2024 Official Fantasy Volleyball Champions League

[vballfan17]

Oct 3, 2024 9:31:01 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

I’m pretty sure the core fantasy group has discussed this before and it was shot down. The randomness of the game is just sometimes part of fantasy. IMO, trying to equalize everything can have adverse consequences. What if the 5th set goes beyond 15 points? All those additional points get a multiplier as well whereas if the prior sets went to extra points, there is no multiplier (or conversely when they do go to extra points now, we don’t discount those points). I think rather than it being seen as a “punishment” it’s just “part of the game”.

That's why I think we could just could the 5th set as .6 of a regular set. 25 points (sets 1-4) = 1x multiple. 15 points (set 5) = .6 multiplier. Any of those sets could go extra points but the multiplier doesn't change. This would mathematically even out the shortened 5th set compared to the others.

[uofaGRAD]

I don’t think I have a strong opinion either way but I like seeing the points for each side lol

[c4ndlelight]

I am against it.

[kiyoat]

Oct 3, 2024 9:23:26 GMT -5 vup said:

Oct 3, 2024 8:39:15 GMT -5 kiyoat said:

Have you guys ever thought of multiplying 5th set stats by 1.67? (or 1.667) It would be a bit of extra math, but would get rid of the random punishment of the 5th set.  Or am I misunderstanding how scoring works here?

Perhaps a lower handicap like 1.167, but applying 1.667 seems to have an inflationary effect where 4(1.667) kills would be 6.67 kills, and 2(1.667) digs would be 3.33 digs per set. When some of our categories matches are only won by tenths and hundredths of points, an extra 2.67 kills in a hypothetical 5th set is quite the bump. I think it's hard to handicap because 5-set matches can be pretty unpredictable. I don't know though, just my opinion.

That makes total sense.  When a first set goes 2 extra points, that would be less of an impact as 2 extra points in a 5th set (if using a multiplier).  Not exactly fair.  And extra points is a random outcome that helps stats, where a 5th set is a random outcome that lowers stats.  I suppose it evens out.

[rainbowbadger]

Oct 3, 2024 12:13:59 GMT -5 kiyoat said:

Oct 3, 2024 9:23:26 GMT -5 vup said:

Perhaps a lower handicap like 1.167, but applying 1.667 seems to have an inflationary effect where 4(1.667) kills would be 6.67 kills, and 2(1.667) digs would be 3.33 digs per set. When some of our categories matches are only won by tenths and hundredths of points, an extra 2.67 kills in a hypothetical 5th set is quite the bump. I think it's hard to handicap because 5-set matches can be pretty unpredictable. I don't know though, just my opinion.

That makes total sense.  When a first set goes 2 extra points, that would be less of an impact as 2 extra points in a 5th set (if using a multiplier).  Not exactly fair.  And extra points is a random outcome that helps stats, where a 5th set is a random outcome that lowers stats.  I suppose it evens out.

Right. The metric is "per set," not "per 25 points." if we go by the logic that a 5th set is 0.6 of a set, then the WI/TAMU set that went to 30-28 should be worth 1.2 sets.

[trojansc]

The only thing the 5th set “for sure” usually hurts, is assists. Most setters are somewhere around 10 assists and there’s no guarantee your team even scores 10 points in the 5th

I feel like people are like “f*ck, it’s going 5” and then your player gets a block or an ace which actually improves your team score unless your player was already above 1 ace or block per set, which usually isn’t the case.

I certainly wouldn’t mind 4.6. But I was also someone who really liked per match scoring, which for some reason it seems people draw the line of liking randomness at that point. I will say the only part of per match I didn’t like was its impact on assists, but again, random.

[trojansc]

Oct 3, 2024 13:34:47 GMT -5 rainbowbadger said:

Oct 3, 2024 12:13:59 GMT -5 kiyoat said:

That makes total sense.  When a first set goes 2 extra points, that would be less of an impact as 2 extra points in a 5th set (if using a multiplier).  Not exactly fair.  And extra points is a random outcome that helps stats, where a 5th set is a random outcome that lowers stats.  I suppose it evens out.

Right. The metric is "per set," not "per 25 points." if we go by the logic that a 5th set is 0.6 of a set, then the WI/TAMU set that went to 30-28 should be worth 1.2 sets.

But most sets don't go to extra points, those are the anomalies. Fifth sets are 99.9%+ less points scored than 1st-4th sets.

But like I mentioned above, fantasy is random and this isn't something I'd care too much about. But I do think on average, it makes sense to do 4.6. But there are probably other scoring changes that could 'make' sense, and I certainly don't see a major issue with it now.

[eazy]

Oct 3, 2024 13:34:47 GMT -5 rainbowbadger said:

Oct 3, 2024 12:13:59 GMT -5 kiyoat said:

That makes total sense.  When a first set goes 2 extra points, that would be less of an impact as 2 extra points in a 5th set (if using a multiplier).  Not exactly fair.  And extra points is a random outcome that helps stats, where a 5th set is a random outcome that lowers stats.  I suppose it evens out.

Right. The metric is "per set," not "per 25 points." if we go by the logic that a 5th set is 0.6 of a set, then the WI/TAMU set that went to 30-28 should be worth 1.2 sets.

In general, my absolute favorite year of playing was the first year when it was per match scoring. It was always fun to root for matches to go 5. No matter which team is leading at any given time, rooting for it to go 5 means more, competitive volleyball where your preferred team still has a chance to win an exciting match. Now if your team is down 1-2, you're incentivized to root for them to lose. 

Sure, making the 5th set 0.6 would make 5th sets less consequential, but it could make them even more consequential. A 23-21 5th set would be worth 0.6 of a set, but a 25-15 set is worth 1 set. The first one had 43 points played and the second one had 40 points played.

A kill at 0-0 in the 1st set is worth 1 kps, but if they're averaging only 1 kps through 4 sets and then get 1 kill in the 5th, they're ending with 1.09 kps. Those extra decimals are an assumption that they would out-perform their average for the match if those last 10 points had been played. And as noted, those 10 points might actually get played in any of the 5 sets if it is actually that close.

It is my opinion that with how often these matches are getting decided on the margins, it would suck if someone's numbers were inflated on an assumption even worse than it sucks if your numbers were potentially deflated by a 5th set.

[maigrey]

Oct 3, 2024 13:57:46 GMT -5 trojansc said:

The only thing the 5th set “for sure” usually hurts, is assists. Most setters are somewhere around 10 assists and there’s no guarantee your team even scores 10 points in the 5th

I feel like people are like “f*ck, it’s going 5” and then your player gets a block or an ace which actually improves your team score unless your player was already above 1 ace or block per set, which usually isn’t the case.

I certainly wouldn’t mind 4.6. But I was also someone who really liked per match scoring, which for some reason it seems people draw the line of liking randomness at that point. I will say the only part of per match I didn’t like was its impact on assists, but again, random.

you can come play the challenger league

[trojansc]

Reagan Barth, i love u

[trojansc]

eazy starting our per match campaign: there’s also a lot of strategy for per match scoring. With WKU playing cupcakes - it was interesting to see how much Lauren Matthews was valued. A 4kps middle with a lot of blocks, but, her team was sweeping EVERYONE. I liked that element to the draft - is she really worth it?

[uofaGRAD]

Oct 3, 2024 16:46:04 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Reagan Barth, i love u

wtf… damn.

[uofaGRAD]

Oct 3, 2024 16:48:44 GMT -5 trojansc said:

eazy starting our per match campaign: there’s also a lot of strategy for per match scoring. With WKU playing cupcakes - it was interesting to see how much Lauren Matthews was valued. A 4kps middle with a lot of blocks, but, her team was sweeping EVERYONE. I liked that element to the draft - is she really worth it?

see I would absolutely DESPISE that.

[vballfreak808]

Oct 3, 2024 16:46:04 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Reagan Barth, i love u

You need to stop

[trojansc]

Oct 3, 2024 16:49:30 GMT -5 uofaGRAD said:

Oct 3, 2024 16:48:44 GMT -5 trojansc said:

eazy starting our per match campaign: there’s also a lot of strategy for per match scoring. With WKU playing cupcakes - it was interesting to see how much Lauren Matthews was valued. A 4kps middle with a lot of blocks, but, her team was sweeping EVERYONE. I liked that element to the draft - is she really worth it?

see I would absolutely DESPISE that.

*shrug* i do see a trend of people liking what they were used to their first year of fantasy, except when we did raw totals, which is one of the only wrong answers.

Adding strategy and predicting matchups was interesting. Though I get the c4ndlelight complaint of when Maryland kept going 5 with teams like Merrimack and Le Moyne and those players getting extra value bc Maryland was bad.