15

Are questions about fantasy sports on topic? This is a huge market and a huge aspect of fandom.

Are they on topic?

  • 1
    :) Great question, my initial thought would be no because fantasy sports are more of a game than a sport. However, it may be useful to see the outcome of the Sports Trivia discussion and use that as a guide on how to handle these spectator sport questions. – Marcus Swope Feb 9 '12 at 14:49
  • 3
    I think it also depends on the elevator pitch for the site, as well; if the site is for sports enthusiasts, then D&D for jocks -- I mean, fantasy sports deserve serious consideration. If this site is for coaches and pro athletes, then perhaps not. – Aarthi Feb 9 '12 at 16:06
  • @Aarthi I think fantasy sports (particularly baseball) is better termed sports for nerds than D&D for jocks...but there is some overlap there :P. – wax eagle Feb 9 '12 at 16:10
  • @waxeagle Six of one, half a dozen of the other... – Aarthi Feb 9 '12 at 16:18
  • 1
    @Aarthi Magic the Gathering has a new 'fantasy pro tour' where you 'make a team of cards' you think will be in the top decks at the tournaments. I call it "D&D for jocks for nerds". – corsiKa Feb 9 '12 at 16:42
  • 1
    is there are a consensus on this matter? – posdef Aug 12 '12 at 17:39
  • 1
    @posdef as far as I'm concerned we really don't have enough test questions on the matter to make a real decision. However, I think good questions about fantasy sports are likely on topic (it's a pretty big part of fandom at this point). – wax eagle Aug 12 '12 at 18:55
  • Sorry if I'm bringing this question back from the dead, but in order to grow this beta site, I feel like this would help it along a lot. I am a fantasy nut and I am on yahoo answers all day asking and answering questions. This would be GREAT for this website. – Zack Dec 4 '13 at 15:22
  • 1
    @Zack there is absolutely no issue with resurrecting questions here (we have badge for it). I agree, though we do need to make sure that questions about fantasy sports are good SE questions. – wax eagle Dec 4 '13 at 15:29
  • 2
    But if we police fantasy questions too much, people will not ask them at all. The Most common questions are: "Here is my roster, who do I start", or "Player A, B, C - PICK 1 to start" and of course "Trade A vs Trade B, who wins" if we allow those 3 questions on this site and we advertise it, this site will blow up. – Zack Dec 4 '13 at 15:36
  • 1
    @Zack mostly we just don't have test cases to see how those questions do. I'd be interested in trying to answer if people ask. If they are asked in an objective manner that provides sufficient context, they can be good questions though who to start might be a bit too situational. – wax eagle Dec 4 '13 at 15:55
  • 1
    The problem is that the most common questions is "who should I start". Can you give an example of a question that provides sufficient context that you think people would ask regularly? – Zack Dec 4 '13 at 15:57
  • @Zack mind stepping into chat? comments are starting to get cumbersome. chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/2433/the-clubhouse – wax eagle Dec 4 '13 at 15:58
16

As an avid fantasy sports player, the problem allowing that topic will be the proliferation of questions like:

"Who do I start this week?"
"Should I draft Pujols over Cabrera this year?"
"Should I make this trade?"

The bulk of these questions will be too localized or have minimal longevity. While the StackExchange platform would make a nice implementation of Fantasy Sports questions and answers of that ilk, it doesn't seem appropriate for this site (or gaming or webapps)

  • 2
    yeah those are all bad questions. I envision more general questions (Strategy, how the game works, etc) rather than day to day operations type questions (same with pro sports as well, questions about what is happening right now really aren't useful) – wax eagle Feb 17 '12 at 3:08
10

We must also be driven by the expert questions. What are the questions that will attract experts?

I think this is an easy yes. The primary reason why is because experts in whatever sport the fantasy question is about will likely be attracted to something that quantifies their experience. At the very least, they will have the knowledge and expertise to answer questions., and since they're on a QA site probably also have the willingness to answer questions.

Willing and able experts means (imho) we should allow it.

  • 1
    and than you will open the door for an online game of Golf , and FIFA 2010 (that can also be considered a fantasy game: you build your team, have tournaments). Next every Gaming console will be here - as there are sport games and tournaments there, that mimic real life. I say Nay – Saariko Feb 16 '12 at 14:37
  • 1
    @Saariko: questions regarding FIFA, or any other similar sports game, belong to Gaming.SE (aka Arqade) gaming.stackexchange.com – posdef Aug 12 '12 at 17:36
9

If there is a tag, this would attract (as @corsiKa intimates) very knowledgeable contributors, while offering those not interested a way to ignore their fantasy specific content.

6

Again, from another question What is counted as sport? I tend to say that Fantasy sports as well as e-sports are not in the scope of the site.

Indeed, most users that will have fantasy knowledge will be most welcome here to answer sport related questions, but I think that the online portion of the game is out-of-topic.

I think it's more suitable in gaming.se than here.

This also leaves all virtual worlds and online games out of this site. (which I think is correct)

  • I've spoken with a mod on Arqade and it appears that fantasy sports are much more likely to be off topic than on over there. they are certainly a borderline issue boths places (heck they may even have some overlap with Web Applications for that matter. I see them as a major part of fandom at this point. – wax eagle Feb 16 '12 at 14:46
  • Might make sense to have a separate fantasy sports site then. ;) – JW8 Feb 17 '12 at 1:20
3

@Zack is on to something when he says, "the most common questions [regarding fantasy sports] is 'who should I start'."

For Sports SE, however, I envision more "Who should I start and why?" to align with the question being "asked in an objective manner that provides sufficient context." Also, this format promotes semantics and strategy rather than "situational" and "opinionated" tones.

For example, I have two fantasy players I am considering to start.

  • Player A, through five games, has had 10, 1, 10, 1, 10 points respectively.
  • Player B, through five games, has had 5, 7, 8, 7, 5 points respectively.

If I am looking for more of a consistent source of points, I'll go with player B. If I am going with the possibility of more points, I'll go with player A. Of course, there are other factors to be considered and that can be provided. This example lays out potential strategies as to why someone should start player A or B.

  • I think that there are two problems here. One is that if you start getting a decent number of these questions, you will end up with a lot of bad questions. Look at any site that caters to sit/start questions: flooded by bad questions inevitably. – Joe Oct 24 '14 at 15:09
  • 1
    Second is that you have the issue that even the why is going to be inevitably an opinion (if any of us could give a correct answer it's either a really dumb question, or you should be making a living in Vegas) and will probably be very short-lived in utility ("Start A because his opponent has a weak defense and..."). A question about generic strategy - "How do I determine which player to start in Fantasy" - might be okay, but once you put actual names in it, I can't see it ever being useful. – Joe Oct 24 '14 at 15:11
  • 1
    Then, the ultimate answer is "no, fantasy sports is not on topic on Sports SE." This attempts to delve into this question which doesn't present anything objective outside of "who should I choose and here's my situation?" Sure, others may be facing similar situations, but the question as phrased only serves to help the person asking it...which doesn't make it very useful outside of the OP (granted, it is an "actual problem that someone faces"). – user527 Oct 24 '14 at 15:29
  • "Start A because his opponent has a weak defense and..." is actually something worth considering as fantasy football (depending on the league, I use ESPN) gives you statistics to corroborate such a claim. For example, Defense A has given up the most fantasy points to quarterbacks thus far this season. Quarterback B has the most fantasy points thus far this season. Quarterback B is facing Defense A. Thus, start B and sit A. This example shows the (rather extreme, I admit) strategy to start B and sit A due to previous objective statistics. – user527 Oct 24 '14 at 15:31
  • If you can back up why with objective statistics, then one's "opinion" is backed up with expertise and knowledge...rather than "this is what I would do" scenarios. – user527 Oct 24 '14 at 15:32
  • I think that I see where you're going - there could be some valuable questions on the topic - but I think this is one of those cases where by allowing those few valuable questions you'd have a host of bad ones, and in this case I'd rather throw the baby out with the bathwater. Fantasy sports are sufficiently different from actual sports, that if they are interesting to have in SE, they probably should have their own site. – Joe Oct 24 '14 at 15:38
  • Sure. I think the bad that comes with the potential good comes with anything that serves itself to be useful and valuable. And I wouldn't be against such a proposal (although, unless it gets ample support, it will be merged here anyway). – user527 Oct 24 '14 at 15:43
  • I think this particular topic comes with a very small bit of potential good and a very massive amount of potential bad. :) – Joe Oct 24 '14 at 15:51
  • I think you need to be very careful in allowing questions that will have ephemeral meaning. "Which players to play" is meaningless after this round's pick. "How to pick players" has a lot more lasting meaning. – user1122 Oct 24 '14 at 18:21
  • @GlenH7 Agreed with that. I think that's the general consensus. The why part of my point is to promote "how to pick players...given a common situation" that has more lasting meaning than, "here are three guys, pick one." As you say, this becomes irrelevant quickly. – user527 Oct 24 '14 at 18:40
-4

Fantasy sports can be discussed on Science Fiction & Fantasy, for example we already have quite a few questions about or mentioning quidditch.

(Note that this does not include imaginary sports that are not from speculative fiction works.)

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .