free agents

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:45 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

I just don't think it would be that confusing to people, partly because it's not confusing now and partly because STATS doesn't display priority lists. All of the examples here showed how people set up their picks. In real life you'd only know your own and there is no situation where you wouldn't as an individual get what you didn't want unless you set it up wrong.

quote: your 8th grade English teacher appeared in Playboy the year before Holy S! Is that true? I can't imaging the ways that would have scarred me. I'd still probably have the magazine, "using" it once or twice a day.

[/QUOTE]"unless you set up wrong"

You'd be amazed at how many times this would happen.

And yes, both english stories are true and post no further on this subject, as you're starting to scar us.

[ April 25, 2008, 04:45 PM: Message edited by: UFS ]

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:49 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

The Washburn example that makes you ill happens with our system now. If someone bids $100 on Washburn and $200 on Fuentes and he/she loses out on Fuentes, he/she can still nab Washburn. Same deal.

I agree about Brian. We have a guy here in town who writes out rules for different organizations. Nobody understands it, but it sure sounds good!

Why would anyone ever waive Fuentes?

I have him on 3 of my 4 teams

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 10:54 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

The Washburn example that makes you ill happens with our system now. If someone bids $100 on Washburn and $200 on Fuentes and he/she loses out on Fuentes, he/she can still nab Washburn. Same deal.

I agree about Brian. We have a guy here in town who writes out rules for different organizations. Nobody understands it, but it sure sounds good!

It's the Kuo situation where Wash is the result. That's what makes me ill and can't happen in the current system. It rewards placing low bids in hopes of getting someone cheap and takes away from the FAAB strategy of analyzing other team's needs, available FAAB, and past faab history of an owner, in determining what the proper FAAB bid should be.

[ April 25, 2008, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: UFS ]

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:05 am

Originally posted by UFS:

quote:Originally posted by bjoak:

I just don't think it would be that confusing to people, partly because it's not confusing now and partly because STATS doesn't display priority lists. All of the examples here showed how people set up their picks. In real life you'd only know your own and there is no situation where you wouldn't as an individual get what you didn't want unless you set it up wrong.

quote: your 8th grade English teacher appeared in Playboy the year before Holy S! Is that true? I can't imaging the ways that would have scarred me. I'd still probably have the magazine, "using" it once or twice a day.

[/QUOTE]"unless you set up wrong"

You'd be amazed at how many times this would happen.

And yes, both english stories are true and post no further on this subject, as you're starting to scar us.

[/QUOTE]I guess a list could be messed up like dropping Brian Roberts instead of Dave Roberts, but not much beyond what we have now.

John, Are you negative toward a new way or just playing devil's advocate?

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:09 am

Originally posted by UFS:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

The Washburn example that makes you ill happens with our system now. If someone bids $100 on Washburn and $200 on Fuentes and he/she loses out on Fuentes, he/she can still nab Washburn. Same deal.

I agree about Brian. We have a guy here in town who writes out rules for different organizations. Nobody understands it, but it sure sounds good!

It's the Kuo situation where Wash is the result. That's what makes me ill and can't happen in the current system. It rewards placing low bids in hopes of getting someone cheap and takes away from the FAAB strategy of analyzing other team's needs, available FAAB, and past faab history of an owner, in determining what the proper FAAB bid should be. [/QUOTE]It doesen't reward a low bidder. The Manager would just rather have the lower priced player than the expensive player. If it's too low of a bid, he still doesen't receive the player, like our system now.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:19 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

I guess a list could be messed up like dropping Brian Roberts instead of Dave Roberts, but not much beyond what we have now.

John, Are you negative toward a new way or just playing devil's advocate? From experience, It would be much more than B.Roberts thing...I can easily see this being a problem every week in a few leagues where an owner e-mails the commish to find out exactly why he didn't get someone. Less if you take the word "priority" out, but that still leaves a complex set of rules to understand.

DA for sure. I do that all that time on MY ideas. LOL.

I'm all for change, if it fits every concern, not just some of them. In these debates, I have my commish hat on 95% of the time.

The cost to program something like this could be as high as $10K. There would have to be an insane amount of testing to make sure all the loopholes/ties were covered. Like some have said, this isn't that big on an issue to warrant that type of cost IMO. More DA LOL.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:26 am

I have zero computer savvy. I'll take you at your word on the $10,000. If true, this idea really isn't worth debating. It would be a better system in my eyes, but not at that cost.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:41 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

I have zero computer savvy. I'll take you at your word on the $10,000. If true, this idea really isn't worth debating. It would be a better system in my eyes, but not at that cost. The $10K is an educated guess. I don't know what rate Greg pays Stats. It could be less, but I really doubt it would be less than $5k. The hours it would take are hard to estimate also. It could be 50. It could be 150. And those babies add up fast!

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:42 am

I still think the current system has to be complicated enough to manage primary bids and conditional bids on all the players simultaneously. Not sure how the new system would be more complex, especially since--as others noted--we can figure it out in our heads. Last time I checked I couldn't divide three digit numbers in my head and computers don't seem to have too tough a time with that.

Kind of frustrating at this point that we are on the "Ask NFBC a question" area and we have 6 pages of answers from everyone except the NFBC.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:45 am

You'd be amazed at how many times this would happen. That people would set up their bids wrong or that you would use the magazine.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:46 am

True Brian.

Greg or Tom, if you've been following along, what are your thoughts?

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 11:56 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

True Brian.

Greg or Tom, if you've been following along, what are your thoughts? Greg is in NY with NBC. Probably eight Coronas down at the moment.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 12:02 pm

Originally posted by UFS:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

True Brian.

Greg or Tom, if you've been following along, what are your thoughts? Greg is in NY with NBC. Probably eight Coronas down at the moment. [/QUOTE]GE owns everything else. It wouldn't surprise me if Corona's are one of their properties. Like putting a carrot in front of Greg's nose.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 12:04 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

Kind of frustrating at this point that we are on the "Ask NFBC a question" area and we have 6 pages of answers from everyone except the NFBC. are u kidding? the NFBC won't give you an "answer" until someone puts the suggestion in a format that ANYONE can understand.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 1:59 pm

If you put out an example equal to this weeks FA bidding...and I can do it in my head (with no pen and paper) with half a buzz on...it can't be THAT complex to program.

You DA, you!

~Lance

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Fri Apr 25, 2008 3:24 pm

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by UFS:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

True Brian.

Greg or Tom, if you've been following along, what are your thoughts? Greg is in NY with NBC. Probably eight Coronas down at the moment. [/QUOTE]GE owns everything else. It wouldn't surprise me if Corona's are one of their properties. Like putting a carrot in front of Greg's nose.

[/QUOTE]GE no Coronoa ... Constellation Brands is the US distributor, ticker STZ - but I wouldn't own the stock, the beer is a better value.

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:30 am

....and there are BETTER beers

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:41 am

I was pm'ed that this idea would not cost a lot of money or even tax STATS at all. It would be comparable to KDS only with the bids being the driving force and not the random selection.

How many would be in favor of listing your FAAB picks by name rather than amount bid? If not enough people respond I'll drop the issue. Thanks.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:56 am

I would love to be the high bidder for three players, and list my $5 bid first, and get him.

I'd love it!

Side Note...

Could what Leo Mazzone taught Daniel Cabrera before getting fired have finally sunken in?

~Lance

[ April 28, 2008, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:32 pm

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:34 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

I was pm'ed that this idea would not cost a lot of money or even tax STATS at all. It would be comparable to KDS only with the bids being the driving force and not the random selection.

How many would be in favor of listing your FAAB picks by name rather than amount bid? If not enough people respond I'll drop the issue. Thanks. good bump...I would be in favor of this .

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:59 am

Originally posted by Hitless:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

I was pm'ed that this idea would not cost a lot of money or even tax STATS at all. It would be comparable to KDS only with the bids being the driving force and not the random selection.

How many would be in favor of listing your FAAB picks by name rather than amount bid? If not enough people respond I'll drop the issue. Thanks. good bump...I would be in favor of this . [/QUOTE]The current way of high dollar bid for every free agent buy is the way that STATS has this programmed and many other sites are set up the same way. I'm not sure if it can be set up the way Dan has requested above, but I sure can check with STATS.