I have done fantasy hockey and fantasy basketball with some people at school. Both of these leagues have been head to head. In baseball, I prefer rotisserie, but I don't know if everybody will approve.
2007-02-08 09:21:07 · 8 answers · asked by n8van2 2 in Sports ➔ Fantasy Sports
Head-to-Head gives direct competition, but also a lot of match-up luck. In particular, head-to-head playoffs are frustrating. In my experience it's rare for the team that dominated the regular season to win it all. On the plus side, even bad teams can still try to win each week, which may encourage more participation.
Rotisserie is a much better test of true fantasy skill, Unfortunately, it can be very off-putting for new players. In most leagues the top, middle, and bottom tiers of teams are pretty well locked by the halfway point, if not sooner, and there are rarely more than two teams in the running for the championship towards the end.
In baseball, stats like OBP, ERA and WHIP can be really weird on a week-to-week basis. Even wins can be frustrating. If your league can handle it, Rotisserie is better, but if you have a lot of new players head-to-head may be easier.
2007-02-08 11:33:43 · answer #1 · answered by Tim S 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Since you are probably doing it with buddies, usually your buddies want to be competitive. Head to Head is more competetive than Rotisserie. Rotisserie you can sit back and set your lineup for a week and not check it but head to head you often want to check back to see the score of your matchup. In rotisserie, you usually only gain or lose about 1-2 points per day.
2007-02-08 09:40:22 · answer #2 · answered by Sixteen and Oh 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I play fantasy hockey ahd baseball too, and I prefer head-to-head for both. If that's what your group is used to using, you should probably either stick with head-to-head or at least check around to see if the rest of your group wants to do rotisserie.
2007-02-08 09:37:34 · answer #3 · answered by rusty shackleford 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think you should do one of each. I only did head-2-head leagues for the first two years. Once I tried the Rot league, i loved it just as much. It takes two different stratagies to play each one. The only league I have not been able to complete in yet is an auction league where everyone has a chance at each player and you bid for their rights. That would be a lot different than your draft leagues. But if I were you, I would do one of each so you can compare the two.
2007-02-08 11:46:34 · answer #4 · answered by postalclerkgso 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I prefer head-2-head, as long as everyone is active.. if you have inactive managers though, head-2-head can be a pain in the ***. Just make sure every1 has a e-mail availible that way you're not getting multiple teasm under 1 acct.
Rotisserie has it's perks too.. bcus its even thruout the entire season, as to whewre head-2-head allows for week-2-week advantages. Someone who may not ALWAYS have the best team, still has a chance at the playoffs in a head 2 head league.
2007-02-08 11:33:40 · answer #5 · answered by Betrayed King 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i like head to head much better because every week you play a new team. in rotisserie, you need all around players so big sluggers arent worth as much as they would be in head to head. for rotisserie, you have to draft an all-around team.
2007-02-08 11:51:43 · answer #6 · answered by pimpy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just go head-to-head, odds are it'll be easier for everyone to understand and if they are anti roto then they're not going to put in a lot of effort.
Set it up so that the majority of the people in the league approve and you're all set.
2007-02-08 10:52:19 · answer #7 · answered by ken_kanith 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
head to head is more competitive, rotisserie is more laid back i guess i can say.
2007-02-08 11:49:39 · answer #8 · answered by jcenathuganomics 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋