Tout Wars new FAAB rules

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat May 30, 2009 1:15 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

If every young player can be bought early, how much will be left on the table when the season is over? As it is now, there are too many teams that don't spend their free agent dollars. that means players like sheffield will go for more money, not the guzman's of the world.

greg's system is artifically inflating the prices of any standout minorleague callup. that is easy to see. [/QUOTE]Why was Guzman worth more than $1? How long was he up....36 hours?

The system creates situation where there are players available some weeks that every team wants. The owners decide what he is worth to that league. How many times does this happen a year?

Greg's system didn't create the Scherzer buzz last year. The owners who stuck their necks out did. Maybe next time a hot shot player's price won't be so high based on Scherzer's failure.

You want the opportunity to take 20 or 30 shots a year for next to nothing. I don't agree.

I bet the tout league uses $100 of faab money. When you have to make 50 or 60 moves a year in a mixed league with a $100 budget, I can see money getting tight. With our system, you can blow $900 a month into the season and still have a 100 moves left for the year.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 30, 2009 2:20 pm

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

The system creates situation where there are players available some weeks that every team wants. The owners decide what he is worth to that league. if every player was available every week, EVERY owner gets a chance to pick him up.

please list your reason why that isn't fair. because you and greg like to see owners spend lots of FAAB!?!? hahaha!!!

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 pm

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

I bet the tout league uses $100 of faab money. When you have to make 50 or 60 moves a year in a mixed league with a $100 budget, I can see money getting tight. With our system, you can blow $900 a month into the season and still have a 100 moves left for the year. For the record, Tout

1. uses Vickery, meaning the winning bid is $1 more than the next highest

2. allows for $0 bids with the caveat all uncontested bids >= $1 are counted as $1 with Vickrey, not $0

3. allows the trading of FAAB

[ May 30, 2009, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat May 30, 2009 3:42 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

The system creates situation where there are players available some weeks that every team wants. The owners decide what he is worth to that league. if every player was available every week, EVERY owner gets a chance to pick him up.

please list your reason why that isn't fair. because you and greg like to see owners spend lots of FAAB!?!? hahaha!!! [/QUOTE]No, I think owners should have a reason to spend their money. I think owners should want to compete by buying players. I think there are too many teams that leave their free agent money on the table. They find themselves out of contetion after the All-Star break with a pocket full of money.

Most players aren't worth the money spent on them. You want to create a market where most minor leagues could be had for a dollar many weeks which increase your buying power.

You have the Yahoo mentality. The one that gets to the computer first wins the game.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 30, 2009 3:48 pm

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

You have the Yahoo mentality. The one that gets to the computer first wins the game. most people when they realize they are on the short end of the stick, resort to exaggerations or fabrications.

what you said above is a complete fabrication. trying to trump this up like it's the first to the computer gets the hot callup. :rolleyes:

Sunday at 8pm the highest bidder gets him, not the first to the computer.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat May 30, 2009 3:54 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

You have the Yahoo mentality. The one that gets to the computer first wins the game. most people when they realize they are on the short end of the stick, resort to exaggerations or fabrications.

what you said above is a complete fabrication. trying to trump this up like it's the first to the computer gets the hot callup. :rolleyes:

Sunday at 8pm the highest bidder gets him, not the first to the computer. [/QUOTE]You want to get the player first for a $1- is that correct or not?

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 30, 2009 4:16 pm

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

You want to get the player first for a $1- is that correct or not? i want to get whatever player i want (regardless of whether he's in the majors or minors) any given sunday.

as always, bid amounts can vary on many variables.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat May 30, 2009 4:22 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

You want to get the player first for a $1- is that correct or not? i want to get whatever player i want (regardless of whether he's in the majors or minors) any given sunday.

as always, bid amounts can vary on many variables. [/QUOTE]Well, I don't. I think the free agent system is fine the way it is.

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Sat May 30, 2009 8:16 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

You want to get the player first for a $1- is that correct or not? i want to get whatever player i want (regardless of whether he's in the majors or minors) any given sunday.

as always, bid amounts can vary on many variables. [/QUOTE]We agree here GG. Why should there be parameters on player pool? Seems to me it adds more strategy, research, skill when adding the minor league player pool to the mix. I love it. I think many people would be scared of this idea because it favors the people that do more research. Aren't we supposed to study the minors pre-draft? Seems to me the minor leaguers are more interesting during the year as opposed to predraft. How isn't it fair to have minor league free agents available? Where's the strategy involved in having to blow a huge wad on a callup when you can pickup them for cheaper earlier in the year?

I play in a league that has no restrictions as far as minor league callups and it is incredible. So much more fun following the minor leagues. Let's have a test league next year.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sun May 31, 2009 2:11 am

Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

I play in a league that has no restrictions as far as minor league callups and it is incredible. So much more fun following the minor leagues. Let's have a test league next year. [/QB]Wow...I play in the same league and don't have this incredible feeling. Why don't you tell me how much money the bottom five teams have left?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun May 31, 2009 3:23 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

I bet the tout league uses $100 of faab money. When you have to make 50 or 60 moves a year in a mixed league with a $100 budget, I can see money getting tight. With our system, you can blow $900 a month into the season and still have a 100 moves left for the year. For the record, Tout

1. uses Vickery, meaning the winning bid is $1 more than the next highest

2. allows for $0 bids with the caveat all uncontested bids >= $1 are counted as $1 with Vickrey, not $0

3. allows the trading of FAAB [/QUOTE]As you can see, comparing Tout's FAAB to the NFBC is like night and day. Why not start a thread that the NFBC should use Vickrey so that anyone who bids too much on a prospect only has to pay $1 more than the runnerup bid?? There are many, many rules in fantasy baseball that can be debated. That's the beauty of fantasy baseball. You have rules and you try to beat your peers in the contest using the same rules.

Vickrey is better for some. I hate it. Having folks pick up top prospects for $1 three weeks before he gets called up is good for some and not as level a playing field for others. It's the rules we've set up. We don't have $0 bids. Why not create a thread asking for $0 bids? We could go on and on.

It's a good discussion, nonetheless.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Sun May 31, 2009 3:39 am

I've heard 11 x 11 is incredible

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Sun May 31, 2009 3:58 am

I like pizza and beer. I think we should be forced to down a slice and wash it back with a beer between every pick. Think of how this could impact KDS and wheel picks!!!

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Sun May 31, 2009 4:26 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

I like pizza and beer. I think we should be forced to down a slice and wash it back with a beer between every pick. Think of how this could impact KDS and wheel picks!!! I second the motion!

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Sun May 31, 2009 5:38 am

We agree here GG. Why should there be parameters on player pool? Seems to me it adds more strategy, research, skill when adding the minor league player pool to the mix. I love it. I think many people would be scared of this idea because it favors the people that do more research. It can work both ways, right? I think there would be many teams out there who have weak bench players or injuries that would simply stash away many prospects in the hope of getting "lucky". For those teams who have a weaker bench because of a poor draft, it might be easier for them to pay a couple dollars and stash a Brandon Wood or Buchholz. There's no added research or skill involved in that. These teams simply had room on their team to stash these guys.

As the rules are, it's not like there is no skill, research, or thought involved. How much should you pay for Fox? How long will Reimold or Medlen stay in the majors? How often will LaPorta play? All these factors affect the bids on Sunday, make it fun, and still require skill.

No matter which way you slice it, there are pros and cons to each side.

Liquidhippo · Post by **Liquidhippo** » Sun May 31, 2009 8:39 am

Originally posted by rkulaski:

quote: We agree here GG. Why should there be parameters on player pool? Seems to me it adds more strategy, research, skill when adding the minor league player pool to the mix. I love it. I think many people would be scared of this idea because it favors the people that do more research. It can work both ways, right? I think there would be many teams out there who have weak bench players or injuries that would simply stash away many prospects in the hope of getting "lucky". For those teams who have a weaker bench because of a poor draft, it might be easier for them to pay a couple dollars and stash a Brandon Wood or Buchholz. There's no added research or skill involved in that. These teams simply had room on their team to stash these guys.

As the rules are, it's not like there is no skill, research, or thought involved. How much should you pay for Fox? How long will Reimold or Medlen stay in the majors? How often will LaPorta play? All these factors affect the bids on Sunday, make it fun, and still require skill.

No matter which way you slice it, there are pros and cons to each side. [/QUOTE]In my opinion this 'no skill' argument to opening up the player pool is slightly convoluted. you wrote:

I think there would be many teams out there who have weak bench players or injuries that would simply stash away many prospects in the hope of getting "lucky". For those teams who have a weaker bench because of a poor draft, it might be easier for them to pay a couple dollars and stash a Brandon Wood or Buchholz. There's no added research or skill involved in that.

...

Sneaky, this dynamic(the 'superior' teams having no chaff to discard) exists REGARDLESS of whether we open up the player pool or not. He has fewer(or zero) slots to pick up players, and ANY pickup by others(limited player pool or unlimited) can just be dismissed as 'oh he just got lucky'.

you wrote:

As the rules are, it's not like there is no skill, research, or thought involved. How much should you pay for Fox? How long will Reimold or Medlen stay in the majors? How often will LaPorta play? All these factors affect the bids on Sunday, make it fun, and still require skill.

...

I would argue that yes, as it is, there is zilch, zero, absolutely nada skill involved in blind FAAB. I've been playing this game to long to think otherwise. I've heard the 'you've got to grind it out' argument. It doesn't work, you just have to hope you cash in on your lotto ticket. As it is now, to ensure getting a player, you HAVE to bid between 300-500. This guarantees you 2-3 'specific' pickups each year. It's a lotto, a crapshoot. I hate it.

As it is, there's little to no reason, or advantage, to have knowledge of players in the minors. Know nothing about a single minor league player in all of pro baseball? No detriment at all to your chances winning your league with the rules as they are. Just check the MLB transaction log on the weekends, then buy a lotto ticket(Blind FAAB) for your targets.

Anything that increases the importance of Blind FAAB is WRONG for fantasy baseball. A limited player pool does exactly that.

As someone mentioned earlier, Vickrey takes care of the luck problem, but that's another story.

[ May 31, 2009, 03:19 PM: Message edited by: Liquidhippo ]

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Sun May 31, 2009 11:01 am

Just check the MLB transaction log on the weekends, then buy a lotto ticket(Blind FAAB) for your targets.

If you feel that FAAB is like buying a lotto ticket, hope you're feeling lucky then.

Otherwise, maybe DC leagues are the way for you to go.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Sun May 31, 2009 11:22 am

Originally posted by Liquidhippo:

I would argue that yes, as it is, there is zilch, zero, absolutely nada skill involved in blind FAAB. I've been playing this game to long to think otherwise. I would just argue that you have no skill at faab then.

I rarely overpay for a player and I rarely get out bid.

How could there be "zilch, zero, absolutely nada" when you sat with Thomas and I spent and spent at least an hour discussing the subject and tricks of the trade at the Flamingo steakhouse?

If you're overpaying by that much, then you are simply not learning the skills that are out there and/or investing the time and just winging your faab bids. Your attitude on this puts you behind before you even start.

[ May 31, 2009, 06:21 PM: Message edited by: JohnZ ]

Liquidhippo · Post by **Liquidhippo** » Sun May 31, 2009 12:13 pm

Originally posted by JohnZ:

quote:Originally posted by Liquidhippo:

I would argue that yes, as it is, there is zilch, zero, absolutely nada skill involved in blind FAAB. I've been playing this game to long to think otherwise. How could there be "zilch, zero, absolutely nada" when you sat with Thomas and I spent at least an hour discussing the subject and tricks of the trade at the Flamingo steakhouse?

[/QUOTE]You have a point John. My passionate hatred of blind FAAB has driven me to overstate my point. There is a little skill involved, not much, but at least a little. I was on a roll ripping FAAB as it is and didn't feel like digressing with a qualifier to my statement.

[ May 31, 2009, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: Liquidhippo ]

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sun May 31, 2009 2:20 pm

any chance someone can tally up all the FAAB$ spent on two high profile callups this week, Jake Fox and Fernando Martinez

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Sun May 31, 2009 4:26 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

any chance someone can tally up all the FAAB$ spent on two high profile callups this week, Jake Fox and Fernando Martinez I can't help you there...but your boy Stephen Drew went for well over $700...and to think I thought I had a chance at him!

ESPN8 THE OCHO · Post by **ESPN8 THE OCHO** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:42 am

I had the understanding when a player like Stephen Drew is cut they do not go to the waiver wire for competitive balance sake. I know he is off to a tough start but he was a top 6 round pick. C'mon.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 2:06 am

Originally posted by ESPN8 THE OCHO:

I had the understanding when a player like Stephen Drew is cut they do not go to the waiver wire for competitive balance sake. I know he is off to a tough start but he was a top 6 round pick. C'mon. Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I don't see a reason to pull Drew from LV8. His ADP in the Online Championship was 77, which is a far cry from Tulowitzki's 33 of last year, and he went 77th in this league. He's also hitting .190 and the risk right now is as great as the reward.

This owner was able to move Michael Young to SS, but he had other options to cut outside of Drew. Still, to each his own and it's not my job to cut players for owners. This is a tight league with many owners having plenty of FAAB to bid on Drew. He's not available in any other main event league, but again I see risk-reward here for any owner in LV8 who bids for him.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:42 am

The NFBC rules were created.

Greg rested.

NFBC owners bid $2,188 on Jake Fox the first week he was in the FAAB pool.

NFBC owners bid $1,576 on Fernando Martinez the first week he was in the FAAB pool.

NFBC owners bid $1,481 on Randy Choate the first week he was in the FAAB pool.

Shawn smiled.

Greg smiled.

[ June 01, 2009, 09:47 AM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko II ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:49 am

Originally posted by ESPN8 THE OCHO:

I had the understanding when a player like Stephen Drew is cut they do not go to the waiver wire for competitive balance sake. I know he is off to a tough start but he was a top 6 round pick. C'mon. One thing we've learned in life is that government intervention is needed, but too much government intervention is not good. Yes, Drew was cut in only one main event league and with an ADP of 77 we did consider taking him out of that league. But with his slow start and injuries, we chose to let that league play out with Drew still in the free agent pool. He was a high risk/reward pickup who went for $714 this week.

During six years of being commissioner of the NFBC and NFFC, I have walked this fine line many times. I always have the integrity of the overall contest in mind and making sure that one dominant player isn't released in just one league to throw the entire contest out of whack. So far we've succeeded, but we've been accused of making wrong calls MANY times.

In the NFFC two years ago, one team cut Donovan McNabb before Week 11 after he had put together several so-so weeks in a row. We allowed McNabb to remain in the free agent pool and let that league play out, even though it was the only one with McNabb as a free agent. The team that picked him up started him during another rough McNabb outing and it cost him a win and a spot in the Championship Round. Had we intervened, a different team would have won the $100,000 rather than the rightful champion.

Sometimes you have to go with your gut feeling and let tough cuts go through. Too much government intervention means that we know more than anyone else and we don't. We monitor every cut every week and make tough decisions. In this case, let's allow this league to play this out, with $714 now out of FAAB from one team.