Ron Shandler not the best salesman

Return of the Aces · Post by **Return of the Aces** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 10:42 am

The proof is in the pudding. I think that whomever actually wins the $100,000 prize should post their draft list and all the moves that they made during the season. I am sure that the team owner(s) will be considered anything from "a genius" to "a lucky sob". But, it is difficult to argue with success.

Karch Adonis · Post by **Karch Adonis** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:29 am

Originally posted by msamuels:

The proof is in the pudding. I think that whomever actually wins the $100,000 prize should post their draft list and all the moves that they made during the season. I am sure that the team owner(s) will be considered anything from "a genius" to "a lucky sob". But, it is difficult to argue with success. Fortunately all that data will be available.

Considering how much value some guys are placing on the last rounds, or how many times a 'previously picked' player was selected, I'm surprised that more teams aren't claiming victory based on Shandler's guess-timate of the bottom 10 picks in this year's draft. (After all, Hojin/Aram didn't win with A-Rod, Rolen, Wagner and Prior last year - the top players know it was really Kinney, Kata and Spivey that swept them into the winners circle...)

Leaderboard Sports · Post by **Leaderboard Sports** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:14 pm

Winning will come down to;

A. Getting in the right league, mistakes have to be made for someone to get greater value with his picks in order to separate himself from the pack.

B. Balance, you won't be able to punt saves and win the overall. Leagues maybe, overall no way.

C. Injury Luck, missing 4 games worth of stats because of an injured player stuck in your lineup till Monday is not a good thing.

D. Pick the waiver cherries, this years Dontrell Willis, David Ortiz, and so on. Somebody will end up with some major help off the waiver wire.

E. Hunches and Gambles, Griffey, Juan Gone, and other reaches will win it or lose it for someone.

There are enough people who know what they are doing to create a log jam at the top 1/3 of the contest. Some risk taker or lucky sob from that top 1/3 will eek out a 2 point win on the last day. Hojin and Aram made up a lot of ground over the last couple weeks last year and ended up dropping a third of the roster to waivers in doing so. They rolled the dice and risked 2nd and third place money in order to walk away the winner.

Harlem Hangover · Post by **Harlem Hangover** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 1:08 pm

Originally posted by Leaderboard Sports:

Winning will come down to;

A. Getting in the right league, mistakes have to be made for someone to get greater value with his picks in order to separate himself from the pack.

B. Balance, you won't be able to punt saves and win the overall. Leagues maybe, overall no way.

C. Injury Luck, missing 4 games worth of stats because of an injured player stuck in your lineup till Monday is not a good thing.

D. Pick the waiver cherries, this years Dontrell Willis, David Ortiz, and so on. Somebody will end up with some major help off the waiver wire.

E. Hunches and Gambles, Griffey, Juan Gone, and other reaches will win it or lose it for someone.

There are enough people who know what they are doing to create a log jam at the top 1/3 of the contest. Some risk taker or lucky sob from that top 1/3 will eek out a 2 point win on the last day. Hojin and Aram made up a lot of ground over the last couple weeks last year and ended up dropping a third of the roster to waivers in doing so. They rolled the dice and risked 2nd and third place money in order to walk away the winner. Nice post Leaderboard.. I agree with alot of your points.. I do, however, think the notion that you need to get into a good league is totally overrated and really doesnt hold much water.. After the first few rounds of the draft, everything really opens up in terms of rankings and different websites projected statistics.. I think the "greater" value picks come from the other things you mention (hunches and gambles) as opposed to be put in the "right league" I know from competing in the WCOFF where there were 600 teams, being put in the right league really had nothing to do with who wound up finishing in the top 10 spots at the end of the year. It had much more to do with making "gut" calls, some key waiver wire acquisitions, and staying injury free.. Just my opinion

Fantasy Jungle · Post by **Fantasy Jungle** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 4:45 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

What is this??

Is this not america?

This is not china!

This is not russia!

This is not the place where they brought down the wall, this is america!

We have the right to say what we want to say

We have the right to do what we want to do

We have the freedom of expression!

We have the freedom of choice!

And you, chinese, black, green, purple, jew,

You have the right to listen to whoever you want to, and even the Gekko crew!

So all you right-wingers, left-wingers, bigots, communists,

There is a place for you in this world!

Because this is the land of the free and the home of the brave!

- by you know who... Gekko,

Im impressed with your Luther Campbell reference. Thats reaching back old school, but impressive nonetheless.

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 6:03 pm

Shandler is a great parallel to the Jim Feist’s of the sports gambling world. I worked for Feist for ONE DAY back in 1997. Here’s how they give out LOCKS: The Yankees were playing the O’s on my first day, on one script for the telemarketer he had the Yankees as the 5-star lock. As I got ready to leave after my 1st day I walked by another desk that had the O’s as the 5-star lock. Feist was touting both sides, cashing in, and convincing half the fools that he knew what he was doing.

Ron may be of the same mold. Pure tout, no substance. If he did have nads he’d throw in and knock heads with the rest of us. I understand that the KP guys cannot play because of a potential conflict, but the rest of these so called “experts” should be willing to pony up and show us what they’ve got.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Mon Mar 29, 2004 6:28 pm

Originally posted by nnoy:

Shandler is a great parallel to the Jim Feist?s of the sports gambling world. I worked for Feist for ONE DAY back in 1997. Here?s how they give out LOCKS: The Yankees were playing the O?s on my first day, on one script for the telemarketer he had the Yankees as the 5-star lock. As I got ready to leave after my 1st day I walked by another desk that had the O?s as the 5-star lock. Feist was touting both sides, cashing in, and convincing half the fools that he knew what he was doing.

Ron may be of the same mold. Pure tout, no substance. If he did have nads he?d throw in and knock heads with the rest of us. I understand that the KP guys cannot play because of a potential conflict, but the rest of these so called ?experts? should be willing to pony up and show us what they?ve got. That's an old stock broker trick... call 100 people out of the phone book. Tell half Ford Stock is going up, tell the other half it's going down. Ford moves in one direction or another, call just those 50 back, tell 25 that GE stock is going up and 25 that GE is going down... two weeks later, call the 25 people that you've been 'right twice with' and tell them they've already missed out on 2 picks... blah blah blah...

I don't get the idea that Shandler is a scam artist, but I do think he overstates the value of 'guessing' errr... 'projecting' that Enrique Wilson can hit .268 if he has the PT. If we did a 30 team league with huge rosters, his extra research and dedicated staff would probably bury me. But in a 15 team full ML league, his 'edge' is nullified and he's just another guy with a draft list.

I would still like to see Shandler competing in a ML universe league and have success. There has to be one, where is it?

D

viper · Post by **viper** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 9:49 am

A big difference between Shandler and that stock broker or Feist is the entire world can see who he picked and how he projects. I think his BA for Tejada is off but he has his reasons. I have always wished there was a scientific way to analyze preseason projections with actual results. I would even exclude injured players from the analysis. I would especially love to see this done with pitchers, the one position which I think is a true guess.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 10:55 am

When the season gets started I will take all 195 teams and plug them into the HQ MACK Engine to see where they project. At the end of the season we'll look at some real data to see what actually occurred. Much can be gleaned from this exercise not the least of which is what strategies were successful on draft day.

Of course you can all pay me for the report

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 11:41 am

Originally posted by :

When the season gets started I will take all 195 teams and plug them into the HQ MACK Engine to see where they project. At the end of the season we'll look at some real data to see what actually occurred. Much can be gleaned from this exercise not the least of which is what strategies were successful on draft day.

Of course you can all pay me for the report I'd appreciate the report - I'm fascinated to watch and track the strategies myself. Price? Hmmm, I'm sure we can work something out - lol

D

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 1:16 pm

Hi, I am Jeff Howard, the very same Jeff Howard Ron mentions in his article. I'd just like to throw my 2 cents in here because this thread has taken such a negative tone.

I, for one, think the article has been greatly misinterpreted here on the NFBC website. Perhaps rightfully so by some of you, but let me add another perspective.

Nowhere in that article does Ron say that all the participants were ill-prepared or that they all used poor strategies. In a game of 195 people one would expect there to be varying degrees of preparedness and perceived skill. To me he was just pointing out that simply throwing down $1250 does not necessarily mean you have the best skill for fantasy baseball. He also didn't say that his way was the only way to win. He knows as well as anyone that there are numerous ways to win and that luck and performance play a vital role in success. He didn't say drafting 5 OF and a UT in 10 rds meant the end of someone's chances - I think he merely meant to say that that is a tough way to go about it (and mathematically he may be right) and that's an awfully big risk to take with $1250.

I drafted in Chicago and while I believe the top 5-7 guys in my league were very astute - I believe the bottom 5 or so players were below average. So much so that I would pit the bottom half of some of my local league guys against them - and I would do that for money. I don't want to sound holier than thou because that's not how I intended this message. I am just pointing out that despite opinions to the contrary - there are less skilled players in this game. We are all not created equal. Inevitably those that finish at the bottom will chalk it up to injuries and/or luck and/or some other reason. Few of us have the moxy to admit it was our strategy or player valuations that failed us.

One has to remember that Ron plays primarily against industry guys with a name to uphold. Those guys always show up at the draft and they are always prepared. They always have enough players on their list to make out the full number of players drafted and they usually have some strategy that has been tested and successful.

He probably has very little experience in leagues where there is such a wide gap in the opinions about players and strategies and therefore he made mention of it in his article. While he probably could have worded it a bit differently, I don't think he was trying to slam all NFBC players as a whole. He was simply making the point that he thought there was a wide range of skilled players willing to fork over $1250 to play. With that one cannot argue. If you joined this thing feeling that luck would play a more vital role in your success than your skill then you probably shouldn't be playing.

As for him competing - there are probably numerous reasons for that. 1) He's primarily an auction player and as far as I know has very little experience with straight drafts. 2) His reputation is not staked on his performance in straight draft leagues, it's on his skill as a $$$ valuator and auction pro. 3) I am the designated "straight draft guru" on his website and have been writing articles to that effect for 5 years now. He knows I would whip his a$$ 4) He competes in so many leagues each season that I doubt he has time for this one. I am sure finishing well in Tout Wars and some others means more than a draft league to him.

I know all you guys who were angered by his abrasiveness want a shot at him, so take it at me instead as I am carrying the HQ flag so to speak in this one. I was Chicago #1, Pick #8. Hang the target on me now. I look forward to playing against all of you with different strategies and different player valuations.

All you guys are entitled to your opinions and I respect that. I just think if you get pissed at Ron and write him off because of that article you will be missing out on some great analysis in the future.

Anyways thanks for your time and good luck this season.

Jeff Howard

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 2:14 pm

Thanks for the reply, Jeff.

Question: Why is Ron 'perhaps weak' at straight drafts? One would think that his ability to value players should then be blended in with some guesstimation of where players would be taken in a normal draft and he would excel at it by only taking players a round ahead of where they might go if he thinks they are 3 rounds better... i.e. clear value is achieved.

I don't know Ron and I can't speak to his 'normal' attitude or writing style - but to say that perhaps he wrote the article to simply let everyone know that there are differnet levels of quality players in this contest really seems kind of ridiculous. OF COURSE there are lesser quality players - we'll have a last place team here just like the Tout Wars draft will have a team come in last. I can accept he didn't intend to slam the entire contest, but that's how I read the article each time I read it again. It sounds derisive and insulting...

' correlating high stakes with high skill turned out to be somewhat less than advertised.'

It sounds mean spirited - not just 'factual' or 'informative'

For a measley $100k Ron couldn't be bothered with this? Hey, no problem - that's his choice, but I would think a big money league like this would be able to get into his time budget for fantasy games. Think he's got 'street cred' right now? He'd blow the top off if he could win this thing.

I 100% respect you for posting and replying here and I wish you and your team good luck in the contest.

Spare a few minutes and tell us how your draft went if you would?

Thanks - and I do appreciate your time.

Dave/Dyv

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 3:02 pm

Jeff, I did not start this post link to knock Ron’s abilities but to point out his lack of thought in his writing. I follow your stuff on Baseball HQ and think it’s quite good. I also respect Ron’s outlook on a number of issues. The issue this time was in his haste to promote Baseball HQ he insulted many who didn’t deserve it. He could of said something like I witnessed a spirited group of owners drafting their hearts out. However this is the Baseball HQ strong points and why I think they’ll win. There was no point to pick out owners and say they weren’t up to par. Heck I may be the 195th at the end.

But I did my best and if someone who played says I’m bad at the end their entitled. They played. Ron can’t because he didn’t. Finally if Ron wants to post let him speak for himself.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 3:11 pm

I'm not going to try to convince anyone of Ron's intentions. I don't truthfully know what they were. Make of it what you want. I threw in my opinion. That's all I'm gonna say about it.

I honestly can't say what Ron's level of skill is in straight drafts. Aside from the MLB.com thing he did last night I'm not sure I have ever seen him do one. His player valuation skills are good but I think that that is only a small part of having a successful draft. There are far too many draft dynamics, strategies, and twists that take place in drafts to think that someone can succeed merely on player valuation alone. Unless you are familiar with all those things and have experience adapting to the barrage of things that happen, you can be good, but probably not good enough. Hell, in the first 5 rounds of a draft alone there are 2.4809E+109 or more possible combinations of players that can be taken. That's 2,48 with 109 zeroes after it for those of you unfamiliar with exponential notation. That's a ton to handle on the fly with little experience.

As for my team - well I like it just fine.

CA - C.Wilson, B.Molina

1B - Huff, Da.Ortiz

3B - C.Blake

2B - Vidro

SS - Tejada, Renteria

OF - Crawford, Burnitz, Dye, Finley, Catalanotto

UT - Olerud

SP - L.Hernandez, Penny, A.Leiter, Ohka, Ol.Perez, Jo.Acevedo (and the injured Armas)

CL - Benitez, Julio, Aq. Lopez

I'm sure the next question will be how do they "project" using Shandler's numbers.

AVG - 290

HR - 290

RBI - 1134

RS - 1075

SB - 155

ERA - 3.58

WHIP - 1.26

W - 82

K - 1089

S - 87

Of course I am certain I will draw brash comments for my pitching staff but hey - the two easiest things to manipulate are W and K with cycling and the easiest thing to find on the FA list is a serviceable starting pitcher.

According to the 80% list posted by Leaderboard on page 1 of this thread I surpass 6 of the 10 cats and some by a nice margin. I am not so far under the others that I could not feasibly reach them. Heck I don't even know if they're accurate (as to what 80% would be) but it's a nice way to compare.

Now, am I naive enough to think the projections mean anything? No. But it's a hell of a lot better to start here than to be looking up at a bunch of those numbers. You have to start somewhere to evaluate your team in context and projections are as good a place as any.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 3:25 pm

Originally posted by Walla Walla:

Finally if Ron wants to post let him speak for himself. Ron didn't ask me to post here. I am not even sure if he is aware of this thread. I did it on my own merits. I am sure he will respond if he deems it necessary.

For what it's worth. I don't take offense to any of this. Everyone should believe strongly in what they are doing. I know I do. No two people play this game alike - which is what makes it fun. There are as many opinions about players/stratgies as there are opinions. Matching wits to see whose ideas come out on top is the best challenge for me.

I have taken as much criticism/abuse for my draft strategies as anyone. Everytime one of my drafts get published in a magazine there seems to be an editorial comment on one of my picks as being bizarre. I would expect no less. If we all had the same opinion this wouldn't be a game. But my system has been extremely successful for me and I am sticking to it until someone proves me wrong.

Now - you guys can denounce Ron if you like but I am a firm believer in scouting my opponents. I have been writing strategy stuff for 5 years for him. You could just about tell every pick I was going to make in the NFBC if you had read my draft article that came out the Friday before the draft. How many of you would have liked to have known virtually everything your opponents were thinking before the draft??? Well now that you know who I am - next year you'll have all the intel you need

SoonerC · Post by **SoonerC** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 3:32 pm

This thread is getting comical. Thank God the games are starting so maybe the egos will die down a bit.

mystydog · Post by **mystydog** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 4:40 pm

The one thing I have ever learned about "experts"

Whatever they say or do.....run dont walk in the opposite direction as fast as you can.....

Jon_Ashton · Post by **Jon_Ashton** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 6:46 pm

Comical: "I am sure he will respond if he deems it necessary."

Respond to a bunch of unsophisticated NFBC yokels like us? I highly suspect not.

It's surprising that some experts somehow manage to come off as insulting to the very people they are hoping will be their customers. And, similarly, many regular guys seem to be hostile toward all experts as a whole for no apparent reason. Why so hard to get along while competing at something we all love, whether one is in the industry expert category or not?

Sugardaddy · Post by **Sugardaddy** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 9:30 pm

I don't post much but i have met Ron Shandler, even took one of his seminars.Unless you are a so called expert or the press he looks down upon you as not being worthy of his time. In my opinion he has little respect for the roto players and we should not buy his products.He may be knowledgable but but he is an ass.

Leaderboard Sports · Post by **Leaderboard Sports** » Tue Mar 30, 2004 9:47 pm

Originally posted by Sugardaddy:

I don't post much but i have met Ron Shandler, even took one of his seminars.Unless you are a so called expert or the press he looks down upon you as not being worthy of his time. In my opinion he has little respect for the roto players and we should not buy his products.He may be knowledgable but but he is an ass. BINGO!!

After three pages of discussion I think Sugar Daddy has summed it all up on Ron Shandler.

Ron knows his $hit but thinks it smells better than ours.

It still smells like $hit Ron

p.s.

I still use Ron's site as one of many information and data gathering sites on the web and really could care less if he insults all of us inferior gamers, it doesn't seem like a good business practice but what the hell

[ March 31, 2004, 05:27 AM: Message edited by: Leaderboard Sports ]

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 4:29 am

Wow... I came by to contribute some thoughtful response, but it appears that these last two posters summed things up far too well.

Hmm.

For the record, my intent was not to knock the participants in the competition -- the intent was to knock Krause's promo hype (re-read the opening of the article). How many of you came to this event thinking that you were going up against the absolute best players in the country? That was the impression that I was given from the hype I was fed, but can anyone not argue that it was misleading?

That's all I was writing, and it takes nothing away from the event as a whole, which Krause orchestrated well. If you want to take the support details as a personal affront, well, that wasn't the intent and I'll apologize for that. All I was doing was making observations.... from here in my bathroom, apparently.

I'm so glad we can all communicate at such a high level. Feel free to pick all these words apart now, as it seems you will be apt to do.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 4:46 am

There's only one way to settle it Ron. Get in the NFBC next year, and let's see how you do against some of us. Seems simple enough.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 4:59 am

And the great statesman has spoken. What next? World peace?

Rey · Post by **Rey** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 5:21 am

In regards to Krause's "hype", they did say I would compete against the best in the country...and I think I AM competing against the best in the country. Are there some below average competitors involved? Of course there are. I never assumed there wouldn't be. Many people have likened this open competition to the World Series of Poker, and I think it fits. Both competitions are the best of their kind and offer the best competition, but because of it's open nature, anyone with money to burn can compete. This opens the floor to "dead money", but also opens the floor to hundreds of guys whose talent and knowledge have been hidden from the public eye. I think everyone involved knew this going in. At no point did Krause ever suggest that everyone involved would be upper crust fantasy players. But they did claim that everyone involved would get the chance to compete against upper crust fantasy players. I think this was accomplished. Where you understood otherwise is still not clear Mr. Shandler.

[ March 31, 2004, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: Rey ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 5:48 am

Okay, this thread seems to have gone on long enough and hopefully I can end it with a conclusion of sorts. Ron and I are good friends and we even talked about his NFBC opinions on Monday night in New York. I had not seen his article or this thread before today, so Ron and I were both unaware of the controversy.

First of all, Ron is entitled to his opinion about every NFBC contestant. But even "expert leagues" have some weak players and Ron and I have been in many of them. Secondly, I think the NFBC has some of the best players in the country and some of the best people in the country. I'd match our business and baseball pedigree with any league in the country. But that being said, some guys probably signed up as much for the thrill of competing in an event like this as for the chance to win $100,000. There certainly wasn't any faulty advertising on KP's part.

Thirdly, the draft did go fast for a lot of people who were trying to mark everything down and thus I can see where some people fell behind in keeping track of picks. Maybe next year more teams will bring partners to the draft for this simple reason. And as for strategies, I think Ron has seen them all and may not agree with all of them but he should know that anything can work. We were in LABR when Larry Labadini bid $251 on hitters and $9 on pitchers and finished third. We thought he was crazy then, but he competed. A lot of people thought Ron was crazy when he tried the LIMA plan, but it won one LABR title for him. He's finished in the bottom half of LABR with that plan, but one year it worked. So he should realize and I think he does realize that drafting six outfielders right away may be wild, but if you fill in the rest of your lineup well later on and pick up the right free agents during the year, you can still win. There should be no knocking any strategy because sometimes you have to go against the grain to beat 194 other competitors.

If there's one thing I wish we could change in this industry it's that "experts" label. Listen, none of us who are in these experts leagues think we're experts. We're professionals who do this for a living and Ron and I are both grateful for that. But I could compete in the NFBC and just as easily finish 15th as I could first in a league. I finished second in the AL LABR in 1994 and the next year I think I finished near the bottom. I did finish last around 1996 and then finished third the following year. Ron has the same track record in LABR and that's expected when you compete against the top guys in the industry. But I sure like all of my teams today -- as does Ron -- and think I can win every single one right now. But injuries will decide that.

Ron is always straight-forward with his opinions and I know he respects the NFBC. He was one of our best promotional partners this year and that article may actually convince the fence sitters that this is easy money next year. Let them come in. Don't leave Ron's service over this article because it's as good as it gets. I respect him completely and I respect his opinions. But no contest will ever get 15 equally dedicated and knowledgeable owners together. It's the diversity of opinions and backgrounds that make this league so great, so keep the free-thinking ideas coming.

Oh, and if you can dominate an auction, you can definitely dominate a mixed league. Saying you can't do it is like saying you've mastered calculus but don't know how to multiply.