CREATiVESPORTS.com on the NFBC

Buster · Post by **Buster** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:07 am

For those who are not regular readers, CREATiVESPORTS.com does weekly columns on the NFBC. Additionally, I do a weekly Outside the [Batter's] Box column that deals with baseball and general, and the NFBC specifically.

Some may recall the Walla Walla and money management column that drew some attention last year.

Today's column doesn't have anything to do with Walla, (you can relax, John), but rather with the main event and L.V. League #2 in general. Of course, much is about my team, and none of you care about that, but if you are interested in reading, the link is

Outside the [Batter's] Box

The column regarding the NL $1,250.00 auction will be posted next Thursday.

Best of luck in the coming competition.

Buster

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:19 am

Nice work, Buster. Now you just have to hope that Team #13 doesn't come knocking on your door at 3:00am one morning with the Goon Squad in tow.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:34 am

Any chance team #13 had twins in NY's draft? (I won't say which league and number.)

Buster · Post by **Buster** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:07 am

For anyone interested, this week at CREATiVESPORTS.com, I gave my thoughts (for what little they are worth) on the drafting of seven Class A pitchers in the $1,250.00 NL auction #2.

http://www.creativesports.com/newsmanag ... 8&zoneid=8

Ken, Perry, and the rest of you who adopted this strategy, or one similar, I would love to put together a column with your thoughts.

Specifically, I would like to know:

1. Your thoughts coming into the draft/auction;

2. Your thoughts during the draft/auction, i.e., did someone else adopt your strategy as well; did you have to make changes due to the league's response; etc.

3. Your thoughts now that the draft/auction is over, but the season has not yet started.

If interested, please drop me a note at [email protected].

Please include your team name and league number, and let me know if you would like me to use your name, team name, or just the generic "one team in a league" in the column.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Buster

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 8:27 am

Buster, Nice review. Its not that I didn't want your input. I just thought it wouldn't be fair being I had a bet with Dyv on the outcome. In hindsite I should of let you draft the team!

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:01 am

Originally posted by Walla Walla:

Buster, Nice review. Its not that I didn't want your input. I just thought it wouldn't be fair being I had a bet with Dyv on the outcome. In hindsite I should of let you draft the team!

Walla, you're a good guy. You want to call the bet off?

Dave

Leaderboard Sports · Post by **Leaderboard Sports** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 5:50 pm

What a pal that Dyv is

[ April 01, 2005, 11:57 PM: Message edited by: Leaderboard Sports ]

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 5:55 pm

Be glad to talk about it Buster. First off I'll address the spirit of the game talk, I play in about 20-30 fantasy baseball leagues every year, some for fun, some for T-Shirts, and some for cash, and I enjoy the heck out of trash talk and competition but I still play to win. I think you're fooling yourself if you think real major league managers would not take advantage of any rule in the books in order to win a game, whether it's how far pine tar is allowed on a bat, intentional walks, or midgets on your roster looking for a walk, the real game we are trying to mimic has in the past and will do in the future anything within the rules to win. LIMA plans, SMART plans, RIMA plans and any other auction strategy are nothing more than strategies developed to exploit existing rules and give the owner his best chance to win. The LIMA strategy of drafting cheap pitchers and middle relievers is not in the traditional mold of a major league roster, nor is rotating two start pitchers and pitchers from waivers, they are just manipulation of the rules and scoring systems to afford their user a better chance to win. No different than what I'm doing. Had I drafted all injured pitchers and a couple closers, (which the team sitting two places from you did), you wouldn't have even noticed, (which you didn't), and nothing would have been said about violation of the spirit of the game, even though that is the exact same strategy. Does it really matter where your pitchers that aren't going to pitch come from? I'm afraid if you were honest about it, the true spirit of the game, both in fantasy and in real baseball is "Just win baby".

Now to address why I employed this strategy. Last year Jeff Rackliffe and I did very well in the NFBC NL Auction, leading till the final two weeks and finishing third 2 1/2 points out of first. With a normal $80 pitching staff we got 33 Pitching points and I realized that with practically no pitching staff I would have received 29 pitching points. If I take only two mid range closers with good job security I figured I'll get between 38 and 41 points. With closers pitching so few innings I needed $1 pitchers who would not influence my ERA and WHIP. When Greg dropped the 40 man roster rule I immediately thought about low class A pitchers with no chance of pitching in the majors. I looked at the risk of one bad closer inning destroying your ERA but decided it was worth the gamble. Not only do I get more money on offense ($25 more) but I get more hitters on my bench and more free agent money to spend on hitters not having to worry about pitching. I felt the rewards were greater than the risks and after checking with Greg to make sure it was legal I committed to that strategy. I thought my plan was shot when around the first of January RotoWorld did a front page article on the benefits of the one closer no real pitcher strategy in no minimum innings leagues. I was concerned too many teams would try the same strategy but luckily only one other team did and it shouldn't hurt me too bad, a lost ERA point can be made up with a 2 in Wins etc.

The Draft.

I was lucky to get the first toss out as I wanted to get my closers early before the shortage drove the price up. I got Looper $1 more than I hoped and Hoffman the next round for a fair price. I then threw out every closer creating a panic and driving up the costs of all the rest of the closers. The closers in our draft went considerably higher than the other NL drafts thanks to this.

On offense I got caught running up the bid on Bonds a player I didn't want but that happens early in an auction when you're trying to feel everyone out. I knew he had the second operation but figured end of April and still thought he would make $29. While in hindsight I wish I had let him go at $27 I still think he can earn $25 with a mid May return. If I don't finish in the money this year it will likely have more to do with Bonds than with my class A pitching staff.

All in all I think I can finish in the money and I have absolutely no problem with next years rule changes and actually prefer the new rule changes. If nothing else I closed a loophole. But I grimace every time I hear someone say "not in the spirit of the game", the rules are the same for everyone and understanding the rules is a big part of managing your team. I can deduct from your article that you didn't like the strategy but speculating on what was on the minds of the founding fathers is just your opinion and no more accurate than mine. I've played in hundreds of leagues over the years and it has been my experience that the spirit of the game is to win, it's why they keep score, and it's why that in the main draft LV 9 league so many people jumped all over the guy who told the owner who had just selected Tony Batista that he was in Japan and wanted to let him retract his pick, if there had been guns at the table 13 people would have shot the poor guy full of holes. I don't think you have a good read on today's trash talking, beer drinking, chest thumping, win at all costs fantasy sports players. Those who start talking about the spirit of the game are usually upset they didn't think of it or are upset they're getting beat by it. As Gordon Gecko will tell you, ruthlessness is what separates the wolves from the sheep. If I win, the money will spend just as sweet, and if I lose, well it was my nickel and I paid a lot to get to manage my team however I wanted within the rules.

I don't care if you use my name Buster, just spell it right

Ken Bayes. I don't even hope you finish last in your league :rolleyes: , in fact I wish you the best of luck. I can handle criticism whether just or unjust and I can laugh at myself if I fall on my face, but I can also touchdown dance with the best of them if I win so you might not want to stand too close next October lest I spike the ball in your direction .

Ken

[ April 03, 2005, 03:59 AM: Message edited by: Ken ]

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Fri Apr 01, 2005 6:21 pm

Personally, I would very much hate to see Greg legislate strategy away.

It would be almost as easy to draft injured pitchers for $1 and then nobody would say a word?

Some teams get 3 closers and that's not realistic... others get none. What? Every team has a closer!

How come we start 2 catchers? Major league teams don't....

And I don't care for the stupidest of stupid explanations 'because Okrent and Waggoner did it' - they never made provisions for chat boards or the internet and here we are anyway

Dyv

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 3:59 am

To set the record right. Buster did not pick any players on my team. If it crashes and burns its my doing. As far as Buster not knowing if another team was doing the same as Barbi(Ken) yeah he knew. I told him I didn't think you could win with that approach. I still don't. But I won't knock you for trying it. If you pull it off good on ya.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:59 am

Walla you are so out of touch with the times. Ken dumped Barbie a couple years ago.

Last I heard she was selling her tail down on Venice Beach.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 10:27 am

Hey Ken...

Nice post. You're the same Ken from LV league 5 in the main?

I think it will be interesting to track your success. I thought about the thrill of 0.00 era and 0.00 whip with one save should a bos/nyy closer get a perfect save sunday night and shut down all pitching for the season.

I actually thought it was a money maker for the league...and not so good for the total...but who cares...it would/could pay for this year (and the next two+ years should you get 1st!)

The overall champ is going to be a healthy team with their eye on the overall standings all year long...tweaking a twisting their rosters/lineups to maximize their chance at the overall...with less regard for their league.

Good luck...and way to go for attacking a weak rules base that allows that very thing to happen. I hope it changes to 250 min. innings pitched next year...but that's 2006.

I think Bonds will be back in LATE April...before the first of May! (fingers crossed)

~Lance

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:28 am

No, I'm the Ken from LV league 9.

The team we drafted in the main event has a very balanced pitching staff. No way do I think the no pitcher strategy would work in the snake draft.

But it is a viable strategy in an auction league with no minimum innings.

[ April 02, 2005, 05:30 PM: Message edited by: Ken ]

Cellar Dwellers · Post by **Cellar Dwellers** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:26 pm

Ken- For the record, I admire your ingenuity. I don't think you did anything wrong or have anything to apologize for. You need to always look for ways to get an edge, and you did it within the rules of the game. I've often thought of using that strategy in other leagues I have been in. To me, it's a strategy that gives you a very good chance to finish in the money, but I think it usually keeps you out of the top spot unless you have no hiccups in your offense. That has always held me back from pulling the trigger on using that strategy. That being said, I'll be happier with an innings pitched minimum next year. Good luck.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:58 pm

So Greg said at the main tourn draft in vegas - that you had to have 'some innings pitched' What does that mean? 1 inning 3? 50?

Online Yeti · Post by **Online Yeti** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:17 pm

While I hate the no pitcher stategies, I don't fault anyone who used them, as they were legal this year. I hope that the min IP requirement is adopted with even more than 250 IP as the standard. I am not trying to say that the rest of FBL is perfectly realistic by any stretch. Just that its a glitch you could win 2 catgories by essentially punting them.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 9:45 pm

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

So Greg said at the main tourn draft in vegas - that you had to have 'some innings pitched' What does that mean? 1 inning 3? 50? You have to have at least 1/3 of an inning pitched to have an era or whip number. 0 divided by 0 is not 0, but 0 divided by 1/3 is 0. So in order to have a qualifying era and whip number you must have at least 1/3 inning pitched.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 2:26 am

He got up and said that you couldn't just have 0 or 1/3 of an inning, but he also didn't say you had to have 1 or 5 or 50, just 'some innings'

Greg, Can you Clarify???

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:36 am

I'm pretty sure that Greg said 1/3 of an inning would qualify for the 2005 NFBC. Putting in a 250 minimum (or any minimum for that matter) would be an after-the-fact rules change. Requiring 1/3 of an inning isn't a change but says that the basic rules of mathematics have to be followed.

Greg said he would put in a minimum for next year but I hope it is low - like about 100IP. You may find a different limit in the main event than you see in the single-league events. You cannot possibly win the 300 team main event by dumping 2 or 3 categories. You can possibly win an individual league that way although I really doubt it. Perry Van Hook will probably write how this extreme variation of the "no starter" draft strategy is a failure. Following the success of the closers/middlemen variation should provide more interest. I get to see it first-hand in NY7.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:50 am

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

So Greg said at the main tourn draft in vegas - that you had to have 'some innings pitched' What does that mean? 1 inning 3? 50? You do not qualify for a category without performing in that category. So until someone gets innings pitched, he can't qualify for ERA or WHIP. So yes, under our current rules 1/3 of an inning would qualify that team in ERA and WHIP. The owners who are gambling on a few innings pitched and winning those categories are also gambling that their pitchers will not give up any earned runs. It's a gamble they are willing to take to possibly win those two categories and then punt the other three.

That being said, I only know of one owner who went this route in an NL Auction League. Yes, some owners are trying to win saves, ERA and WHIP while punting Ks and Wins. That is being tried in the auction leagues and the main event and it's certainly within the rules. As I stated last year when I announced the rules without an innings pitched minimum, my goal is to allow many different strategies and methods to win your league and the overall title. This is just one of them and it was proven last year by Artie Rastelli and other Top 10 finishers that the proven way (at least last year) was to have strong balance in all 10 categories. We'll see if that holds true this year as well.

Everyone should realize that I respect Ken, Hank and other owners who are trying different strategies to win their league and contend for the $100,000 grand prize. It's a 15-team league and in the overall contest there are 300 points in each category, so everyone can do the math and figure out the best way to get to 80 percent of the total points, which is about what you need to win the overall title and possibly the league title. I wish everyone luck in doing that under the current rules.

I will institute an innings pitched minimum next year just so we have that total in the rules so that it's clearer next year. It may remain at 1/3 or it may go higher. We'll see. The one thing I definitely want to avoid is the Class A pitchers strategy as I want MLB players on all rosters and thus will go back to making the player pool only those players on 40-man rosters (with a few exceptions).

Good luck everyone!!! And I mean EVERYONE!!!

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:50 am

Thanks for the respect Greg with three sons and a wife of 34 years that might be all the respect I get this year.

I knew you weren't thrilled with my minor league pitcher auction strategy when I told you about it a couple months ago. I could have found 7 $1 pitchers on 40 man rosters who wouldn't have hurt my strategy like Hank did but it was simply easier for me to grab A players. Trying to win ERA, WHIP, and Saves by pitching low ERA closers is a very viable strategy to win a 13 team Auction league with low or no minimum innings pitched requirements. I wouldn't and didn't try it in the main event as I think it eliminates you from the overall race.

That being said the 40 man roster rule and a low minimum inning requirement for next year will not stop someone from doing basically the same thing again next year if it proves successful. Two closers and a low era setup man would easily top 200 innings and two weeks before the start of the season many teams 40 man rosters still include injured, soon to be retired, soon to be sent down pitchers. Finding 7 or 8 pitchers who won't pitch wouldn't be too difficult even for a couple teams in one league. Unless you want to put a minimum inning requirement high enough to force everyone to have 4 or 5 starters the changes aren't really going to change much. If it's the class A pitchers that has everyone upset it's an overreaction. Like I said on the first page what difference does it make where your pitchers that aren't going to pitch come from. Whether it's class A, the injured list, or unsigned free agents, they're still not going to pitch.

While I don't want to see a high innings requirement next year, I don't have a problem with the new rule changes. I don't think it stops me from using a similar strategy next year and I'm sure it will make STATS' (the only people who have a right to be mad at me) job a lot easier. Whatever the final written rules are next year, make sure you make them Ken proof

, because I will be studying them for long hours looking for an edge.

[ April 03, 2005, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Ken ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 11:57 am

I have no problem with this strategy being implemented again next year. I just think it makes more sense operationally to have MLB players on 40-man rosters (entering rosters is easier and it seems fairer to me) and having some minimum innings pitched level clarifies things (the assumption that 0 IP equals 13 ERA and WHIP points needs to be put to rest). But the minimum IP level won't be very high as I already know where I want to go with that and it's within Ken-range!

Good luck to you in all of your leagues. I'm sure it's in the 20-30 range at least this year!

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:23 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I have no problem with this strategy being implemented again next year. I just think it makes more sense operationally to have MLB players on 40-man rosters (entering rosters is easier and it seems fairer to me) and having some minimum innings pitched level clarifies things (the assumption that 0 IP equals 13 ERA and WHIP points needs to be put to rest). But the minimum IP level won't be very high as I already know where I want to go with that and it's within Ken-range!

Good luck to you in all of your leagues. I'm sure it's in the 20-30 range at least this year! I'm not really sure if I like the rule change, Greg. There are usually 5 or 6 draft-worthy players who are on minor league contracts at the time of the draft. Not being able to touch these players, in addition to the hot prospects that will be called up later in the season, kind of limits the potential draft pool.

As has already been pointed out, you're not going to stop the "strategy" of drafting A-level pitchers--these owners would just draft 9 Rick Ankiels or some other pitcher that won't pitch at all this year. So really, all you're doing is making things easier for STATS's data entry staff.

One thing is for certain: limiting us to 40-man rosters is certainly NOT going to save time or make things easier on the people who are drafting. In addition to the smaller player pools, everyone will be responsible for figuring who is actually on the ever-changing 40-man rosters at the time of the draft. You guys are busy enough in the week leading up to the draft -- are you really going to have the time to figure that out?

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:25 pm

Also, not everyone on a 40-man roster is a "MLB player." On each team's roster, there are always at least a couple single-A level farmhands who will never see the light of day.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:27 pm

We'll figure it out by next year. For now, good luck to everyone under 2005's rules.