Post
by KJ Duke » Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:12 pm
I would presume that almost everyone will prefer KDS to random selection because they're more likely to get a spot they want, less likely to get one they don't. The feedback seems to support this, thus I don't think I'm going too far out on a limb by predicting that Greg will NEVER go backwards (back to random), so any further comparison of either KDS or BBDS to random are irrelevant - the debate should only be KDS vs BBDS. After two seasons of discussion in both baseball and football, I think I can argue both sides.
In favor of KDS
KDS is established and successful, after this year, and simple. If someone makes a mistake the consequences are minimal. With BBDS, if someone were confused and bid their entire budget on a slot position they'd be unable to pickup a single free agent. In such a case, they'd have virtually no chance of competing during the season. This would make for a difficult controversy and one very unhappy customer who threw away $1250 on a mistake before the season began.
In favor of BBDS
KDS does not address the fairness/luck issue, which BBDS does. Theoretically, 14 players in the league could get their first choice using KDS, and one player could get their last choice. Is that fair? No, in the same way that random selection smiles on some and frowns on others, KDS does the same.
BBDS is more true to the spirit of the competition --- winners and losers should be determined by (a) what happens on the baseball field, and (b) your strategies, management and decision-making as an owner.
Sure, luck is involved in many aspects of fantasy baseball, from freak injuries to who happens to be sitting to your left or right during the draft, but there is no way to control for these things. The luck of the draw, which is a factor in KDS, can and should be eliminated. We're not playing the lotto here, we're in competition.
And on this topic, let me head off one argument that will inevitably be made here (before I puke from hearing it for the 50th time). It goes like this -- you can't control injuries, luck is a part of the game, you can't change it and shouldn't attempt to. Here is the fallacy in that argument ... in any competition, lets take the real game of baseball as an example, yes, luck is inevitably part of the game. If your star player slips in the dugout and breaks his wrist because a fan tossed beer on the steps, guess what? Those are the breaks. But does that mean that when the player steps up to the plate we draw a piece of paper out of the hat to see if he starts with a 3-0 count or an 0-2 count? No, we don't do that, because that is an element of luck that is unneccesary, avoidable, and has nothing to do with the competition. Similarly, randomly drawing for slots or preference in choice of slots is also unneccesary, has nothing to do with skill, and can and should be avoided.
. We hadn't done Tampa yet!
