FAAB Results on 9/25?

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:11 pm

Looks like something is wrong - 8:10 EST and still no free agent moves?

Spy

Bobby J · Post by **Bobby J** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:21 pm

I guess it is a good thing there are not any early games tomorrow, so whenever they get it fixed we still have time to put in our lineups

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:25 pm

good to hear it isn't just the 2 leagues I am in....

8:30 and no moves!

Bobby J · Post by **Bobby J** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:28 pm

can't view live stats either, it keeps locking up

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:52 pm

You know, one small complaint I have had this year about the NFBC is that no one seems to be around to help us if there is a problem on Sunday night. This is not the first time that a Sunday problem went unaddressed. I know these guys have families, but Sunday night is a potentially volatile time and somebody needs to manage this or assure us it will be okay or whatever. Looking at the other strand it's clear that not every member of the NFBC can make it to a computer anytime. I can do this from work tomorrow, but I have a busy day ahead of me and I'd really rather not.

I called STATS once and the person on the other end didn't even know that they were handling the NFBC and couldn't get into my league to look at the info.

751542 · Post by **751542** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:54 pm

this is crap!!! it is the last week of the season, albiet most important moves of the year, and we are almost 2 hours tardy. i guess fantasy football is king!!!

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:57 pm

And, yes, my computer has already crashed twice due to locked up live scoring today so that explains my foul mood!

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:15 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

And, yes, my computer has already crashed twice due to locked up live scoring today so that explains my foul mood!

You sure it does not have anything to do with drafting Ben Sheets in the first round?

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:16 pm

Not the best time of year to see a lapse in service that is for sure.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sun Sep 25, 2005 2:50 pm

Chest Rockwell draft picks:

1. Carl Crawford

3. Tim Hudson

5. Armando Benitez

7. Rich Harden

8. Carlos Guillen

9. Phil Nevin

11. Mike Adams

You know from the draft you had, I would think you would have figured out that the later mid rounds are really what matter most. After all your subsequent slamming of my team, I'm looking at fourth place, not ideal, but I think you had me pegged for dead last or something. I'll just barely be $750 more broke than you.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 2:06 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

Chest Rockwell draft picks:

1. Carl Crawford

3. Tim Hudson

5. Armando Benitez

7. Rich Harden

8. Carlos Guillen

9. Phil Nevin

11. Mike Adams

You know from the draft you had, I would think you would have figured out that the later mid rounds are really what matter most. After all your subsequent slamming of my team, I'm looking at fourth place, not ideal, but I think you had me pegged for dead last or something. I'll just barely be $750 more broke than you. We will see how the last weeks pans out- Crawford was a bad pick? Harden got more from him than you did from your first?- we had the same pick we chose Crawford you chose Sheets hmmm. Sorry I could not foresee Benitez injury, I think you also conveniently left off picks like Carpenter, Ensberg, Floyd, Cantu, or Dempster. Or the fact that we backed up Adams with Turnbow.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:04 pm

Yes, Crawford was a bad first round pick. How do you not know that? The only thing that he has first round #'s in is SBs and he hasn't even gotten 50 yet. Take away the fact that he is bringing down your team homer percent, and yeah, I hope this wasn't what you were counting on from him. It's the same first round deal as the Ichiro crowd got, really.

The point was more about making 6 bad picks in the first ten rounds rather than 4 decent ones. Clearly. I only had 4 bad picks and after the first round, they were rounds 8, 9, 10. So what? You're still ahead of me, but people who build glass drafts shouldn't throw draft picks.

And again, you're being hypocritical by talking about you're good late round picks. I know they were good but you keep going on about the first round like for instance, taking Crawford in the first is so much more important than taking Ensberg in the 18th. You want to talk about my 18th round, we'll talk about my 18th round, but to you the rounds are inversely proportional so your fixating on Sheets like he's a far bigger disaster than Nevin because of the round number. This is not true. I got good numbers out of Sheets when he played. I got good numbers out of his replacements when he didn't. How much did Nevin hurt you before you sat him?

By the bye, the only thing you were right about was that Sheets wouldn't be productive. You had no idea why. So stop gloating that you knew so much. You want to pull up the message from 6 months ago where you were predicting his ear thing because I don't seem to remember that. Hey, I could say I knew Benitez wasn't going to be good this year. I did think that, but I didn't know it'd be because he'd lose 4 months and there's no way to know how it would have panned out otherwise.

[ September 26, 2005, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:15 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

Yes, Crawford was a bad first round pick. How do you not know that? The only thing that he has first round #'s in is SBs and he hasn't even gotten 50 yet. Take away the fact that he is bringing down your team homer percent, and yeah, I hope this wasn't what you were counting on from him. It's the same first round deal as the Ichiro crowd got, really.

The point was more about making 6 bad picks in the first ten rounds rather than 4 decent ones. Clearly. I only had 4 bad picks and after the first round, they were rounds 8, 9, 10. So what? You're still ahead of me, but people who build glass drafts shouldn't throw draft picks.

By the bye, the only thing you were right about was that Sheets wouldn't be productive. You had no idea why. So stop gloating that you knew so much. You want to pull up the message from 6 months ago where you were predicting his ear thing because I don't seem to remember that. Hey, I could say I knew Benitez wasn't going to be good this year. I did think that, but I didn't know it'd be because he'd lose 4 months and there's no way to know how it would have panned out otherwise. Thanks man- I do not know what I would do without you to teach me. On another note there is something wrong with the player rater- It has a certain Tampa Bay OF number 4 overall.

You did better than I thought you would with that horrible "early" draft. I believe I also predicted you would do horrible in batting avg how have you done there?

I guess I should have been more clear on why Sheets was a terrible first round pick. He actually did better than I honestly thought he would but the difference between us is I do not always have to be right. If you have not figured it out that is why I give you such a hard time. You know everything just ask you.

[ September 26, 2005, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: Chest Rockwell ]

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:34 pm

And again, you're being hypocritical by talking about you're good late round picks. I know they were good but you keep going on about the first round like for instance, taking Crawford in the first is so much more important than taking Ensberg in the 18th. You want to talk about my 18th round, we'll talk about my 18th round, but to you the rounds are inversely proportional so you're fixating on Sheets like he's a far bigger disaster than Nevin because of the round number. This is not true. I got good numbers out of Sheets when he played. I got good numbers out of his replacements when he didn't. How much did Nevin hurt you before you sat him?

I'm the one who has to be right all the time? I don't follow you around, telling you what you did wrong in message boards that have nothing to do with you or Sheets or what have you. I'm defending myself from your attacks. Somehow that means I have to be right all the time? Well, hell, I don't know, maybe it does. What does that even mean? Do you strive to be wrong all the time? If it means I don't think I ever made mistakes, that's ridiculous. If I was right all the time, I'd be in first overall. Who exactly do you think I blame for that...you? If it means it irritates you that I can churn out good persuasive writing--I don't really care.

Well, I guess if your advanced tools of statistical analysis are the 'player rater' then how can I even begin to argue that point. The fact that you don't think there's something wrong with the player rater says a lot.

My batting average does suck. And why did you think that, because of Konerko and Podsednik? Again your reasoning and the result happen to match up but not because of any correlation between your logic and real baseball.

[ September 26, 2005, 07:40 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:23 pm

Alright I am under your skin enough-

I don't know how anyone could have foreseen a batting avg problem with Dunn, Konerko, and Pods

I guess I got lucky..

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 3:25 pm

On another note- I just glanced but it looked to me like this player rater actually might take position scarcity in to mind. If so then yes I do give it more merit than your typical player rater.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Mon Sep 26, 2005 4:56 pm

I don't know how anyone could have foreseen a batting avg problem with Dunn, Konerko, and Pods

I love this sarcasm. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Yeah, their BAs are supposed to suck and you're so convinced that they do suck that you probably haven't even bothered to check if they suck this season so far.

Here's your wake up call:

Pod: .289

Konerko: .277

Dunn: .250

Avg: .272

Now, I know that all your sources tell you they're supposed to suck and that's why I'm taking these guys.

Here is what my scouts told me they would look like after 500 at bats:

Pod: .278

Konerko: .280

Dunn: .270

Avg: .276

The deviation here is .004. How close were your projections? You look at everyone's numbers from last year and figure they'll hit the same when this is an extraordinarily complex science. But you look at my guys and say, what a weak draft! His BA will suck! and when it does suck you figure your subjective glance at my team was correct.

If you looked at it carefully and objectively you'd know a part of it was that I expected to get the BA from my catchers that everyone else is losing from their catchers and it didn't work out with Hernandez going on the DL and the bottom falling out on JD Closser. This is a simplified portion, but again, as always you think a point of batting average from your third round pick is magically more valuable than a point of batting average from a tenth round pick, when the reverse is actually true. A point of batting average is more valuable in later rounds because it's harder to find. Same with homers or anything else.

But you look at the first 3 hitters I take and figure you've judged the team accurately because everyone else is filler. What kills me is that you do this despite the fact that your own draft went far worse in the first ten rounds than the next ten. You of all people should know this, but you still think the first five rounds defines a team.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 2:58 am

Hey sport,

First you cannot evenly divide those guys by 3 so your facts are wrong, I hope you are not a math teacher.

Second- you probably want to come out of a draft with your top 3 guys projected to hit higher than 275.

Third- I predicted you would get a one in batting avg- you got a one. Now you still want to argue you were right, or that I was right but for the wrong reasons come on.

I actually have something to play for now so that is where I will concentrate my energy. I hope 3 things though 1) We are in a league together next year 2) That you pick Chris Carpenter or Dontrelle Willis with that 8th pick again 3) That you script your entire draft again next year- what a total moronic move and you still don't see it.

Looking to make up batting avg from your catchers- BRAVO tremendous strategy I am shocked that it did not work out for you-

[ September 27, 2005, 09:00 AM: Message edited by: Chest Rockwell ]

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 12:30 pm

Your points are even more obtuse than usual so I won't spend a lot of time here.

First-No, their collective average really is .272.

I hope you are not a math teacher.

Second-I did! I wanted to come out of the draft with my top three hitting .276. Again, you think that makes a difference, whereas I'm looking at what an entire draft produces.

Three-Yes. If you predict something and it comes true for a completely different reason, you are wrong. You can call it luck. You predicted my team would come in last too.

Have no idea what the Willis/Carpenter comment means.

I never said I script drafts; you said that. I said I plan drafts. Apparently you have no plan.

And how exactly do you plan on winning when you think you should do things like 299 other guys?

[ September 27, 2005, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]