NFBC All-Time Top Money Winners

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:06 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by ssmarsh:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Walla,

I agree about the luck element. I know I am in the minority, but percentage wise, skill/luck needed to succeed would be 30/70. I'd split it 45% skill (how well you draft) and 55% luck. For me, luck breaks down into to subcategories. First, it's players avoiding injury. Second, it's getting huge returns from guys you expected very little from (see Cliff Lee). If you draft well and get your fair share of "luck", you're always in the race for your league title. [/QUOTE]injuries are just an excuse. in baseball, skillful managers can overcome injuries, even to a key player or two. [/QUOTE]I'd add that skillful managers expect to get huge returns from those guys that others expect very little from them. I'm not saying anyone expected Cliff Lee to be Cy Young but there were certainly those who expected him to be an integral part of their team. People blasted me for drafting Alexeii on these very boards and what he gave me wasn't terribly far apart from what I expected.

There were certainly those who lucked into him and then there were those who had him and luck had nothing to do with it.

ssmarsh · Post by **ssmarsh** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:55 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

injuries are just an excuse. in baseball, skillful managers can overcome injuries, even to a key player or two. True enough with pitchers, but if one of your big hitters goes down for a significant length of time and suitable positional replacements aren't available in the FA pool, you could be in big trouble. Players get hurt all the time, so you have to try and plan for it, but I would consider not having to deal with it at all during the season very lucky.

imported_Low Talkers · Post by **imported_Low Talkers** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:10 pm

Clearly, as someone mentioned earlier, the higher the level of competition, the more luck becomes a factor. Throw one of the top NFBC players in a random Yahoo league, and they win often enough it's probably 90/10 skill/luck. but playing against each other, I'd guess it's closer to 60/40 skill/luck.

The Alexei Ramirez example is a good one. Most of the people in the NFBC who drafted Ramirez expected a breakout year from him=skill. But in some internet leagues, he was probably auto-picked after someone ran out of players they'd heard of=luck.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:14 pm

Originally posted by Low Talkers:

Clearly, as someone mentioned earlier, the higher the level of competition, the more luck becomes a factor. Throw one of the top NFBC players in a random Yahoo league, and they win often enough it's probably 90/10 skill/luck. but playing against each other, I'd guess it's closer to 60/40 skill/luck.

The Alexei Ramirez example is a good one. Most of the people in the NFBC who drafted Ramirez expected a breakout year from him=skill. But in some internet leagues, he was probably auto-picked after someone ran out of players they'd heard of=luck. It's too bad Ramirez was drafted and then cut on high percentage of teams this year. The teams that saw some upside weren't rewarded unless they are able to buy him back.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:23 pm

Originally posted by ssmarsh:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

injuries are just an excuse. in baseball, skillful managers can overcome injuries, even to a key player or two. True enough with pitchers, but if one of your big hitters goes down for a significant length of time and suitable positional replacements aren't available in the FA pool, you could be in big trouble. [/QUOTE]hitter or pitcher injuries can be overcome.

jupinka finished 2nd last year and lost gallardo. i finished 6th and lost furcal. i'm sure other top finishers lost people as well.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:26 pm

Originally posted by Low Talkers:

Clearly, as someone mentioned earlier, the higher the level of competition, the more luck becomes a factor. Throw one of the top NFBC players in a random Yahoo league, and they win often enough it's probably 90/10 skill/luck. but playing against each other, I'd guess it's closer to 60/40 skill/luck. if we were in 10 teams leagues with "Yahoo-type" owners, they'd win more than 10% of the time due to talent not being spread as thin.

Hard Heads · Post by **Hard Heads** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:04 pm

we finished 23rd overall and dealt with a number of injuries. you have to be able to overcome them to win. the more skillful owners are able to do that, but there is also luck involved as well. mistakes are made by us all, but those that can limit there mistakes will more then often perform well. luck is a factor in baseball, but in a 26 week season full of injuries and cold streaks as well as hot streaks you need more skill in baseball to win. i would even put it more towards 70-80% skill.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:43 pm

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

quote:Originally posted by Low Talkers:

Clearly, as someone mentioned earlier, the higher the level of competition, the more luck becomes a factor. Throw one of the top NFBC players in a random Yahoo league, and they win often enough it's probably 90/10 skill/luck. but playing against each other, I'd guess it's closer to 60/40 skill/luck.

The Alexei Ramirez example is a good one. Most of the people in the NFBC who drafted Ramirez expected a breakout year from him=skill. But in some internet leagues, he was probably auto-picked after someone ran out of players they'd heard of=luck. It's too bad Ramirez was drafted and then cut on high percentage of teams this year. The teams that saw some upside weren't rewarded unless they are able to buy him back. [/QUOTE]I drafted, dropped, and bought back. Even more skill over luck in the free agent market perhaps. Too bad I don't have those numbers so we could look at what the real math says rather than just speculate. When you know that 5% of winners should have repeated by luck and then find out 25% actually did, you can really build off of that.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:00 am

Originally posted by ssmarsh:

it's getting huge returns from guys you expected very little from (see Cliff Lee). i can confirm, this guy was ALL LUCK

cindy · Post by **cindy** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:58 am

These lists that Greg and Tom have provided us with seem to prove a few facts to me.

1 - There is clearly an elite group of players based on money winnings.

2 - this elite group forms subgroups: players that excel in individual league play; players that excel in the overall format; players that excel in auction leagues; and crossovers of some sort.

3 - Winning the 100k, you must get lucky

4 - Winning individual leagues is based mostly on skill

Any thoughts?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:15 am

Here’s a way of looking at it:

In a 15 team baseball league comprised of 5 poor owners, 5 average owners, and 5 above average owners…the 5 poor owners will win 0% of the time, the average owners will win 25% of the time, and the above average owners will win 75% of the time.

In a 12 team football league comprised of 4 poor owners, 4 average owners, and 4 above average owners…the 4 poor owners will win 10% of the time, the average owners will win 40% of the time, and the above average owners will win 50% of the time.

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:16 am

Originally posted by cindy:

3 - Winning the 100k, you must get lucky

Any thoughts? I think the season is too long to sum up coming in 1st out of 390 teams lucky. I'd like to say that good fortune followed whatever skillful choices that team made at the time - from draft day all thru FA season. Their choices performed and stayed healthy. In effect the results were what that championship team had forcast, but to the max.

cindy · Post by **cindy** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:25 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

Here’s a way of looking at it:

In a 15 team baseball league comprised of 5 poor owners, 5 average owners, and 5 above average owners…the 5 poor owners will win 0% of the time, the average owners will win 25% of the time, and the above average owners will win 75% of the time.

In a 12 team football league comprised of 4 poor owners, 4 average owners, and 4 above average owners…the 4 poor owners will win 10% of the time, the average owners will win 40% of the time, and the above average owners will win 50% of the time. I am not a football buff, but I will tell you that I know very little and am currently in 1st place in an FFOC league by drafting right out of a magazine. If I end up winning any money it is purely luck. I find football extremely hard to be consistent in, a total crapshoot, YET I see that you and Gillis are doing well again this season in NFFC, so it cannot be too much luck dependent I guess.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:27 am

Originally posted by cindy:

YET I see that you and Gillis are doing well again this season in NFFC, so it cannot be too much luck dependent I guess. i think that fits into the summary i provided above.

cindy · Post by **cindy** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:29 am

Originally posted by Quahogs:

quote:Originally posted by cindy:

3 - Winning the 100k, you must get lucky

Any thoughts? I think the season is too long to sum up coming in 1st out of 390 teams lucky. I'd like to say that good fortune followed whatever skillful choices that team made at the time - from draft day all thru FA season. Their choices performed and stayed healthy. In effect the results were what that championship team had forcast, but to the max. [/QUOTE]I didn't mean to dilute the 100k winners at all. What I meant is that in order to beat almost 400 other people across leagues that you have no control over has to involve some luck to win the overall title. In the individual leagues you have much more control I think, and therefore less luck needed to win. But you're right, your choices over the course of an entire season need to be executed to perfection.

cindy · Post by **cindy** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:48 am

I've heard Shawn Childs mention this prior, but what are the differences when drafting for a main event team vs. the individual leagues? better yet, why are there different approaches?

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:12 am

Originally posted by cindy:

I've heard Shawn Childs mention this prior, but what are the differences when drafting for a main event team vs. the individual leagues? better yet, why are there different approaches? You might approach an indivdual league the same as the main event, but you might decide to punt a category at some point in the season and still have a chance to win your league. If you did that in the main, your chances of winning the overall might go out the window. It would very difficult to beat 389 other teams by punting a category. It could be done, but you really would have to ace the other 9 categories. So in the main, I would probably try to grind out say saves longer than I would in the ultimate if I had a limited upside in the league standings.

Head 2 Head · Post by **Head 2 Head** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 5:32 am

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

quote:Originally posted by cindy:

I've heard Shawn Childs mention this prior, but what are the differences when drafting for a main event team vs. the individual leagues? better yet, why are there different approaches? You might approach an indivdual league the same as the main event, but you might decide to punt a category at some point in the season and still have a chance to win your league. If you did that in the main, your chances of winning the overall might go out the window. It would very difficult to beat 389 other teams by punting a category. It could be done, but you really would have to ace the other 9 categories. So in the main, I would probably try to grind out say saves longer than I would in the ultimate if I had a limited upside in the league standings. [/QUOTE]Not sure I agree about punting a category in the main, as it is very difficult to beat the 389 either way. However, the dumping of one catagory - should increase your numbers in the other 9 - and the number of *other nine catagories* to move from 82% to 92% is lower then that to move from 72% to 82%. I agree that it hasn't been done - yet? Either way it would take an almost prefect storm to walk away the winner, (and your punt would have to pick up some points).

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:36 am

I promised more elaboration on my 30/70 statement. A warning this may be a little lengthy.

Lets look over the skill factors first. Skill of fantasy players is derived from:

1. Homework- How much is done and how that knowledge is used. This homework is the foundation for all decisions made before, during, and after the draft.

2.Confidence- If you've done the homework, you should have it, like school with a test.

3.Constructing the draft- Maybe more important than the draft itself,not only does this include how you think your draft will go pertaining to individual players but back up plans, both individually and positionally should original plans go awry.

4. Drafting- Making decisions not going on tilt. Trying to follow your plan but able to make decisions on the fly.

5 Player Management- Homework comes into play again, matchups, trends, momentum, team play, positional elements all come in to play.

6. FAAB management- Submitting the lowest bids possible while still obtaining the player that fills the needs of your roster. Decisive action on who may be a difference maker that not only furthers a team but keeping away from your nearest competitors.

Seems like a lot of skill factors and I didn't mention retention, like everything else a product of homework. An instance of this would be last year when Albert Pujols mentioned to the press that he'll play as long as possible with his injury but would probably need surgery. The inexperienced player dropped Pujols from their lists and made a mental note not to "waste" a pick on him. The more skilled player knows that Pujols has a bit of a "hero complex" and wants everyone to know that he is playing through one pain or another. Maybe moving Pujols down a peg or two but not much more.

Shoot, sorry, I've got to go. I'll come back tomorrow and make this a two-part post. Apologies.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:55 am

Here is something I have always wondered...

How much of the skill is "100% your own" and how much is the ability to assimilate tools provided by others?

Let's say that in order to compete in the NFBC, on Jan.1 you were sequestered in a hotel room with nothing at your disposal but a laptop with Excel, 3 years worth of comprehensive stats from everyone who played in the Majors and Minors and the news and notes section from USA Today once Spring training began. You were let out of your room on draft day.

Would you still pony up the $1300 for the Main Event?

By the way, I am not implying someone who does "100% their own work" is any better than anyone else. Besides, trust me, NO ONE does 100% their own work.

Most successful business operators know the best business model is to surround themselves with people capable of doing their job better than the CEO could -- it is the CEOs job to manage those people. In a way, I think managing a fantasy baseball team is analogous.

But that said, simply as a discussion vehicle, who would still enter the main with the above constraints?

OK, you'll get food and can have porn on your laptop as well as Excel.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:50 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

How much of the skill is "100% your own" and how much is the ability to assimilate tools provided by others?

Let's say that in order to compete in the NFBC, on Jan.1 you were sequestered in a hotel room with nothing at your disposal but a laptop with Excel, 3 years worth of comprehensive stats from everyone who played in the Majors and Minors and the news and notes section from USA Today once Spring training began. You were let out of your room on draft day.

Would you still pony up the $1300 for the Main Event?

i need full access to the Internet. The key is knowing what to look for and where to go

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:51 am

and i need a lot of time

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:53 am

Good question, Todd. I would do it if everyone else had to do it, no question, but not if everyone else played like normal. It would be a handicap I was fine, even happy to compete with if everyone else had it.

The way you worded it, I am not sure that I would do it without updated depthcharts for every team so I know who the starting players are--something more comprehensive than the notes of USA today, but in the spirit of your question I would think that is something you'd allow.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:56 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

How much of the skill is "100% your own" and how much is the ability to assimilate tools provided by others?

Let's say that in order to compete in the NFBC, on Jan.1 you were sequestered in a hotel room with nothing at your disposal but a laptop with Excel, 3 years worth of comprehensive stats from everyone who played in the Majors and Minors and the news and notes section from USA Today once Spring training began. You were let out of your room on draft day.

Would you still pony up the $1300 for the Main Event?

i need full access to the Internet. The key is knowing what to look for and where to go [/QUOTE]I think by comprehensive stats he meant everything you could possibly want. But on the Internet you could look up Shandler's projections, for example, and that is an example of something that the question wants to know whether you can live without.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:09 am

Originally posted by Head 2 Head:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

quote:Originally posted by cindy:

I've heard Shawn Childs mention this prior, but what are the differences when drafting for a main event team vs. the individual leagues? better yet, why are there different approaches? You might approach an indivdual league the same as the main event, but you might decide to punt a category at some point in the season and still have a chance to win your league. If you did that in the main, your chances of winning the overall might go out the window. It would very difficult to beat 389 other teams by punting a category. It could be done, but you really would have to ace the other 9 categories. So in the main, I would probably try to grind out say saves longer than I would in the ultimate if I had a limited upside in the league standings. [/QUOTE]Not sure I agree about punting a category in the main, as it is very difficult to beat the 389 either way. However, the dumping of one catagory - should increase your numbers in the other 9 - and the number of *other nine catagories* to move from 82% to 92% is lower then that to move from 72% to 82%. I agree that it hasn't been done - yet? Either way it would take an almost prefect storm to walk away the winner, (and your punt would have to pick up some points). [/QUOTE]Not sure I know what you mean with your % figures, but in order to compete for the overall you need to do well--not perfectly--in all 10 categories. Keeping that in mind, if you were above average in homeruns this year, say you were in 100th place, to do well you'd want to get up to 50th place. 100 to 50th is 13 homeruns. However, punting a cat you'd need to be virtually perfect. Instesad let's say you were trying to improve from 50th to 1st, now you need 59 homeruns.

Summing up, it is possible to get 13 extra homers and go from good to great and almost impossible to get 59 homers and go from great to perfect when punting. This is why Shawn and the other great players not only don't use these strategies but actively discount them. This is not new information to most of us.