Ron Shandler not the best salesman

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:10 am

Greg, Bottom line is Ron smack talked some owners of the NFBC. They smacked back. If he doesn't like it than too bad. At least he has you and a couple of others going to bat for him. You don't see anyone going to bat for those NFBC owners on his web site. I for one wouldn't mind if he wasn't invited back next year. We expect a higher class of people.

Leaderboard Sports · Post by **Leaderboard Sports** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 7:17 am

I guess I should start with a quasi-apology / disclaimer statement.

Everything Ron said I totally agree with.

I count on the dead money, illprepared, in it for the fun, new to the format guys to boost my odds a little better. I even go to my friends after the draft and tell them what dumbass picks so and so made. I love to see it hyped as the best against the best for the championship of the world, both to stroke my ego and to push more big dead money guys over the edge and into my leagues.

The issue I had with Ron's statement was not what he said, but the pulpit from which it was said. I want this event to grow and be an annual party for me and my friends and whether intended or not Ron's statement came off as an affront to the event as much or more than to the individual sampling he was subjected to in one NY league.

Ron is an industry leader and his columns are read by many. I did not think the article will benefit the NFBC so I took offense to it. I apologize for the $hit remarks, it was 3:40 in the morning and it seemed much funnier then

.

I subscribe to Ron's site and will continue to do so simply because it's one of the best and no one puts more data and samples into their prognostications than Ron does. It saves me much work and offers another view in my draft prep. I think the experts like to feel they are a little superior to the good roto players because they do all the data gathering work and we just buy it from them. The truth is though in the end we both have the same data and it comes down to luck and taking risks to do well in a large contest.

So in the future I hope Ron sees the benefit to the industry of a gigantic once a year championship which will allow both expert and novice to compete along side each other and push for it's growth. It just seems like good business to me.

[ March 31, 2004, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: Leaderboard Sports ]

The_Tenman · Post by **The_Tenman** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:37 am

Thought I`d throw in my 2 cents.

I wish more people like Ron would say what they think. The truth(although opinion) is much better than some political I love you; you love me; lets all hug statement. Besides, we all knew there would be "dead money" and some unprepared people. How good is that guy that drafted the OFs going to feel if he places in the money after the experts comments.

I drafted 7th just before Mr. Howard in Chicago league 1 and agree with Howards` earlier comments about our draft. We had a few guys that were totally lost at the end. Regardless, we have some solid teams in the league and Rons` man can expect some strong competition.

By the way,

GOOD LUCK HOWDOG!

Big Fish · Post by **Big Fish** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:45 am

I guess am actually one of those "ill prepared" "dead" money contributors to the NFBC, although admittedly I did not see myself in this light while in New York or the days leading up to the event.

However, I do not take offense to these remarks because I was clearly not in the same league if you will, and I was out manouvered by more seasoned players. It is accurate to say I was not as good as everyone else that participated in my league. It was a "learning" experience for me; the last fantasy league I participated in was my freshman year in college 1990 with 10 other teams ( I finished second to last).

However, I thouroughly enjoyed this event and the people involved and I am glad I did not meet many of the blow hards on the message board that pontificate their excellence and bore all with their daily diatrabe about he said, she said BS.

This event meant different things to many different people and that is what made it great. For me, it was just an opportunity to join a league on such a grand scale with a really exciting purse. I am gambler by nature, you probably have seen me in Vegas or Connecticut playing craps. This is my nature. I compete and hope to win but I dont play expecting to win. I play because I enjoy it. I joined this event for the same reason.

I hope that some of you can find a place in your leagues for people like myself that want to have a good time despite contributing what has been called "dead" money, because for some of us, it was the best $1,250 ever spent. The past few weeks have been a lot of fun (despite Nomar, Trot, Hairston, all sidelined and with Doug Mientiewickz as my starting 1B). Long live the NFBC and I will be back next year with a lot more experience to hopefully field a more competitive team. I pray for all who proclaim greatness and omniscience some "ill prepared" player does not take your "dead" money.

kgrady · Post by **kgrady** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:51 am

Just a short comment on the swiftness of the drafts. I don't necessarily concur with Greg's suggestion that having a partner will make it easier to keep up with the pace. The team which struggled the most in the draft Ron Shandler facilitated had two owners. Part of the problem they had in keeping track of players taken was that they were struggling to decide between themselves which player(s) to draft. They were leafing through magazines and conferring while draft picks were being posted on the board. I've seen this in other drafts as well. When you have dual owners, you have to work well together. That means being organized and reacting quickly as a team. If you have a partner who is on the same page as you are, then it can probably work well. Otherwise, it is easy to see the partnerships tripping over themselves.

Kevin

mystydog · Post by **mystydog** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 11:00 am

I observed the same thing in the Chicago League #3 draft that I was in....the teams that were being drafted by individual managers took about 15 seconds to make their picks....those teams that had two managers almost always took the whole time....and spent most of their time looking at each other with very confused looks on their faces....there were a couple exceptions to this of course...but, still for the most part co-managed teams had a much harder time.....

Jackstraw · Post by **Jackstraw** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 11:08 am

I think Kevin's comments are good. I didn't have a partner for the Auction or the Draft, and I didn't have any problems keeping up. I think the pace was good. I was in Las Vegas #2 and it went really well. We had one guy who missed his pick, but I think that was because he was on his cellphone. I think it was more a point of being organized. Thank God, I am an organizational freak or I might have been in trouble. And another thing was realizing how many possible players were going to be put on to rosters. I worked endlessly, for days it seemed like, making sure I had everyone I thought was a plausible selection on my list and then making sure that I had at least the minimum number that would be selected (using the idea that everyone would draft whoever I thought plausible). The dead money is most likely those least prepared... And those who didn't have some strategy. Anyway, 'nuff said about that.

What I would really like to say is that this league brings together a lot of people who enjoy fantasy league sports. Some guys are football guys, and like Dyv, some are hockey guys, and then some of us are baseball nuts. The hype that Krause used about bringing together the best in competition is true regardless of what anyone says. One thing I have noticed on these boards is that just about everybody is an "expert." Heck, I'll be the second one to stand up and say I'm dead money (Big Fish was the first). I don't care. And, $2500 was a huge chunk of change for a mere rookie like myself. My experience has been strictly in Yahoo and being a "streamer" as someone put it a long time ago. This type of play is pretty much foreign to me. But I think I am a tough competitor, win or lose. And unlike some, I will still be playing even when I am a million points out of first. But, I prepared... I strategized... I did my own player evaluations... I bought and I drafted... Now, I'll probably get my ass kicked, but at least it will be against THE BEST COMPETITION I HAVE EVER HAD A CHANCE TO PLAY AGAINST. Live long NFBC!

God Our Team Sucks · Post by **God Our Team Sucks** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 4:29 pm

I was in the NYC Draft #2 facilitated by Ron, and was also at the Q&A forum the previous night.

He was never anything other than 100% gracious. He generously took all my questions on Friday night -- and I asked him at least 40 or 50. We had polite conversations between in the two draft intermissions. He wasn't the slightest bit dismissive or disrespectful at the draft. And it was kind of fun to find out that I've been playing this game longer than him, and that he didn't know about Doug Loman.

So he doesn't like the idea of picking 6 outfielders in your first nine picks. Duh! So what. BaseballHQ gives you lots of insight. I certainly read with interest their projected rank orders for a 15 team mixed league straight draft, and although there were a bunch of players I thought were pretty far off base on the list (e.g. Keith Foulke, Brandon Webb, and Adam Dunn were too low, and Matt LeCroy too high based on the Morneau threat) I had already reached many of the same conclusions in Jeff Howard's draft primer.... That the easiest positions to fill late with quality would be pitching and outfield -- and that those would also be the most likely positions to find useful players in the pool during the season.

There isn't any doubt that middle infielders have the greatest disparity between top and bottom -- and that that to win, if you don't get 2B's and SS' with speed as well as a little power, not only will you have crappy players on your active roster in an "everyone must contribute world", you'll be hard pressed to make up for it in the OF without totally compromising HRs and RBIs.

As an aside, there were a whole bunch of fat pasty white 40ish guys in the room where I was drafting, and Ron could have easily wrote stuff like go hey outside in the daytime -- but he resisted the temptation.

Also, this isn't ESPN -- with one catcher in a ten team league. Going from 10 to 30 catchers makes a big difference. As someone who played fantasy baseball for years before rotisserie baseball was "invented" I'm comfortable in saying the two catcher rule is one of the weaker ones that's still around, right up there with stolen bases being worth 25% of total hitting. But that being said, the advice to get two decent catchers and wait on OF and pitching was clearly sound.

The boring math part is, when you compare the expected performance of rosterable cornermen, midfielders, outfielders, and catchers, under these NFBC rules the standard deviation of the midfielder and catcher groups is quite a bit higher than that of cornermen and outfielders. ...and that says pick midfielders and catchers early, wait on cornermen and outfielders.

Anyway I think the Ron bashing is really off base. He said what he did. Probably could have worded it nicer. The guy he thumped spoke his mind, which he had a right to, and I wouldn't blame the guy if he transfers his subscription. The great thing is, we'll know by Memorial Day who's more correct. And you know what, the trash talk on the bulletin board of my ESPN league is way tougher than what Ron wrote, so get used to it dyv!

Meanwhile, I'm just praying PECOTA's not a big joke.

SGHammer · Post by **SGHammer** » Wed Mar 31, 2004 4:39 pm

I respect the fact that Ron felt passionate enough about his feelings that he would risk losing a chunk of business by publishing them....but that's about it.

Greg- I am not sure I would run to defend someone who calls out your marketing strategy. You advertised "compete against the best". Stick to your guns. This type of prize pool DOES attract the best players. Will there be dead money? Of course...there always is. But in poker there is an expression .."Please don't tap the fish tank."

These HQ guys are the group that advised a friend of mine to grab Rentaria and Crawford in rounds one and two (against his better judgement from what I gather). Maybe it will work....but it sure seems like a reach to me. Besides...last I checked Crawford played OF. Why not take B. Boone?

My partner and I drafted in Vegas, league 2 and found every team to be extremley competetive and prepared when it was their pick. Our Mod. could barley keep up (although he did a great job). I have a hunch this goes for the majority of the leagues. The guys that are being called out because they took outfielders early may make the "experts" eat crow. We had a strategy of taking two of the top 4 catchers and grabbed Possada and Lopez in the 3rd and 4th. We felt starting two catchers in a 15 team league predicated this type of strategy. Are we right? Who knows....i'll tell you in October.

The problem with this whole "expert" thing is the fact that you need to back it up "on the field." Everyone compares this to the World Series of Poker. Well, I have played in the WSOP for the past 5 years and I can tell you right now, as much as Phil Helmuth likes to critque everyone's play both at the table and in his commentary, and as much as I can't stand him....he is one guy you can count on to be sitting at the table when they say "shuffle up and deal". I give every single person that had the balls to pony up 1,250.00 and get in the mix credit....and I could care less if they didn't cross out a name and picked a guy twice, or took 6 outfielders in 7 rounds.

I am sure the guy provides great stats and has a keen eye for upcomng talent....but could he beat half of this field in 5x5....I doubt it. I would love for him to prove me wrong next year. More dead money.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 2:31 am

Originally posted by Doug Loman All-Stars:

And you know what, the trash talk on the bulletin board of my ESPN league is way tougher than what Ron wrote, so get used to it dyv!

I bow to your infinite wisdom, Doug Loman - it appears you've figured out 'the way' to win and I only hope I'm lucky enough to finish 2nd

Trash talk? I'm not good at trash talk... I'll be honest. The idea that my mouth can make my team better or that your mouth can make my team inferior is just something I struggle with. It will ALL be proven on the field - and that's the facts. The only thing you seem to be missing? Ron can't prove anything on the field - he's not in this contest

I'm glad you like Ron - that's wonderful that you two old fantasy games warriors can meet after all these years and share a wonderful moment. Beautiful...

But the facts remain for me that his posts were mean-spirited and his explanation that he just wanted to bash Krause and didn't intend to attack the participants really rings hollow to me.

Feel free to disagree (but please allow me to have an opinion) - and keep you eyes open for good OF to round out your roster. Bobby Higginson had a grand slam in spring training yesterday - and sounds like your team needs some OF

Errr, wait - Placido Polanco qualifies for OF doesn't he? That could fill a big hole...

Good luck,

Dyv

CubFanBudMan · Post by **CubFanBudMan** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 3:18 am

Dyv,

Ron didn't post his original comments here. He posted them within the walls of the site that his subscribers pay money to read his (and his staff's) insights. Somebody took it on themselves to cut and paste those comments out of the subscriber site and into this public forum. Where I come from there's what's right...and then there's what's right. That ain't right.

From that point the biggest irony of this entire discussion is that all of you who clearly think Ron Shandler is a moron care so much about what he wrote to his mindless subscribers.

I don't know WTF a Dyv is either, Dave.

God Our Team Sucks · Post by **God Our Team Sucks** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 5:05 am

Dyv, skimming the cream.... we know you'll rise to the top.

But Ron's a good guy. Truly. It's not like he held up the microphone to the family of the murder victim.

SoxFan · Post by **SoxFan** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 6:52 am

Dyv,

Ron didn't post his original comments here. He posted them within the walls of the site that his subscribers pay money to read his (and his staff's) insights. Somebody took it on themselves to cut and paste those comments out of the subscriber site and into this public forum. Where I come from there's what's right...and then there's what's right. That ain't right.

From that point the biggest irony of this entire discussion is that all of you who clearly think Ron Shandler is a moron care so much about what he wrote to his mindless subscribers.

To what CubFanBudMan said...EXACTLY. Copyright violation, anyone?

If those who knock Ron - why DO you care so much what he wrote to his subscribers? If you're offended that he mentioned that there were some ill-prepared owners...why? Everyone has pretty much agreed on this point.

Ron stated that his comments were a knock on the hype or the advertising by Krause. That's something between he and Greg, and they've already talked about the NFBC according to Greg's post. He said, to paraphrase, that a big money event doesn't necessarily guarantee that the top players will be there. No surprises there - several folks have already commented upon the fact that they are probably "dead money" (not the kindest of phrases, but I guess it's a term that the high stakes vets like to use).

So what's all the fuss about? I still can't figure that part out. Every league that you'll ever play in has a wide distribution of owner talent, preparation, dedication, etc. This is seemingly no different, it's just that the stakes are higher. There are those of us, like Ron, who wonder why anyone would fork out that money to do something that they weren't prepared for or didn't think that they actually stood a chance of winning. Obviously, judging from these posts, there are some folks who signed up for the experience, even if they didn't think that they could realistically win the thing. There's nothing wrong with that...it's just a different perspective that wouldn't have occurred to me and obviously didn't occur to Ron.

Here's looking forward to Sunday night, so we can officially dispense with this and move on to Opening Day. Let the games begin!!!!

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 9:47 am

Some folks just don't know when to let go, let bygones be bygones. Let's play ball!

viper · Post by **viper** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:18 am

I know I have posted several times on this thread, but I suggest that it be put to rest. This is my last post to this thread.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 10:51 am

I'm done posting on the topic as well. I do appreciate everone's comments and respect your opinions on the matter.

I'm probably over the top with my criticism of Ron, but I have a lot of respect for Greg and I think this competition is fantastic. To attack it seemed like the act of a punk, not a respected statistician and veteran gamer. In fact, his commentary (illegally stolen and reprinted here) shocked me.

It's worth the money to me just to have the fun of competing and to get a feel for where I stand as a fantasy baseball competitor. Winning some cash would only make my wife happy

Good luck to everyone for a good season - understand that when we butt heads in these spirited debates it's all good clean fun (at least for me).

Dave

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:28 pm

Off the subject for a moment. Today a plane crashed. As an air traffic controller I did my job in alerting those that needed to know. I continued to do my job and clocked out. When something like that happens you go home and reflect on whats important. This wasn't one of the things at the top of my list. Which brings me to Ron. Ron I'm sorry I started this post link.

I realize at this moment that this is a game to be enjoyed. First, Last, Good, Bad, Money, No Money its still just a game. I won't forget that lesson again.