roto rankings

Post Reply
Groovyabs
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by Groovyabs » Fri Jan 23, 2004 12:21 pm

That's an EXCELLENT post there, Edelman!!



I absolutely hate it when these "so-called experts" so boldly step up and announce that so and so (in this case Pierre and Crawford) are sooooo valuable.

But when it comes time to put their money where their mouth is...THAT'S when you see what kind of "experts" they are.



Neither Liss or Erickson took EITHER of those 2 guy's.

IMHO---their reputation and integrity is SHOT TO HELL!!!

SirStanley
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by SirStanley » Mon Jan 26, 2004 4:56 pm

That is such an ignorant statement to make. A ranking list is merely a list of projected values in order. Rankings generally do not reflect an anticipated drafting strategy. Just because their calculations project out that way does not mean that they plan to take a top SB threat early in a draft, only that they expect that player to be worth a certain amount. Not everyone drafts based on "best available player regardless of position". Some people go into a draft with a round by round strategy. They may have anticipated being able to get one of those guys later in the draft than they actually went.



For some reason many people on this message board find some satisfaction in bashing the so called "experts". That looks like a sign of simple minds to me.

Dyv
Posts: 1148
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by Dyv » Mon Jan 26, 2004 5:12 pm

Stanley - you gotta admit, it's pretty funny when they put out a list of 'top 100' or whatever and then don't even look at it to do a mock. Why put out a 'top 100' if you don't think it's accurate enough for people to use ?



The experts get bashed because they put themselves out there to be bashed. Same reason politicians get bashed, etc. You've staked some of your reputation and value on a set of numbers and stats that you've compiled and recommended. If your rankings stink... why is it so unfair to point that out? I'm sure if I put my rankings out there you'd have some critique to offer... but I'm not gonna, so don't worry about it ;)



As for the 'simple minds' commentary? That seems so crude and uncalled for... Is it truly that unfair and outrageous that you're offended by it?



Personally, I like having a simple mind. We'll know next late September if simple minds beat 'complex' minds ;)



Good luck,



Dyv
Just Some Guy

Groovyabs
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by Groovyabs » Mon Jan 26, 2004 8:57 pm

Stanley, Stanley, Stanley.

Oh excuse me...SirStanley.



Unfortunately, I didn't see your response prior to Dyv posting his.

Had I, my sentiments would have been, and are, quite similar.

However, pontificating points already made would be an exercise in redundancy I shant participate in. :cool:



That said, I agree that the word choice was strong...



Had this been an Auction draft, I think there would have been more circumstances created for revising values and salaries.

For instance when a guy's name gets called, and how much money you have left.

Most of us have participated in Auction drafts and I don't feel a need to expand on that.



Even if you go with a tiered system, or a position system or a category system...in a snake draft it's almost catastrophic to not stick with a predetermined top 30-36 list.

At least through the 1st 3 Rounds.

What about factoring in position scarcity you say?

You factor it in to the top 36, and adjust from there. Based on the draft and your needs/projections as it progresses.



In this case, we get not only a so-called experts list of top players. But we get to see those same so-called experts utilize what they're telling us (you know--Joe Blow Roto Junkie) in a REAL draft. With REAL other so-called experts.



When someone (or some people) fails so miserably to live up to the standard they're telling others to emulate---in ANY walk of life---that equates to a loss of reputation, or an increase in hypocrisy.

Neither of which are any good.

If I was one of those 2 guy's, and I knew I was doing a top 100+ list for a site like Roto Wire...you can bet everything you've got I'd have made DAMN sure I followed it like I outlined above.

If for no other reason than to maintain my reputation and put my money where my mouth is.

What?

Don't these guy's believe what they write???

Groovyabs
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by Groovyabs » Mon Jan 26, 2004 9:23 pm

Stanley, Stanley, Stanley.

Oh excuse me...SirStanley.



Unfortunately, I didn't see your response prior to Dyv posting his.

Had I, my sentiments would have been, and are, quite similar.

However, pontificating points already made would be an exercise in redundancy I shant participate in. :cool:



That said, I agree that the word choice was strong...



Had this been an Auction draft, I think there would have been more circumstances created for revising values and salaries.

For instance when a guy's name gets called, and how much money you have left.

Most of us have participated in Auction drafts and I don't feel a need to expand on that.



Even if you go with a tiered system, or a position system or a category system...in a snake draft it's almost catastrophic to not stick with a predetermined top 30-36 list.

At least through the 1st 3 Rounds.

What about factoring in position scarcity you say?

You factor it in to the top 36, and adjust from there. Based on the draft and your needs/projections as it progresses.



In this case, we get not only a so-called experts list of top players. But we get to see those same so-called experts utilize what they're telling us (you know--Joe Blow Roto Junkie) in a REAL draft. With REAL other so-called experts.



When someone (or some people) fails so miserably to live up to the standard they're telling others to emulate---in ANY walk of life---that equates to a loss of reputation, or an increase in hypocrisy.

Neither of which are any good.

If I was one of those 2 guy's, and I knew I was doing a top 100+ list for a site like Roto Wire...you can bet everything you've got I'd have made DAMN sure I followed it like I outlined above.

If for no other reason than to maintain my reputation and put my money where my mouth is.

What?

Don't these guy's believe what they write???

Liss
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2004 6:00 pm
Contact:

roto rankings

Post by Liss » Sun Feb 01, 2004 6:52 pm

I just wanted to respond to some of the comments below.



SirStanley makes an excellent point, and sums up a lot of what I would say. If you look specifically at my mock, my first pick (second overall) was Carlos Beltran, so I did put my money where our rankings were, i.e., I drafted high for steals.



But having Beltran, I opted to fill in some other categories and positions before doubling up on top-5 steals guys.



Lastly, the mock was done a month or so before Erickson and I came up with our top-200, and the latter was done after we projected stats for every player in the league. Looking at our projections, Crawford and Pierre merited high round picks, higher than they actually went in the mock.



Now if you disagree with our projections of 50+ SBs for each, then, of course, you should draft them lower. But if you feel that it's pretty likely that they'll steal 50+, I think, given the scarcity of steals, that they rank pretty high.



Finally, as for the status of "experts" like Jeff Erickson and myself, you are ALWAYS wise to doubt our conclusions. You should always take in the info, read what we have to say, then decide for yourself. If you agree, great. If not, then go with your own instincts. No one has a monopoly on knowledge of what's going to happen in 2004. But while you should doubt "expert" conclusions until you inspect their methods and reasoning, questioning our integrity (as if we have anything to gain by putting one over on you) is pretty stupid. Everyone at RotoWire - and I would certainly assume this is true at every other site - is putting out the best rankings they can come up with.



Just because they change over time or with the circumstances in a draft/auction, doesn't mean someone's trying to pull a bait and switch - leave that to the politicians.



Very Truly Yours,



Christopher P Liss

Managing Editor

RotoWire.com

2001 FSTA Mixed-League Champion

Groovyabs
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by Groovyabs » Sun Feb 08, 2004 7:27 am

First, Mr. Liss, thank you for taking the time to respond to this thread.



However, the following statement is completely misdirected...

"questioning our integrity (as if we have anything to gain by putting one over on you) is pretty stupid."



The point isn't whether you are pulling a bait and switch to fool us, or anybody you may draft with.

The point is simply that if you feel Pierre and Crawford are THAT valuable to a team (and I find it HIGHLY unlikely that you're opine changed drastically between your draft and posting the top 200 list) then your strategy would more likely to have been to pass on Beltran and take a power hitter ala Pujols, Helton, Vlad, and then take either Pierre/Crawford in a later Round. Which they were both available.



But you DID NOT do that. And that is precisely the point.



You did not do what you told others to do and that is a disparaging mark on your integrity!!



Want further proof you guys are embarassed by your top 200 vs the Mock Draft?



I can't even find either on your site. And I've looked pretty good.

Where/why are you hiding it???

edelman24
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
Contact:

roto rankings

Post by edelman24 » Sun Feb 08, 2004 8:53 am

nice post Groovy :D

Gekko_had_a
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 6:00 pm
Contact:

roto rankings

Post by Gekko_had_a » Mon Feb 09, 2004 12:21 pm

When 1 player can garner roughly 1/3 of the total amount needed to lead the league in a cat, he is valuable. What cat is always the cat that one player gets the highest % of the league total? Can 15 teams count on being able to get one of the few players capable of doing that? I'm guessing you would whine just as much if he did take one of the 50 sb threats, but didn't take the other 2 rounds later if he was still there. Clearly you aren't too bright, so you may want to stop trying to make sure everyone here knows it. Just a hunch, but it doesn't seem like a super solid auction strategy. I'm guessing from your sissy fit you spend more than a little time getting your ass handed to you by those who aren't softer than a sneaker full of **** . I suppose after awhile, I would try to find someone to blame too.
"Teabags and gerbils and whips that sting, these are a few of my favorite things." ..Gordon Gekko

Groovyabs
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by Groovyabs » Mon Feb 09, 2004 1:33 pm

Geeko,



I've seen you're antagonizing posts all over this board.



Can't wait to see those July posts when you're 'splaining to everyone why you changed your name to "ATLAS"



(you know, Atlas, doncha?---he's the guy who's carrying the League on his shoulders cuz he's in LAST PLACE)



'Nuff said :eek:

Gordon Gekko
Posts: 4317
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
Contact:

roto rankings

Post by Gordon Gekko » Mon Feb 09, 2004 2:06 pm

Originally posted by Groovyabs:

Geeko,



I've seen you're antagonizing posts all over this board.



Can't wait to see those July posts when you're 'splaining to everyone why you changed your name to "ATLAS"



(you know, Atlas, doncha?---he's the guy who's carrying the League on his shoulders cuz he's in LAST PLACE)



'Nuff said :eek: If you're referring to Gordon Gekko, I'd suggest you get your facts staight, sport. Can't help it if another poster uses a name like mine. Guess you can't tell the difference? Figures.



I'm like Howard Stern. People (without a creative bone in their body) try and copy me. It's pretty funny actually. Happens to the best of the best in any discipline. That's one way I know I'm at the top. Thanks! :D

Groovyabs
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm

roto rankings

Post by Groovyabs » Mon Feb 09, 2004 2:16 pm

Here's a couple thoughts for ya...



A Geeko by any other name...



You can fool some of the people some of the time. But ya can't fool Groovy!!!

Post Reply