NFBC Success by_Venue

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:32 am

Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

quote:Originally posted by Top Dawg:

Mark - My buddy is in phone leage one. It appears to him (as supported by your data) that several teams in his league are not competitive at all.

Pete Pete, ask your buddy, are the teams bringing up the rear still active? Are they trying, or have they stopped making moves? [/QUOTE]Now we've called out one league for all to see. Okay, let's analyze this one league. Every single owner has logged into his team in the last day, so nobody has abandoned their team. I see FAAB remaining as $199, $391, $497, $620 and $823. Here are the standings with 10 teams still in the hunt and five teams – as Mark has pointed out – struggling to improve their Lifetime STandings. But nobody has abandoned their team in this league, that I can see.

NFBC PTS

Cryptical Envelopment 115.5

ARod's Trainer 110

wolfpack 109

Team Johnson 109

Chin music 98.5

Georgia 92.5

Macedawggs 89

Showtime 83.5

ALL-IN 82.5

Heels 78.5

KrejciKesselChara 51.5

Stretch-n-Shells 48.5

Twinstrivia.com 46

Two 84Gators and Son 44

The Black Pearl 42

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:38 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Top Dawg:

Mark - My buddy is in phone leage one. He tends to agree with some of what you are saying here. In fact, he brought it to my attention a couple of weeks ago when he noticed his league had 6 teams in the top 40 and 3 in the top 16. It appears to him (as supported by your data) that several teams in his league are not competitive at all. Ironically, it makes winning his league a bit harder (he feels) as the top 5-6 teams are eating up points gained each week, making it harder to pass the better teams as the weaker teams fall by the wayside. But, it also makes climbing the ladder for the $100K easier.

When you pool people, you will get some leagues with a batch of top rated players and other leagues with more of the lower ranked players. That is often luck of the draw. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the balance of the year.

Pete

Pete so I was on to something and headhunters had his head buried in the sand. just like i said.

pete - you are correct. makes winning your league harder, but the 100K is EASIER with a bunch of deadbeat teams in your league.

thanks for posting pete. it probably took some courage to do so.

[/QUOTE]Courage? Okay, now I'm getting confused. Pete talked to Will who said five teams are in the crapper in this league, which you already pointed out and everyone can see every day in the Overall STandings. But 10 teams are all fighting for three money spots and hopefully the bottom five will still be spoilers in FAAB. They don't have the most money, mind you, as top teams still have $638, $562 and $427. Looks like a pretty competitive league if you ask me with enough NFBC veterans in the middle to make life tough on the top teams.

Good luck all....in all leagues.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:49 am

courage? ad hominem- courage is going to iraq. geez. get a grip. head in sand- no you have not defined easier or harder. nor will you. you will give us facts. 2 + 2= 4 therefore phone leagues are "easier". maybe- but not because 2+2=4. sorry try again

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:50 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

here is the average overall ranking for the BOTTOM 5 teams in each league for 2009.

New York League 5 ; 282

New York League 6 ; 292

Las Vegas League 10 ; 293

Las Vegas League 9 ; 297

Phone/Online League 2 ; 300

New York League 3 ; 307

Las Vegas League 7 ; 307

Las Vegas League 11 ; 309

Chicago League 3 ; 311

Las Vegas League 2 ; 311

Las Vegas League 1 ; 314

Las Vegas League 6 ; 320

Las Vegas League 3 ; 323

New York League 4 ; 324

Orlando League 1 ; 324

Las Vegas League 4 ; 330

New York League 2 ; 332

Orlando League 2 ; 332

New York League 7 ; 333

Chicago League 1 ; 335

Chicago League 2 ; 337

Chicago League 4 ; 338

New York League 1 ; 339

Las Vegas League 5 ; 340

Las Vegas League 8 ; 356

Phone/Online League 1 ; 371

Honestly, it still just looks hit or miss to me. If you take the averages for each venue, which is what I think we are discussing, the average place for the bottom five in each venue is:

New York - 316

Las Vegas - 318

Orlando - 328

Chicago - 330

Phone/OL - 336

That is a pretty tight distribution and a statistical non-event to me (distribution of about 20 spots over 390 teams or about 5%). Sorry.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 9:21 am

gee- i am in chicago 3 and live in darien illinois. so it must be that my league is easy- or is it hard- because it is close to ny 6. all i know is- ad hominem is 21 points ahead in his league and could have had every crappy pick he took right when he took them in chicago 3- but not some of the good ones. means nothing to me- he wasn't there. but it must mean something to him. being the gambler that i am i would bet a lot of $ ad hominen knew these #'s before he started posting. what he didn't know is- they don't mean anything. except maybe a spike in phone leagues next year. i think some of us ( and i had conversations with a few) intuitively knew there might be a few teams that might not prepare as well in the phone leagues- but my conclusion was it would be harder to win. no numbers to back that up -just a guess. but i admit my guess and also see no proof those leagues are " easier" first off- easier to do what?- finish 37th and win nothing?. all of this might as well have been written to say the phone leagues and chicago have the best players- thus driving the others down. i really do think the outlier here is ny 6. you have 1 owner that was not competitive in chicago- by his own admission and " by the #'s- that has absolutely killed the competition in ny. what more proof do you need? chicago has the best players and ny sucks. geez i felt dumb even writing that but to some it obviously makes sense. they must have TWO black dogs.

NorCalAtlFan · Post by **NorCalAtlFan** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 9:39 am

Soooooooooo, we should do phone leagues from Chicago?

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 9:43 am

Originally posted by NorCalAtlFan:

Soooooooooo, we should do phone leagues from Chicago? That looks something like this...

MJ's JUICERS · Post by **MJ's JUICERS** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:57 am

Just to level set Pete..

I never said anyone abandoned their team or was not competing. I did say at the time we had (6) teams in the top 36 overall, I was #20 at the time, now not so much (#142), that's what 3 straight awful weeks will get ya.

I think the league is super competitive for sure.

And if you want to talk courage.... We actually had a guy in our league drafting from IRAQ!!

Now that's courage..

Will

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:58 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Courage? Okay, now I'm getting confused. Pete talked to Will who said five teams are in the crapper in this league, which you already pointed out and everyone can see every day in the Overall STandings. yep, courage. it's not easy for most to come out and publicly say that venues may not have the same talent in them. look at the backlash i have received!

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:01 pm

Originally posted by headhunters:

courage? ad hominem- courage is going to iraq. geez. get a grip. head in sand- no you have not defined easier or harder. nor will you. you will give us facts. 2 + 2= 4 therefore phone leagues are "easier". maybe- but not because 2+2=4. sorry try again going to iraq??????? why not say "standing up to a mugger?"

:rolleyes:

we are talking about playing fantasy baseball. people on the losing end ALWAYS exaggerate to try and move focus away the issues. you are trying your best, but failing every step of the way!

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:07 pm

Originally posted by headhunters:

i think some of us ( and i had conversations with a few) intuitively knew there might be a few teams that might not prepare as well in the phone leagues looks like heady finally "came clean" and admitted it.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:10 pm

Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

That is a pretty tight distribution and a statistical non-event to me (distribution of about 20 spots over 390 teams or about 5%). Sorry. u have to remember that these are not independent events. it's a zero sum game. if someone moves up a spot, that means someone moves down a spot.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:11 pm

Originally posted by NorCalAtlFan:

Soooooooooo, we should do phone leagues from Chicago? ROLMAO

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:38 pm

Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

here is the average overall ranking for the BOTTOM 5 teams in each league for 2009.

New York League 5 ; 282

New York League 6 ; 292

Las Vegas League 10 ; 293

Las Vegas League 9 ; 297

Phone/Online League 2 ; 300

New York League 3 ; 307

Las Vegas League 7 ; 307

Las Vegas League 11 ; 309

Chicago League 3 ; 311

Las Vegas League 2 ; 311

Las Vegas League 1 ; 314

Las Vegas League 6 ; 320

Las Vegas League 3 ; 323

New York League 4 ; 324

Orlando League 1 ; 324

Las Vegas League 4 ; 330

New York League 2 ; 332

Orlando League 2 ; 332

New York League 7 ; 333

Chicago League 1 ; 335

Chicago League 2 ; 337

Chicago League 4 ; 338

New York League 1 ; 339

Las Vegas League 5 ; 340

Las Vegas League 8 ; 356

Phone/Online League 1 ; 371

Honestly, it still just looks hit or miss to me. If you take the averages for each venue, which is what I think we are discussing, the average place for the bottom five in each venue is:

New York - 316

Las Vegas - 318

Orlando - 328

Chicago - 330

Phone/OL - 336

That is a pretty tight distribution and a statistical non-event to me (distribution of about 20 spots over 390 teams or about 5%). Sorry. [/QUOTE]Exactly! the numbers don't lie- of course. But let's not make it sound like they are Significant if they really aren't. Just eyeing them, they certainly don't look like it.

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:42 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

That is a pretty tight distribution and a statistical non-event to me (distribution of about 20 spots over 390 teams or about 5%). Sorry. u have to remember that these are not independent events. it's a zero sum game. if someone moves up a spot, that means someone moves down a spot. [/QUOTE]actually, good point. Still unsure if anything significant in all this data.... And when looking at the overall standings, a NY owner benefits just as equally as a Chicago owner from deadbeat teams in Chicago (or wherever) because there are no leagues when computing the overall standings. Right?

[ June 26, 2009, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: rkulaski ]

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 1:40 pm

Originally posted by rkulaski:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

That is a pretty tight distribution and a statistical non-event to me (distribution of about 20 spots over 390 teams or about 5%). Sorry. u have to remember that these are not independent events. it's a zero sum game. if someone moves up a spot, that means someone moves down a spot. [/QUOTE]actually, good point. Still unsure if anything significant in all this data.... And when looking at the overall standings, a NY owner benefits just as equally as a Chicago owner from deadbeat teams in Chicago (or wherever) because there are no leagues when computing the overall standings. Right? [/QUOTE]it's not a zero sum game when player pools are restricted to within individual leagues. The "weak" owners foster a super-team draft day (if there are too many of them) and eventually help maintain the super power by slovenly managing their needs via the free agent pool and then by their eventual abandonment

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:19 pm

Originally posted by rkulaski:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

That is a pretty tight distribution and a statistical non-event to me (distribution of about 20 spots over 390 teams or about 5%). Sorry. u have to remember that these are not independent events. it's a zero sum game. if someone moves up a spot, that means someone moves down a spot. [/QUOTE]actually, good point. Still unsure if anything significant in all this data.... And when looking at the overall standings, a NY owner benefits just as equally as a Chicago owner from deadbeat teams in Chicago (or wherever) because there are no leagues when computing the overall standings. Right? [/QUOTE]deadbeat teams help allow other teams in their league become superpower teams

[ June 27, 2009, 06:32 AM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko II ]

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:49 pm

I see what you (and quahogs last post) mean by this now. definitely good points.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 11:47 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by rkulaski:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

That is a pretty tight distribution and a statistical non-event to me (distribution of about 20 spots over 390 teams or about 5%). Sorry. u have to remember that these are not independent events. it's a zero sum game. if someone moves up a spot, that means someone moves down a spot. [/QUOTE]actually, good point. Still unsure if anything significant in all this data.... And when looking at the overall standings, a NY owner benefits just as equally as a Chicago owner from deadbeat teams in Chicago (or wherever) because there are no leagues when computing the overall standings. Right? [/QUOTE]deadbeat teams help allow other teams in their team become superpower teams [/QUOTE]If there are deadbeat teams, and I say IF but I can imagine that there will be some sprinkled amoung 390, I certainly agree. My point is a deadbeat has just as much chance of showing up in NY, LV, Chicago, Orlando, Phone/Online, Timbuktu or anywhere we decide to have this.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:54 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

Summary of what I looked at. The numbers are all FACTS, so don’t shoot the messenger.

I used main event data from the last three years. In 2007, there were 25 leagues. In 2008, 26 leagues. In 2009, 26 leagues. I took the top 25 main event overall teams from 2007, the top 26 teams from 2008, and the top 26 teams from 2009. In summary, the top 77 elite teams from the past three main events is my sample size.

Before I get to the results, it’s important to note the # of leagues by Venue that during the past three years:

Chicago 12

Las Vegas 31

New York 25

Florida 7

Online/Phone 2

Accordingly, the top 77 teams from the main event overall should be represented by these Venue numbers, i.e. 12 of the top 77 teams should be from Chicago. 31 from Las Vegas, etc…Here’s the actual results:

Chicago 16 (33% MORE than it should be)

Las Vegas 27 (13% less than it should be)

New York 25 (exactly the number it should be)

Florida 6 (14% less than it should be)

Online/Phone 3 (50% MORE than it should be)

Initial conclusion on Venues by Elite teams: Online/Phone % in the top 77 is a joke. Could be based on too small a sample size though. We’ll come back to this in a bit. Chicago (as I suspected), produces more elite teams than EVERY OTHER VENUE. Las Vegas is tough (as I suspected). Florida is surprisingly tougher than I thought. My apologies to Florida drafters. Your clamor over the years of drafting with tougher competitors appears to have some validity.

But to really tie this all together, we need to look at the opposite of the elite teams. We need to look at the real bottom dwellers of the competition, i.e. the 77 worst performing main event teams (25 from 2007, 26 from 2008, 26 from 2009).

Again, the results should be:

Chicago 12

Las Vegas 31

New York 25

Florida 7

Online/Phone 2

The real results:

Chicago 13 (8% MORE than it should be)

Las Vegas 33 (6% MORE than it should be)

New York 24 (4% less than it should be)

Florida 3 (57% less than it should be)

Online/Phone 4 (100% MORE than it should be)

Initial conclusion on Venues by Worst teams:

Online/Phone contains TWICE as many poor teams as it should. WOW! And the kicker is THREE of the worst 77 teams from the past three years are from a SINGLE league…Phone/Online League 1!!!

:rolleyes:

Based on this information, I would conclude that Phone/Online League 1 probably has a couple highly ranked “elite” owners. Sure enough, TWO teams from Phone/Online League 1 are in the top 77 elite teams. These two teams may or may not be owned by good managers. What I’m certain of is they are getting helped by being in such a poor league. Chicago and Las Vegas have more deadbeats than normal. New York has less deadbeats than normal. And Florida jumps off the charts with more than 50% less deadbeats than normal!! Floridians, I owe you an apology. The numbers say you’ve been playing in tough leagues. Since I’m a numbers guy, I have to accept this. My apologies for my bashing the past two years.

Final Conclusion coming up… Gordon, good work, basically I 100% agree with you...