse.

    I’ll probably benefit from the rule change, but I still think it’s dumb and unnecessary. If I thought hard enough I could probably come up with a dozen other changes I think FD needs more than eliminating the lowest score (and again, late swap solved that just fine).

  • moped_jones

    @superjon said...

    Not sure what’s worse.

    1. People that don’t understand this.
    2. People that think punting a random min salary guy just to have his score dropped is a good idea.

    1. Don’t confuse people disliking something as them not understanding it.

    2. Changing the argument to “random min salary guy” is very misleading. People will research whatever punt they play. Obviously if you are going for a min priced guy you need to pick someone that is actually on the team (and not in the G league or inactive all the time, lol). I’d say going after a min priced guy that gets 15-20 minutes a night is a great way to go just in case he goes off (or there’s a blowout and he gets extended run).

  • Njsum1

    @moped_jones said...

    I do understand the change. Two things happened..

    1. FD got rid of something they shouldn’t have (late swap)

    and then….

    2. people who are bad at DFS and too lazy to dig a little deeper and find out starting lineups cried b/c they got a few DNPs

    Really, are you trolling now?

    1) You clearly did not understand the change as your entire post that I commented on, was based on the notion that it will be miserable if you were leading a GPP, then all of a sudden dropped in the standings, when your lowest score was dropped. To be helpful I explained that it doesn’t work that way.

    2) FanDuel never had late swap. So they couldnt get rid of something they didn’t have.

    3) The change has nothing to do with “people who are bad at DFS.” It had to do with people not wanting to take unavoidable 0’s, when late scratches happen.

    4) congratulations on your good fortune of not being affected by a single late scratch. Most if not all diligent players were affected by a late scratch at least once last season, if not more.

    5) who cares about “Seeing if you would have won the old way.” The old way no longer matters. If you’re making lineups, “the old way” you’re doing it wrong. It’s like going back and calculating what your score would have been when blocks and steals were worth 2 points instead of 3. What’s the sense in that?

    Again, you don’t have to like the change, and if users don’t like it after an adequate test run, I’d guess FD will change it back. I’d just give it a chance, I’ve played the format and it’s pretty cool..IMO. People already discussed some sharp strategies. Good luck

  • jayk123

    • 11

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #11

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2020 $1M Prize Winner

    @superjon said...

    Not sure what’s worse.

    1. People that don’t understand this.
    2. People that think punting a random min salary guy just to have his score dropped is a good idea.

    Mate. Have you seen FD salaries? There’s a minpriced guy with 30+ ceiling on pretty much every slate. It’s not like you’re clicking a guy that isn’t playing. It’ll be the dominant strategy, and for good reason.

  • pick6er

    @Njsum1 said...

    Really, are you trolling now?

    1) You clearly did not understand the change as your entire post that I commented on, was based on the notion that it will be miserable if you were leading a GPP, then all of a sudden dropped in the standings, when your lowest score was dropped. To be helpful I explained that it doesn’t work that way.

    2) FanDuel never had late swap. So they couldnt get rid of something they didn’t have.

    3) The change has nothing to do with “people who are bad at DFS.” It had to do with people not wanting to take unavoidable 0’s, when late scratches happen.

    4) congratulations on your good fortune of not being affected by a single late scratch. Most if not all diligent players were affected by a late scratch at least once last season, if not more.

    5) who cares about “Seeing if you would have won the old way.” The old way no longer matters. If you’re making lineups, “the old way” you’re doing it wrong. It’s like going back and calculating what your score would have been when blocks and steals were worth 2 points instead of 3. What’s the sense in that?

    Again, you don’t have to like the change, and if users don’t like it after an adequate test run, I’d guess FD will change it back. I’d just give it a chance, I’ve played the format and it’s pretty cool..IMO. People already discussed some sharp strategies. Good luck

    Let me just hit on your #4. EVERYONE was effected by a late scratch last season. Pacers/Pelicans was postponed after a leaking roof, there was heavy ownership in that game. Just wanted to further your statement!

  • mtdurham

    @tonytone1908 said...

    But please, someone find me an example from last year where someone would lose with the new rules. Until then I think it’s a moot argument.

    They didnt play under these rules last year…. so last years rosters data is totally invalid

  • mtdurham

    @moped_jones said...

    The point is it’s an unnecessary change. They avoided this before by having late swap. Then they took that away b/c people complained about having to pay attention after the games start. So they took a situation that had no (real) problems………….then created a real problem………..then “solved it” by making it worse.

    I’ll probably benefit from the rule change, but I still think it’s dumb and unnecessary. If I thought hard enough I could probably come up with a dozen other changes I think FD needs more than eliminating the lowest score (and again, late swap solved that just fine).

    1) Late swap is a problem. If you live on the East coast and spent from 2 pm to 7 pm every day researching the slate then maybe you’d understand what it means to want to enjoy the rest of your evening after lineup lock at ~7 pm.

    I want to watch the Charlotte Hornets game at that point. I dont want to mess with my lineups at all after that.

    Now I’d be willing to compromise if they set up a system where if i checked my notifications and saw my $7200 Damian Lillard at Utility had been ruled out at 9:00 PM EST for a 10:00 PM EST game …and i could sub in $7200 Lamarcus ALdridge, $7100 Marc Gasol, or $7000 Deandre Jordan, or $6900 Harrison Barnes, or $6800 CJ McCollum…. well you get the point… a 1 for 1 swap with any player of equal or lesser value with that positional eligibility….. id be fine with this…. heck id be fine with designating one backup in advance…whatever….

    Am I okay with sprinting home from dinner, the bar, blowing off my family/friends/JOB/etc? Perhaps not even DOING or ATTENDING ANY EVENT WHATSOEVER so that i could sit in front of my computer all night every night? No…thats where everyone is drawing the line man…

    To top it all off I have no desire to learn to use those CSV things… therefore I dont have the ability to change 500 lineups on a moments notice…

    One key player being ruled out essentially changes the value of every single player on the slate. It’s like a brand new slate.

    It’s like if you spent your whole day researching a slate and that 15 minutes before lineup lock draftkings said WHOOPS WE POSTED THE WRONG PLAYER PRICES, HERE THEY ARE AGAIN, QUICK BUILD 500 NEW LINEUPS IN THE NEXT EIGHT MINUTES!

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Subforum Index

RotoGrinders.com is the home of the daily fantasy sports community. Our content, rankings, member blogs, promotions and forum discussion all cater to the players that like to create a new fantasy team every day of the week.

Bet with your head, not over it!
Gambling Problem? Call 1-800-Gambler