Would You Be In Favor Of Ranking Your Draft Spots?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 4:49 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

GG, it's not any less fair than our current system because that 14th or 15th pick could end up getting his/her 8th or 9th favorite spot. In our current setup, there is no alternative other than getting what you're assigned. it certainly is less fair. to boil down the KD method, the #1 randomly selected owner is telling you what draft slot they want #1, and you will give it to him. the #15 randomly selected owner will get whatever slot is left, whether that be his #1 or #15 preference. the #15 owner doesn't have a choice, like the #1 owner does...hence unfair.

[ October 11, 2005, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 4:52 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

We'll poll the participants soon and decide in baseball if any change is needed. count my vote as a big NO to the KD method. in fact, count it 100 times, as i speak for some folks not on the MB.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:07 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

GG, it's not any less fair than our current system because that 14th or 15th pick could end up getting his/her 8th or 9th favorite spot. In our current setup, there is no alternative other than getting what you're assigned. it certainly is less fair. to boil down the KD method, the #1 randomly selected owner is telling you what draft slot they want #1, and you will give it to him. the #15 randomly selected owner will get whatever slot is left, whether that be his #1 or #15 preference. the #15 owner doesn't have a choice, like the #1 owner does...hence unfair. [/QUOTE]Correct, that is the random part that is still involved with that process. Everyone randomly has an equal chance when all the names are processed to get a top pick (thus their choice) or a late pick (and not having much choice). Nobody has an advantage before we randomly select the spots.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:19 am

Then I'd give you your money back. Thanks for the response. Very fair. Puts me at ease.

Gekko's heart is really in this and I can appreciate that. Nevertheless, people are going to have their own opinions; I don't see how trying to argue every point will change that. I don't feel a need to explain my opinions other than this: something done at random is by definition fair. I don't see an issue of fairness with any of the three draft methods. Beyond that, I like the new way, I like the old way, though somewhat less, and I don't like bidding. This is an issue of preference, is it not? It matters little to me whether my reasons are agreed with or understood. I'm voting same as I will in November. I don't need to come out of a poll booth and qualify my votes for them to count.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 9:30 am

it certainly is less fair. to boil down the KD method, the #1 randomly selected owner is telling you what draft slot they want #1, and you will give it to him. the #15 randomly selected owner will get whatever slot is left, whether that be his #1 or #15 preference. the #15 owner doesn't have a choice, like the #1 owner does...hence unfair. This is like saying the lottery isn't fair because I didn't win.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:34 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

This is like saying the lottery isn't fair because I didn't win. when's the last time you played the lottery for $1,250+. thanks for proving my point.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:53 am

Sigh. Okay, everyone else who thinks I proved Gekko's point, raise your hands.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 11:58 am

I think I lost a thousand on the Kentucky Derby last year does that count!!

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:10 pm

Originally posted by Plymouth:

Why should the process be changed for the minority that might be stupid enough to trade down? Then again maybe we should do it just to see who would be silly enough to do so. That's offensive to most people I'd think. You do understand that the draft works in a snake-like fashion where there are actual benefits to drafting lower, i.e. you don't have to wait for 28 other picks before taking your second guy? The difference between the first and 15th guy might be great, but the difference between 16 and 30 is not much smaller. A big benefit to drafting last is that you have a two player agragate, helping to insure your team against injury, whereas putting most of your eggs in one basket, well, that could mean a whole lot of broken eggs. I'm not saying I always want to be last, but there are positives to that kind of thinking.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:22 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by Plymouth:

Why should the process be changed for the minority that might be stupid enough to trade down? Then again maybe we should do it just to see who would be silly enough to do so. That's offensive to most people I'd think. You do understand that the draft works in a snake-like fashion where there are actual benefits to drafting lower, i.e. you don't have to wait for 28 other picks before taking your second guy? The difference between the first and 15th guy might be great, but the difference between 16 and 30 is not much smaller. A big benefit to drafting last is that you have a two player agragate, helping to insure your team against injury, whereas putting most of your eggs in one basket, well, that could mean a whole lot of broken eggs. I'm not saying I always want to be last, but there are positives to that kind of thinking. [/QUOTE]I have to say, personally, I am shocked by the number of people supporting this approach (though I would support it if the only choice was completely random). I completely agree with Gordon Gekko (though I prefer an open outcry before the main draft).

I am really surprised that many players who want to perform at their highest level don't feel comfortable about bidding. Bidding allows for people to express exactly their desires. As for 'saving FAAB' $, I don't see any limits on stupid bids during the regular season! I saw players spend almost all their FAAB in the first couple of drafts, what is the difference????

Chris

kd.gray · Post by **kd.gray** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 12:40 pm

Earlier, I put my vote as yes for the derby method. I also mentioned that I utilized all my FAAB dollars during the season. However, I should mention that if everybody else wanted to bid, so be it. I don't care what system we put in place. I dont mind if it doesn't change. If Greg says that on draft day, we show up and pick rubber ducks out of a tub, whichever number is on the bottom is our draft slot...ok, I'm still playing.

Then again, I put $10 or $20 bucks into every different little pool or game anyone comes up with at work.

In a nutshell, I suppose that I should abstain from voting simply because I would agree to whatever is decided.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 3:14 pm

Looks like Greg has decided to do the Kentucky Derby Style of drafting in the main event. Or at least it sounds that way. I have no problem with it since it doesn't effect the auctions.

I don't think it fixes anything though. Which is the whole point of making a change.

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 3:36 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by Plymouth:

Why should the process be changed for the minority that might be stupid enough to trade down? Then again maybe we should do it just to see who would be silly enough to do so. That's offensive to most people I'd think. You do understand that the draft works in a snake-like fashion where there are actual benefits to drafting lower, i.e. you don't have to wait for 28 other picks before taking your second guy? The difference between the first and 15th guy might be great, but the difference between 16 and 30 is not much smaller. A big benefit to drafting last is that you have a two player agragate, helping to insure your team against injury, whereas putting most of your eggs in one basket, well, that could mean a whole lot of broken eggs. I'm not saying I always want to be last, but there are positives to that kind of thinking. [/QUOTE]Bjoak, I don't think I offended anyone, if I did I am sorry, but I see you are the only one that commented on my post about being offended. I really don't need a lecture about the benefits of picking last as that is exactly where I picked this year and I did OK. That being said, I would pick first any day of the week over 15 and 16.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:55 pm

Well, maybe 'offensive' isn't the right word but I'm sure the vast quantities of people who don't pick '1' as their first choice won't appreciate being called stupid. If I had to pick right this second I'd go in order 1 to 15; I just don't think a different strategy is stupid.

Incidentally, I'd bet good money that most people would pick a number other than one. Many might just pick 2 or 3 to avoid the round-the-bend position while plenty of others on these message boards seem to revere the middle positions.

[ October 12, 2005, 12:02 AM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:14 am

Kentucky or Bid? I don't mind either as long as it is completed 3-4 days in advance of the draft.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:49 am

Originally posted by Walla Walla:

Looks like Greg has decided to do the Kentucky Derby Style of drafting in the main event. Or at least it sounds that way. I have no problem with it since it doesn't effect the auctions.

I don't think it fixes anything though. Which is the whole point of making a change. Yeah, this is like a government proposal that makes a lot of noise but then doesn't solve everything people want. Whether we do the Kentucky Derby Style or not, the goal is to make the draft selection process a little more fairer for the participants. I'm proposing that this is one way, although it's not perfect. Draft slot bidding is more fairer, but also a more drastic change.

The bottom line is that wherever you draft from in the main event, you'll need a good draft through 30 rounds (not just one), good health and great pickups via FAAB through 26 weeks of a marathon season.

Maybe one day draft slot bidding will be a natural fit for the NFBC, but I don't see that time as today.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 2:51 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

Kentucky or Bid? I don't mind either as long as it is completed 3-4 days in advance of the draft. You have my guarantee that all draft spots will be announced no later than Monday, March 13th, five days before the Saturday, March 18th draft. If we sell out earlier than our deadline, we'll have the leagues and draft spots announced before then. But if we go with a new process, it won't slow us down at all.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:56 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

Kentucky or Bid? I don't mind either as long as it is completed 3-4 days in advance of the draft. You have my guarantee that all draft spots will be announced no later than Monday, March 13th, five days before the Saturday, March 18th draft. If we sell out earlier than our deadline, we'll have the leagues and draft spots announced before then. But if we go with a new process, it won't slow us down at all. [/QUOTE]cool

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:03 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

The only way to do this would be to have a system in place online where you could rank your 15 preferences and change those rankings right up until our deadline. Tom and I would then take it from there. greg - can you describe other aspects of how this process would work? am i correct in assuming that as you receive new signups, you forward that info to STATS and they create each owners account? as we all know, STATS isn't the swiftest moving entity.

if signups end at midnight of the sunday before the draft, when would your on-line preference ranking stop?

if you received 12 sign-ups on the last day, how would those folks have accounts created, and be able to rank their preferences?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 5:20 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

The only way to do this would be to have a system in place online where you could rank your 15 preferences and change those rankings right up until our deadline. Tom and I would then take it from there. greg - can you describe other aspects of how this process would work? am i correct in assuming that as you receive new signups, you forward that info to STATS and they create each owners account? as we all know, STATS isn't the swiftest moving entity.

if signups end at midnight of the sunday before the draft, when would your on-line preference ranking stop?

if you received 12 sign-ups on the last day, how would those folks have accounts created, and be able to rank their preferences? [/QUOTE]Good question. Krause Publications is currently taking all of the signups online through our site and then we send the info to STATS and they provide the usernames and passwords to new owners. That's a tedious process and one we are updating now. Our goal is that by the end of the month all of the signups will run directly to STATS, who will then automatically give each owner a username and password once their registration is complete. No more waiting for those from STATS via e-mail. That should be done for baseball soon.

But you are correct, if we get a lot of last minute signups we'd need to contact those owners and get their draft slot preferences entered immediately. I think that's possible. We'd likely set a cutoff date on that Friday, March 10th and then get the late signups to give us their preferences immediately. The cutoff would definitely be before Sunday, March 12th for all other owners.

Remember, for baseball last year we sold out on Saturday morning, March 12th. We definitely have a head-start on last year's pace so far and we have a smaller growth expectation this year than last year. My goal is that we'll sell out in advance of our deadline and get everyone's draft preferences in place with little to no problems if this was implemented. But again, I'm not even sure we're going to do it, but I've thought it through enough to know we can do it.

STATS would still need to set this up online and we're still talking that through with them, so maybe I'm jumping the gun a bit. But I wanted to introduce the process now and make a decision on the draft process well in advance of Draft Day.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 6:12 am

Greg,

A couple of suggestions. Require new signups to go through a questioniare (online) of sorts before their login and password is processed. The questinaire is simple ranking your draft slot preferences. This should be very user friendly and simple to understand. I would also allow everyone to update it up unitl a certain day and time (ie deadline).

I would also make it quite clear in the rules somehow as to this requirement and that if someone doesn't complete it (somewhere along the way) that STATs/KP have the right to set a default preference. (Actually, the default should be set prior to the screen popping up where everyone would make such pfreferences.) I would also state what that default actually is (ie 1 to 15 in that order).

And make sure STATs gives you the facility to just place each of the 15 managers in such leagues and the program (technology behind it)works it all out itself.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:16 am

A couple of thoughts:

1) You will not be able to please everyone with any system.

2) More people will be pleased with their draft slots in the derby than with the current method. This in my opinion makes it a good thing.

3) You do not have to justify your vote- I find it funny that those who have to Srebro actually post good reasons but he knows everything so why bother.

If I were you Greg- I would first give Tom Kessenich a raise, and then I would only change it if something like 2/3 of all voters wanted to with a minimum of about 25% of people who are signed up or played last year voting.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:44 am

Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:

A couple of thoughts:

1) You will not be able to please everyone with any system.

2) More people will be pleased with their draft slots in the derby than with the current method. This in my opinion makes it a good thing.

3) You do not have to justify your vote- I find it funny that those who have to Srebro actually post good reasons but he knows everything so why bother.

If I were you Greg- I would first give Tom Kessenich a raise, and then I would only change it if something like 2/3 of all voters wanted to with a minimum of about 25% of people who are signed up or played last year voting. 1) Agreed.

2) That's the truth.

3) Why should Kessenich get a raise when I'm doing all the work?

Start stumping for me to get a raise as the wife is putting on another new addition to the house! I need the cash more than TK does!

We'll see what the numbers present and what kind of feedback I'm getting via e-mail. I've had a lot of responses today, so I think I know what the early response of people is.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:49 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:

A couple of thoughts:

1) You will not be able to please everyone with any system.

2) More people will be pleased with their draft slots in the derby than with the current method. This in my opinion makes it a good thing.

3) You do not have to justify your vote- I find it funny that those who have to Srebro actually post good reasons but he knows everything so why bother.

If I were you Greg- I would first give Tom Kessenich a raise, and then I would only change it if something like 2/3 of all voters wanted to with a minimum of about 25% of people who are signed up or played last year voting. 1) Agreed.

2) That's the truth.

3) Why should Kessenich get a raise when I'm doing all the work?

Start stumping for me to get a raise as the wife is putting on another new addition to the house! I need the cash more than TK does!

We'll see what the numbers present and what kind of feedback I'm getting via e-mail. I've had a lot of responses today, so I think I know what the early response of people is. [/QUOTE]I have called your boss personally this year and told him what a great job you did, that is the best I can do.