The top league in the NFBC!

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:21 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

i long for the days where all 390 teams are placed in the same overall league with an overall free agent pool and we play it out there. NOT base the overall title ENTIRELY on the 15 team league you randomly get placed in.

let's face it, all leagues don't have an equal amount of talent in them. this 100% affects your chances of winning 100K.

in a tough league, say bye bye.

in an easy league, 100K is more reachable.

doesn't matter who you are. both those statements hold true. Are you RANDOMLY going to be placed in a 15-team league for the draft and then all 390 compete in one league afterwards?? Otherwise, someone will be picking 390th right? I understand why you think this would be the fairest way to go about this contest but not sure I understand how it would all work.

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:21 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

i long for the days where all 390 teams are placed in the same overall league with an overall free agent pool and we play it out there. NOT base the overall title ENTIRELY on the 15 team league you randomly get placed in.

let's face it, all leagues don't have an equal amount of talent in them. this 100% affects your chances of winning 100K.

in a tough league, say bye bye.

in an easy league, 100K is more reachable.

doesn't matter who you are. both those statements hold true. Are you RANDOMLY going to be placed in a 15-team league for the draft and then all 390 compete in one league afterwards?? Otherwise, someone will be picking 390th right? I understand why you think this would be the fairest way to go about this contest but not sure I understand how it would all work. Would you even have an faab?

[ June 25, 2009, 06:21 PM: Message edited by: rkulaski ]

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:09 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by headhunters:

gecko- until you define tough and easy your argument is crap. if one definition of "easy" is- players fall- well it doesn't matter much to you- you took 22 of 30 early. define easy and tough- evaluate all the leagues using those criteria and post your results. otherwise it is blab blab blab. tough means you have good, smart owners in your league

easy means you have less good and less smart owners in your league.

with chicago having SEVEN teams in the top 20, that tells me Chicago fits the second situation. [/QUOTE]It's not that simple.

GG, the biggest problem with what you wrote above is this:

You CAN'T tell me which leagues have the less smart, less good owners before the start of the NFBC season. Are some owners "better" than others-yes. But there's many other factors- injuries, free agent pickups, LUCK, that upset competitive balance in leagues. I follow certain teams during the year. You've picked up J Rivera, Kawakami in free agency. Do you think you have good,smart owners in your league? Those players have NOT been free agents in my league, which by the way is Chicago 3. I'd love to have those 2 players right now. I would've loved them 1 month ago. Who are the unsmart, bad owners in your league??

If you could pick out what the tougher leagues are before the drafts based on owners, than you might have something. I say you CAN'T. If you could pick out the tougher leagues AFTER the drafts, then you might have something. Again, you CAN'T. After evaluating my team, you said you didn't even count 100 steals. My team has 92 steals and it's not even the half way point. You, a good owner and a top 5 fantasy baseball player (like me), was way off evaluating a team after the main event draft. Maybe the good owners really shine during the season and I believe that but I still think EVERY league has their fair share of good owners in-season.

Here's how it is. ALL leagues are tough and ALL leagues have "talented" owners - good and smart. Yes, some owners are better than others. But, it's the other variables plus luck that MAKES some leagues look like they are "hard" with good owners or "easy" with bad owners.

other opinions?

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:13 pm

would the avg lifetime ranking for each league help determine which leagues are tougher?

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:23 pm

Originally posted by rkulaski:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by headhunters:

gecko- until you define tough and easy your argument is crap. if one definition of "easy" is- players fall- well it doesn't matter much to you- you took 22 of 30 early. define easy and tough- evaluate all the leagues using those criteria and post your results. otherwise it is blab blab blab. tough means you have good, smart owners in your league

easy means you have less good and less smart owners in your league.

with chicago having SEVEN teams in the top 20, that tells me Chicago fits the second situation. [/QUOTE]It's not that simple.

GG, the biggest problem with what you wrote above is this:

You CAN'T tell me which leagues have the less smart, less good owners before the start of the NFBC season. Are some owners "better" than others-yes. But there's many other factors- injuries, free agent pickups, LUCK, that upset competitive balance in leagues. I follow certain teams during the year. You've picked up J Rivera, Kawakami in free agency. Do you think you have good,smart owners in your league? Those players have NOT been free agents in my league, which by the way is Chicago 3. I'd love to have those 2 players right now. I would've loved them 1 month ago. Who are the unsmart, bad owners in your league??

If you could pick out what the tougher leagues are before the drafts based on owners, than you might have something. I say you CAN'T. If you could pick out the tougher leagues AFTER the drafts, then you might have something. Again, you CAN'T. After evaluating my team, you said you didn't even count 100 steals. My team has 92 steals and it's not even the half way point. You, a good owner and a top 5 fantasy baseball player (like me), was way off evaluating a team after the main event draft. Maybe the good owners really shine during the season and I believe that but I still think EVERY league has their fair share of good owners in-season.

Here's how it is. ALL leagues are tough and ALL leagues have "talented" owners - good and smart. Yes, some owners are better than others. But, it's the other variables plus luck that MAKES some leagues look like they are "hard" with good owners or "easy" with bad owners.

other opinions? [/QUOTE]rich - your league had had ryan franklin available (after named closer), mccutchen (after called up), frasor (after named closer).

i didn't have any of them available on the waiver wire. Kawakami??? please.

as for your steals, congrats. you must have crawford. also, how many steals does the team you drafted have. don't include your free agent pickups. thx

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 2:44 pm

gg,

ok maybe our league is easy with less than dave dropping r franklin. thanks dave! (kidding)...

Yes, I wasn't excluding our league just pointing out an example that your ny league makes mistakes too and it's hard to measure which is leagues are the tougher leagues. Kawakami- legit example - surface stats and injuries just not showing it yet, which is probably why a good owner like you was able to acquire him from another owner who either made a mistake or at the time couldn't afford to keep him on the bench because of injuries.

As for our steals, we do have crawford.

steals from drafted players (85)

crawford 37

utley 6

tulo 9

choo 11

a ramirez 11

church 4

ethier 3

sandoval/barajas: 4

steals from faab (7)

fowler 6

sheffield 1

Less than Dave · Post by **Less than Dave** » Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:57 pm

UGG... thanks for bringing THAT up... that could cost me BIG bucks... but seriously, I dropped him the week they randomly made him closer after anointing Motte closer, who blew one freaking save and they dethroned him.. when I dropped him it looked like he was 3rd in line there, I fucked up, but it didn't seem like there was a reason to hold onto him!

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:01 am

Originally posted by rkulaski:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

i long for the days where all 390 teams are placed in the same overall league with an overall free agent pool and we play it out there. NOT base the overall title ENTIRELY on the 15 team league you randomly get placed in.

let's face it, all leagues don't have an equal amount of talent in them. this 100% affects your chances of winning 100K.

in a tough league, say bye bye.

in an easy league, 100K is more reachable.

doesn't matter who you are. both those statements hold true. Are you RANDOMLY going to be placed in a 15-team league for the draft and then all 390 compete in one league afterwards?? Otherwise, someone will be picking 390th right? I understand why you think this would be the fairest way to go about this contest but not sure I understand how it would all work. [/QUOTE]Rich – I posted something about this last year. From what I remember people thought it was a good idea, but since the current system isn’t broke, why change it?

Basically, it goes like this:

1. Draft your main event team against 14 other people

2. Your main event team is put in a separate league against those 14 other people

2a. Free agents for this league are between you and the 14 other people

3. Your main event is put in an overall league against 389 people

3a. Free agents for this league are between you and the 389 other people. For instance, since there are 26 total leagues, there would be 26 John Mayberry available to be rostered. If Mayberry is already on 10 teams, that means there are 16 Mayberry’s in the free agent pool. If you bid on him, you only need to be one of the 16 highest bids to acquire him. How many times were you the runner-up bid and lose out, while your bid would have won the player in other leagues? This concept removes that bum deal. Note – Teams could not start the same player twice, ie. A team could not pickup two Andrew McCutchen’s and start them.

Currently, in the overall race for 100K, we are competing against each other through our 15 team leagues. My concept removes that inefficiency and allows for a more ‘real’ H2H competition.

Dirt Dogs · Post by **Dirt Dogs** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:13 am

interesting gekko. Makes you wonder about that for a few minutes.

But i think that woudl change the draft strategy somewhat. I dont think the draft would play as large a role as it does now. Because the probability to be able to add a player is increased due to all leagues in play.

Wouldnt you agree somewhat. makes you wonder though.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:28 am

Originally posted by Dirt Dogs:

interesting gekko. Makes you wonder about that for a few minutes.

But i think that woudl change the draft strategy somewhat. I dont think the draft would play as large a role as it does now. Because the probability to be able to add a player is increased due to all leagues in play.

Wouldnt you agree somewhat. makes you wonder though. more players available, but more owners are trying to get them. tough to say. i like it.

Asumijet · Post by **Asumijet** » Sat Jun 27, 2009 2:31 am

[/qb][/quote]

Basically, it goes like this:

1. Draft your main event team against 14 other people

2. Your main event team is put in a separate league against those 14 other people

2a. Free agents for this league are between you and the 14 other people

3. Your main event is put in an overall league against 389 people

3a. Free agents for this league are between you and the 389 other people. For instance, since there are 26 total leagues, there would be 26 John Mayberry available to be rostered. If Mayberry is already on 10 teams, that means there are 16 Mayberry’s in the free agent pool. If you bid on him, you only need to be one of the 16 highest bids to acquire him. How many times were you the runner-up bid and lose out, while your bid would have won the player in other leagues? This concept removes that bum deal. Note – Teams could not start the same player twice, ie. A team could not pickup two Andrew McCutchen’s and start them.

[/QB][/quote]

I like it.

Two teams for the price of one. But that probably increases the cost to play.

The only other downside I see is that with 2 teams for one, many of us might by one less team due to Sunday FA management.