Chicago League 4

Bull Pen Pugs · Post by **Bull Pen Pugs** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:58 pm

Yeah, HILARIOUS!

I just posted on our league site about it. I dont give him the attention he desires, he cried about Orlando being the weakest citylast year too, Hmmm, I won one of those leagues there.

Any city that does better than him and he starts whining about how easy the other cities are. Guess some people just need excuses to bolster thier ego.

[ July 14, 2009, 07:00 PM: Message edited by: Bull Pen Pugs ]

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:16 pm

Originally posted by Bull Pen Pugs:

Yeah, HILARIOUS!

I just posted on our league site about it. I dont give him the attention he desires, he cried about Orlando being the weakest citylast year too, Hmmm, I won one of those leagues there.

Any city that does better than him and he starts whining about how easy the other cities are. Guess some people just need excuses to bolster thier ego. just look at the #'s. i'll post more tomorrow. they tell you everything you need to know. sorry.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:33 pm

So GG, in March 2010, will it be Original Gino's East or Lou Malnati's?

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:43 pm

just fyi mr queens- those are not the best pizza joints in chicago.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:55 pm

Originally posted by headhunters:

just fyi mr queens- those are not the best pizza joints in chicago. Give me your Top 3.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:57 pm

Originally posted by headhunters:

just fyi mr queens- those are not the best pizza joints in chicago. Connie's on Archer?

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 3:11 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Bull Pen Pugs:

Yeah, HILARIOUS!

I just posted on our league site about it. I dont give him the attention he desires, he cried about Orlando being the weakest citylast year too, Hmmm, I won one of those leagues there.

Any city that does better than him and he starts whining about how easy the other cities are. Guess some people just need excuses to bolster thier ego. just look at the #'s. i'll post more tomorrow. they tell you everything you need to know. sorry. [/QUOTE]Why did our league break the way it did? Are the number simply showing us correlation or causality?

Bottom line: Chicago 4's draft and weekly FAAB hasn't been any easier than NY-whatever or any other league. GUG! (Giveit Up Gekko).

[ July 14, 2009, 09:24 PM: Message edited by: rkulaski ]

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:01 pm

Originally posted by rkulaski:

Why did our league break the way it did? Are the number simply showing us correlation or causality?

Bottom line: Chicago 4's draft and weekly FAAB hasn't been any easier than NY-whatever or any other league. GUG! (Giveit Up Gekko). i go by #'s. if the #'s at the end of the season say a certain city was "easy", whether it be Chicago or NY, i have no problem saying it. don't take things personal. i would LOVE to have very poorly performing teams in my league. i don't have any. Chicago Lg 4 does.

[ July 14, 2009, 10:03 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko II ]

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:02 pm

Originally posted by King of Queens:

So GG, in March 2010, will it be Original Gino's East or Lou Malnati's? i have some Top 10 data from the past 6 years that "pulls up the curtain" on chicago. way too many top 10 teams from chicago as opposed to other cities. and this is over 6 years of data. kinda tough to refute that.

[ July 14, 2009, 10:03 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko II ]

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 4:59 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by rkulaski:

Why did our league break the way it did? Are the number simply showing us correlation or causality?

Bottom line: Chicago 4's draft and weekly FAAB hasn't been any easier than NY-whatever or any other league. GUG! (Giveit Up Gekko). i go by #'s. if the #'s at the end of the season say a certain city was "easy", whether it be Chicago or NY, i have no problem saying it. don't take things personal. i would LOVE to have very poorly performing teams in my league. i don't have any. Chicago Lg 4 does. [/QUOTE]I still don't believe there is any substance behind the numbers. And I would LOVE to be in a league where the top 4 teams were not all so good. Let me flip your phrasing around. While you would LOVE to be in a league with very poorly performing teams, then you would also be in a league with great performing teams. Welcome to Chicago 4 where you could have a team finish in the top 20 OVERALL and not win a penny in your own league because you finish 4th. Would you LOVE to be this league? Either Dave, Edward, Ken, or me and co-manager Chris is going to finish the year without winning anything in our league.

Also, unless you can show me after the main event and before the start of the season which league is going to be an "easy" league, I don't think the the data has any substance. Maybe I'm missing something and GG, you often times are on the money, but I'm just not buying this one.

[ July 14, 2009, 11:04 PM: Message edited by: rkulaski ]

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:17 pm

Originally posted by rkulaski:

I still don't believe there is any substance behind the numbers. And I would LOVE to be in a league where the top 4 teams were not all so good. Let me flip your phrasing around. While you would LOVE to be in a league with very poorly performing teams, then you would also be in a league with great performing teams. Welcome to Chicago 4 where you could have a team finish in the top 20 OVERALL and not win a penny in your own league because you finish 4th. Would you LOVE to be this league? Either Dave, Edward, Ken, or me and co-manager Chris is going to finish the year without winning anything in our league.

Also, unless you can show me after the main event and before the start of the season which league is going to be an "easy" league, I don't think the the data has any substance. Maybe I'm missing something and GG, you often times are on the money, but I'm just not buying this one. rich - league success is constructed from the BOTTOM up. if you have some teams that are very poor for whatever reason (bad luck, bad managers, bad picks, just don't have enough fantasy skillz), that league (on average) will breed superpower teams. "good" teams will appear "great".

the opposite is also true. if you don't have any poor teams in a league, it's a lot harder for the better players in that league to break away.

are you telling me you don't believe this???

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 1:39 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by rkulaski:

I still don't believe there is any substance behind the numbers. And I would LOVE to be in a league where the top 4 teams were not all so good. Let me flip your phrasing around. While you would LOVE to be in a league with very poorly performing teams, then you would also be in a league with great performing teams. Welcome to Chicago 4 where you could have a team finish in the top 20 OVERALL and not win a penny in your own league because you finish 4th. Would you LOVE to be this league? Either Dave, Edward, Ken, or me and co-manager Chris is going to finish the year without winning anything in our league.

Also, unless you can show me after the main event and before the start of the season which league is going to be an "easy" league, I don't think the the data has any substance. Maybe I'm missing something and GG, you often times are on the money, but I'm just not buying this one. rich - league success is constructed from the BOTTOM up. if you have some teams that are very poor for whatever reason (bad luck, bad managers, bad picks, just don't have enough fantasy skillz), that league (on average) will breed superpower teams. "good" teams will appear "great".

the opposite is also true. if you don't have any poor teams in a league, it's a lot harder for the better players in that league to break away.

are you telling me you don't believe this??? [/QUOTE]I believe that within the constraints of the league. Not for the overall standings. I could've assembled a similar team drafting in another league in another city and would still be have a high overall standing. You've mentioned before that you drafted 20 or so players before their ADP, so that makes me think you also could've built a similar team drafting anywhere. If you were in Chicago 4, what place would you be in hypothetically? Again, you say you would love to be in a league with poor teams. Would you still rather be in Chicago 4 this year or your league?

Like I said too, if someone can tell me next year before opening day which leagues will become "easy" leagues, then I may change my thinking on this.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 2:26 am

Rich – Think of it this way: Suppose one specific city for WHATEVER reason has a greater % of owners with less baseball skills than the other cities. How would that show up in the standings? I think it would show up by the reasons I’ve listed:

•greater % of poorly ranked teams in the overall event

•greater % of highly ranked teams in the overall event

How do YOU think it would show up?

If someone asked you which league you’d want to be in based on the info below, what would you say?

League A has 5 teams in the bottom 90 teams

League B has 0 teams in the bottom 90 teams

Hands down, sign me up EVERY time for league A. Basically, top teams in Chicago LG 4 are not competing against 14 other teams. They are only competing against maybe 10 or 11 other teams. You might have 15 active owners in that league, but I guarantee you that some of the very poor teams are not spending much time on their teams. And this, of course, breeds Superpower teams, as demonstrated by the data presented.

Less than Dave · Post by **Less than Dave** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:29 am

Yikes... our league forum has been invaded... all I have to say is, being in 4th place in my league despite having such a good team is really frustrating... take it for what it's worth... data be damned.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:46 am

dear gordon gecko- mr. capitalist. capitalism is a top down belief. socialism communism and all ism's are bottom up. did not know that was how you think- but from your analysis i gues you are an ism kinda guy. like you, i can only deal in the facts. you believe it is bottom up. sorry- i believe it is top down. these guys in chicago are just better this year than you are. deal with it. kings- connies is a great choice. pizza is an opinion. i like less tomatoes and more cheese and a thinner crust. i like traversos also. back with more. ad hominem has now become carl marx.

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:48 am

dear dave- love ya- and you are better than me this year. but quit moaning about the closer run. you took cruz over a closer- you couldn't pass him up. navel lint hit the nail on the head. you can't win bagging a category. your hitting is great because it is what you drafted. trust me on this.

NorCalAtlFan · Post by **NorCalAtlFan** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:50 am

Whoa, there is something in here that is not being given enough attention. Chicago Pizza. I was just in Chicago for the first time and was told to go to Gino's East and Lou Marnati's. Was I duped!!!? They were both fabulous mind you. But now I'm thinking I might have missed out on even better pizza:(

Pray tell the best joints, as I will be going back to my new favorite city soon!!

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:01 am

Originally posted by headhunters:

dear gordon gecko- mr. capitalist. capitalism is a top down belief. socialism communism and all ism's are bottom up. did not know that was how you think- but from your analysis i gues you are an ism kinda guy. like you, i can only deal in the facts. you believe it is bottom up. sorry- i believe it is top down. these guys in chicago are just better this year than you are. deal with it. kings- connies is a great choice. pizza is an opinion. i like less tomatoes and more cheese and a thinner crust. i like traversos also. back with more. ad hominem has now become carl marx. i agree with "capitalism", BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THIS ISSUE IS CAPITALISM?!?!? DUH! ANYONE SEEING WHY I THINK CHICAGO IS THE PLACE TO BE. JUST READ HEADHUNTERS POSTS. :rolleyes:

i have no problem with players being better than me. i do have a problem THIS YEAR if one draft venue is significantly weaker than others.

i won't have that problem NEXT year if you know what i mean.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:42 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by headhunters:

dear gordon gecko- mr. capitalist. capitalism is a top down belief. socialism communism and all ism's are bottom up. did not know that was how you think- but from your analysis i gues you are an ism kinda guy. like you, i can only deal in the facts. you believe it is bottom up. sorry- i believe it is top down. these guys in chicago are just better this year than you are. deal with it. kings- connies is a great choice. pizza is an opinion. i like less tomatoes and more cheese and a thinner crust. i like traversos also. back with more. ad hominem has now become carl marx. i agree with "capitalism", BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THIS ISSUE IS CAPITALISM?!?!? DUH! ANYONE SEEING WHY I THINK CHICAGO IS THE PLACE TO BE. JUST READ HEADHUNTERS POSTS. :rolleyes:

i have no problem with players being better than me. i do have a problem THIS YEAR if one draft venue is significantly weaker than others.

i won't have that problem NEXT year if you know what i mean. [/QUOTE]You didn’t seem to have that same problem the past two seasons.

If I use the type of analysis that you have applied to determine relative city strength, last year New York was the weakest city. 6 teams finish in the overall top 10 which is 57% higher than would normally be expected. 4 teams finished in the bottom ten, again more than expected (based on parameters set forth by you in an earlier post).

In 2007, one New York league, #5, produced three

teams in the top 12 overall at season’s end.

Based on the type of analysis that you applied to our half season of play, it would be fair to say that anyone that had won NY5 in 2007 or any NY league in ’08 had done so against weaker competition.

Of course that isn’t fair.

However it hasn’t stopped you from making the same remarks.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:31 am

Originally posted by Navel Lint:

You didn’t seem to have that same problem the past two seasons.

If I use the type of analysis that you have applied to determine relative city strength, last year New York was the weakest city. 6 teams finish in the overall top 10 which is 57% higher than would normally be expected. 4 teams finished in the bottom ten, again more than expected (based on parameters set forth by you in an earlier post).

In 2007, one New York league, #5, produced three

teams in the top 12 overall at season’s end.

Based on the type of analysis that you applied to our half season of play, it would be fair to say that anyone that had won NY5 in 2007 or any NY league in ’08 had done so against weaker competition.

Of course that isn’t fair.

However it hasn’t stopped you from making the same remarks.

As you know, I won NY5 in 2007. Take a look at the city and league # of the overall dead last place finisher overall. That’s right, NY5. I (and others in NY5) were not competing in a league with 15 teams. At most we had 14 teams in our league. I am the first to admit that. Having the absolute WORST team in the entire NFBC in my league HELPED me (and others) place so high overall. I know FIRSTHAND how having a poor team in your league impacts the other leaguemates.

I don’t BS. I tell it like it is.

[ July 15, 2009, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko II ]

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:02 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Navel Lint:

You didn’t seem to have that same problem the past two seasons.

If I use the type of analysis that you have applied to determine relative city strength, last year New York was the weakest city. 6 teams finish in the overall top 10 which is 57% higher than would normally be expected. 4 teams finished in the bottom ten, again more than expected (based on parameters set forth by you in an earlier post).

In 2007, one New York league, #5, produced three

teams in the top 12 overall at season’s end.

Based on the type of analysis that you applied to our half season of play, it would be fair to say that anyone that had won NY5 in 2007 or any NY league in ’08 had done so against weaker competition.

Of course that isn’t fair.

However it hasn’t stopped you from making the same remarks.

As you know, I won NY5 in 2007. Take a look at the city and league # of the overall dead last place finisher overall. That’s right, NY5. I (and others in NY5) were not competing in a league with 15 teams. At most we had 14 teams in our league. I am the first to admit that. Having the absolute WORST team in the entire NFBC in my league HELPED me (and others) place so high overall. I know FIRSTHAND how having a poor team in your league impacts the other leaguemates.

I don’t BS. I tell it like it is. [/QUOTE]OK

So… just to make this clear.

The two league championships that you have won have come against

1) The weakest league* in the history of the NFBC, and

2) One of the weakest cities* in the history of the NFBC

*based on parameters set forth by you in earlier posts.

Of course I don’t believe that is true. Any title won in this competition should be congratulated as a major fantasy accomplishment, including yours**. But you have chosen to use your ‘data’ to suggest that Chicago 4 is 2009’s weakest league and Chicago in general is the weakest city (Thru the All-Star break) :rolleyes: and so those same judgments should apply to you.

As you say, No BS

**Congratulations on your previous wins. I also see that you are leading this year and that you have a chance to be the first to win three consecutive titles. Good Luck.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:44 am

Originally posted by Navel Lint:

The two league championships that you have won have come against

1) The weakest league* in the history of the NFBC, and

2) One of the weakest cities* in the history of the NFBC

*based on parameters set forth by you in earlier posts.

no, no, no. use the entire 5 1/2 history of the event to show the weak Venue. we all know where that is. sorry, the data tells us so.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:59 am

if i come to chicago next year, can we feast on the best pizza chicago has to offer?

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:20 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Navel Lint:

The two league championships that you have won have come against

1) The weakest league* in the history of the NFBC, and

2) One of the weakest cities* in the history of the NFBC

*based on parameters set forth by you in earlier posts.

no, no, no. use the entire 5 1/2 history of the event to show the weak Venue. we all know where that is. sorry, the data tells us so. [/QUOTE]If the same 195/300/390 people had all played in the same venue year after year you might be able to argue a point. As they have not, much of your 5 and a half year data becomes invalid.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:21 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

if i come to chicago next year, can we feast on the best pizza chicago has to offer? I’ve already talked to a couple of people about this, Next year in Chicago I think we are going to try and have some sort of pre-event get-together. You would be more than welcome to come; in fact I bet there are some people in Chicago that would love for you to come here and play.