2015 NFBC Cutline Scoring Totals

[ToddZ]

For the record, I'm a big fan of the format - the scoring is secondary. I just want to know what it is so we can start drafting

That said, keep in mind that when the playoff cutline was on the verge of being rolled out, the roto-emulating scoring system wasn't favored hence the switch to the DFS-friendly system.

Again, I don't favor one over the other. I love the proposed format.

[KJ Duke]

For the record, I'm a big fan of the format - the scoring is secondary. I just want to know what it is so we can start drafting

That said, keep in mind that when the playoff cutline was on the verge of being rolled out, the roto-emulating scoring system wasn't favored hence the switch to the DFS-friendly system.

Again, I don't favor one over the other. I love the proposed format.

My recall of it was a bit of questioning by several of the let's say, non-mathletes, more so than actual push-back. The beauty of it was that no one was really forced to re-rank their draft preferences from roto even if they didn't totally get the scoring. Because of that, I think acceptance would've gotten better each year as it became familiar. Now it's just more of me hating DFS for ruining another game.

[Navel Lint]

For the record, I'm a big fan of the format - the scoring is secondary. I just want to know what it is so we can start drafting

That said, keep in mind that when the playoff cutline was on the verge of being rolled out, the roto-emulating scoring system wasn't favored hence the switch to the DFS-friendly system.

Again, I don't favor one over the other. I love the proposed format.

I agree.

We know why KJ doesn't like it........ his scoring system wasn't picked and so everything else is sub-standard. That's fine.


As for the complaints about having to create a different draft model
Do people need it to be that easy?
Will they not play if they have to put a little effort in?
I read comments on this board about the "wussification" of America. Looks like it's reached the NFBC.

[Greg Ambrosius]

For the record, I'm a big fan of the format - the scoring is secondary. I just want to know what it is so we can start drafting

That said, keep in mind that when the playoff cutline was on the verge of being rolled out, the roto-emulating scoring system wasn't favored hence the switch to the DFS-friendly system.

Again, I don't favor one over the other. I love the proposed format.

My recall of it was a bit of questioning by several of the let's say, non-mathletes, more so than actual push-back. The beauty of it was that no one was really forced to re-rank their draft preferences from roto even if they didn't totally get the scoring. Because of that, I think acceptance would've gotten better each year as it became familiar. Now it's just more of me hating DFS for ruining another game.

Questioning by "non-mathletes"? What is that?

So I have to ask: Are you in favor of the format, the optimal scoring and the rest, but you want to lead a charge to boycott this contest because it doesn't have exact-Roto like scoring? I'm trying to understand this: You would be in favor of this contest if it exactly replicated 5x5 Roto, but you want it to fail because it has DFS-style scoring? Is that the angle?

So what is the goal with the posts: To get me to change the scoring format? Is that the rallying cry here? If it is, then sure let's debate. But I agree with Russell, maybe we are making this more complicated than it should be. And there were people who didn't like the points Roto-style format before the Post-Season contest and we did change it to this setup. That format seemed to work well, unless I'm missing something.

As John Pausma said, there's a LOT of programming time that is being set aside for this contest. If we're going to lead a charge to stay away from this contest, then we can certainly put all of that programming time on hold for a year to debate. We can do other items instead. But it seems like we've talked about this contest for two years and now the anti-DFS scoring setup is taking charge. Nobody is going to go against KJ or Doughboys on the boards, so if this is the sentiment then maybe it's time to table this.

I'm always in favor of tweaking any of our contests, but this debate seems to be about "NFBC replicated scoring" or "DFS points-style scoring" and one side winning to prove a point. We don't want to fight an uphill battle against our own customers, so here we are. Is it worth the effort with the rallying against the format? I'm interested to hear. If not, we have other things to do.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Nobody is going to go against KJ or Doughboys on the boards, so if this is the sentiment then maybe it's time to table this.

How did I get included in this?
I'd just like to see a DC version included later.
I like the game.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Just an addendum....
Greg, most of the Message Boards folks are used to the roto format. I would almost anticipate that most would be critical of the set up.
Just the nature of the beast.

Roll it out and see what happens. You are not really after multiple teams from the old guard as much as wanting newbies from the daily game.
I think it'll be good test to see if there is much interest from the daily faction to crossover to the season-long game.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Just an addendum....
Greg, most of the Message Boards folks are used to the roto format. I would almost anticipate that most would be critical of the set up.

That's a bold assumption that certainly doesn't give the contest a chance.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Just an addendum....
Greg, most of the Message Boards folks are used to the roto format. I would almost anticipate that most would be critical of the set up.

That's a bold assumption that certainly doesn't give the contest a chance.

Why?
You are asking folks that have prepped one way for drafts for many years, to change on a dime.
Even slight rule changes are met with much resistance on these Boards.

[DOUGHBOYS]

I believe that once the contst is available, that most on these Boards will give it a whirl.
It is unfair to think they have to accept change right off the bat.

[ToddZ]

The number of people that play points-based fantasy baseball on sites like ESPN/Yahoo/CBS are STAGGERING. My sense is that is the real target audience and not DFS. From a marketing POV, it makes sense to me to attack that market as a way to bridge them into the more traditional NFBC contests.

Of course, the contest should also have some appeal to the present NFBC populace -- that's where best ball and limited FAAB runs come into play.

I'm not sure I understand using "have to change my prep" as a reason to ostracize the format.

Rankings/strategy for 12 teams is different than 15 teams

Rankings/strategy for DC is different than FAAB leagues

Rankings/strategy for leagues with an overall prize are different than stand-alone leagues

And this doesn't even account for the really cool leagues KJ has introduced (drafting teams, using salaries etc.)

Yeah, the common thread is all these use 5x5 scoring. Maybe I'm wrong, but to me the scoring is a small part of the process. The ranking and game theory per format is what really counts and this aspect of the cut-line is no different than any of the examples cited above.

Maybe my POV is off since I play in some points contest already (Head2Head.com) and am already used to a couple different scoring systems but I don't think the transition to a points based format - regardless of the system - is as daunting as it is made out to be.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Most every game that is introduced under the NFBC umbrella has been popular with most players.
After 12 or 13 years, it is time for the NFBC to branch out a bit. Introducing games that are not in our normal realm. This will, of course, be met with consternation.
Much the same thing happened with the introduction of 12 team leagues.

In order to grow, the NFBC has to branch out. Sometimes, the old guard will not like it because it is a game not like the others.
But to grow, new gaming has to be introduced.
The worst that can happen is that the old guard will not play and the new folks will enjoy the new game.
The best thing that can happen is that after the new players win that game, they will goad the old guard into playing against them next year after taunts that maybe the older players aren't that good afterall.

Although met with resistance now, I believe this to be good for the NFBC.



(Edit- Now leave me alone, I'm on vacation!)

[Rainiers]

I'm very excited about the format. Talking with others by email, they are as well. In my own little world, I see at least 30 sign ups for this...I know, small sample size, I know. But my hunch is this will be very popular.

People are aware that KJ is not happy with certain aspects to the point of not wanting to play and they respect his opinion, but that certainly will not stop them signing up and playing...after all, most of us seem to be independently-minded contrarians anyways.

I could care less if it is this years point allocation system or the last one. Just pick one and stick with it. I'd hate to getting ready for one and have it switched up at the last minute.

[KJ Duke]

We know why KJ doesn't like it........ his scoring system wasn't picked and so everything else is sub-standard. That's fine.

Not true. I don't like it because I REALLY REALLY don't like it. Greg and I have discussed this scoring issues multiple times in the last few years when the game was being formed. I told him then and every time since when we've discussed it that DFS scoring is a mistake. And I've posted exactly why I think it's a mistake, both here and a year ago when it was discussed.

[KJ Duke]

Nobody is going to go against KJ or Doughboys on the boards, so if this is the sentiment then maybe it's time to table this.

How did I get included in this?
I'd just like to see a DC version included later.
I like the game.

People go against me all the time. Not as much, but certainly Dough has been opposed plenty as well.

[KJ Duke]

Questioning by "non-mathletes"? What is that?

People that don't understand how you can easily convert roto stats into dollar or point values.

So I have to ask: Are you in favor of the format, the optimal scoring and the rest, but you want to lead a charge to boycott this contest because it doesn't have exact-Roto like scoring? I'm trying to understand this: You would be in favor of this contest if it exactly replicated 5x5 Roto, but you want it to fail because it has DFS-style scoring? Is that the angle?

I like the cutline format as you know. A no line-up manage option with the excitement of cutline survivor-type is a great, great addition. I don't want it to fail. You created a great addition to the NFBC roto leagues and then ruined it by switching to DFS scoring ... that is 100% my angle.

So what is the goal with the posts: To get me to change the scoring format? Is that the rallying cry here? If it is, then sure let's debate.

Yes. I think you will have a lot more signups with roto-conversion points than DFS points.

But I agree with Russell, maybe we are making this more complicated than it should be. And there were people who didn't like the points Roto-style format before the Post-Season contest and we did change it to this setup. That format seemed to work well, unless I'm missing something.

No doubt there will be people that A) prefer roto-like, B) prefer DFS, C) don't care. My argument is about the numbers. I think there are more potential signups for the NFBC in A. And if you go with B you are taking on greater risk of the game failing, which I don't want to see because like many of us here I would like to have a no-lineup game. Likewise, I think you have one shot at this. If you intro it with DFS and it struggles I don't see it then changing to roto points because then you'd get resistance from those who just don't want change.

As John Pausma said, there's a LOT of programming time that is being set aside for this contest. If we're going to lead a charge to stay away from this contest, then we can certainly put all of that programming time on hold for a year to debate.

I realize you're not a programmer Greg, but changing a few lines of code from 4 points for a HR to 6 points, or whatever it is, should take a few hours not a year. None of the logic code has to be changed, if it's going to be ready using DFS scoring a few more hours of going thru the code to change the number of points attached to various stats isn't going to derail the project.

[Money]

Great concept and anyone can adapt to a scoring system. Price point is a bit low for my blood but I'll be grabbing some teams given the FAAB setup and no lineup decisions.

The game will flourish among the masses and welcome the DFS crowd to the NFBC. Great job all around.

[KJ Duke]

Great concept and anyone can adapt to a scoring system. Price point is a bit low for my blood but I'll be grabbing some teams given the FAAB setup and no lineup decisions.

The game will flourish among the masses and welcome the DFS crowd to the NFBC. Great job all around.

That should clinch it. You said the same about the flailing Primetime setup.

[Money]

Great concept and anyone can adapt to a scoring system. Price point is a bit low for my blood but I'll be grabbing some teams given the FAAB setup and no lineup decisions.

The game will flourish among the masses and welcome the DFS crowd to the NFBC. Great job all around.

That should clinch it. You said the same about the flailing Primetime setup.

In reality you should welcome any New type of Overall format wether it be baseball or football given your record in them the past few years. This is great for the NFBC!!

Happy Thanksgiving!!

[Navel Lint]

We know why KJ doesn't like it........ his scoring system wasn't picked and so everything else is sub-standard. That's fine.

Not true. I don't like it because I REALLY REALLY don't like it. Greg and I have discussed this scoring issues multiple times in the last few years when the game was being formed. I told him then and every time since when we've discussed it that DFS scoring is a mistake. And I've posted exactly why I think it's a mistake, both here and a year ago when it was discussed.

Right.
Your statement is nothing like mine.
Except the part were you proposed a scoring system to Greg, he choose a different system, you determined that it is a mistake and the whole contest is doomed.
It can only be about the scoring, because nothing else in the contest has changed.

And please, don't tell us how you would be more than happy with some other non-KJ 5X5 scoring system.
If there is one thing I know, it's that no one on this board comments with as much absolute certitude as you do.

Which is not to say that people shouldn't be fully invested in their opinions and ideas, they should be; and they should make every effort to back their thoughts.

The difference is, most people are willing to leave some room for the possibility that they may be wrong.
When their ideas aren't agreed to, they either work with what is before them, or they leave it alone all together.
What most people don't do is actively try to scuttle a different idea because they didn't get their way, which based on the reply you left above for Greg seems to imply is exactly what you are hoping for.

[KJ Duke]

We know why KJ doesn't like it........ his scoring system wasn't picked and so everything else is sub-standard. That's fine.

Not true. I don't like it because I REALLY REALLY don't like it. Greg and I have discussed this scoring issues multiple times in the last few years when the game was being formed. I told him then and every time since when we've discussed it that DFS scoring is a mistake. And I've posted exactly why I think it's a mistake, both here and a year ago when it was discussed.

Right.
Your statement is nothing like mine.
Except the part were you proposed a scoring system to Greg, he choose a different system, you determined that it is a mistake and the whole contest is doomed.
It can only be about the scoring, because nothing else in the contest has changed.

And please, don't tell us how you would be more than happy with some other non-KJ 5X5 scoring system.
If there is one thing I know, it's that no one on this board comments with as much absolute certitude as you do.

Which is not to say that people shouldn't be fully invested in their opinions and ideas, they should be; and they should make every effort to back their thoughts.

The difference is, most people are willing to leave some room for the possibility that they may be wrong.
When their ideas aren't agreed to, they either work with what is before them, or they leave it alone all together.
What most people don't do is actively try to scuttle a different idea because they didn't get their way, which based on the reply you left above for Greg seems to imply is exactly what you are hoping for.

Russell,the goal is results not ego. I've argued just as hard for other things in the NFBC/NFFC over the years that had nothing to do with it being "my idea".

The game was structured based on these primary tenets:
1• no lineups to manage
2• excitement of survivor-style playoff
3• feeds draft obsession
4• mimics roto-style scoring so it functions as roto prep just like DC drafts

We don't have a game that hits those 4 markers. I wanted one, and I think it would be a hit. Now will the NFBC still have a hit if they hit 3 out of 4 of those markers? It's an unnecessary risk as it loses one important component of the design. It's Greg's risk to take and if he wants to pander to DFS players, which seems to be the goal. Likewise, no one here is so shallow that they're going to decide not to play because of me. I am predicting an outcome not calling a boycott.

[KJ Duke]

Alright, one final post unless I get lured back in.

Which scoring system to use comes down to what maximizes entries. Simple math problem.

A• If X% of roto players decide not play because they don't want to bother with a re-ranking that has no prep value for their roto leagues, how many entries does the NFBC lose?
B• How many guys are there like Zola and Russell who will play either way?
C• How many non-roto players can the NFBC lure into this contest?
D• How many of those non-roto players would play ONLY if DFS scoring is used, rather than roto-conversion scoring?

B and C don't actually matter, in terms of which scoring system to use.

So the only question that needs to be answered:
Is D is greater than A? If so, we should use DFS scoring.
If A is greater than D, we should use the roto-conversion scoring.

My guess is that A is significantly larger than D. Of course I could be wrong, and if there's a better way to answer that question than guessing it would probably be a good idea to do it.

[ToddZ]

Additional questions to consider...

1. How many of current NFBC players would just be reshuffling of a finite amount of dollars spent - playing cut-line in place of other contests?

2. How many of current NFBC players will spend more money than usual with the cut-line?

3. How many of current NFBC players will spend what they usually do but won't be spending MORE on the cut-line due to the rules?

[KJ Duke]

Additional questions to consider...

1. How many of current NFBC players would just be reshuffling of a finite amount of dollars spent - playing cut-line in place of other contests?

2. How many of current NFBC players will spend more money than usual with the cut-line?

3. How many of current NFBC players will spend what they usually do but won't be spending MORE on the cut-line due to the rules?

Yes. These Q's also go to the heart of why the cutline contest is ideal for EXISTING NFBC ROTO players. Because a no-lineup contest is significantly more likely to be incremental, rather than a deck reshufffling, since many of us are up against in-season time constraints more than anything else limiting our roto play. We all want to draft more. Many of us have incremental dollars to spend. But few of us want to devote even more time to managing teams.

[the icon]

well I've made my return to the baseball page. and I must admit at 1st I was happy to read the cutline was coming. but I also prefer roto that's how we all prepare. and if it was roto I think it complements the other contests. I've been waiting for a draft and go league that kind of hits the spot but I much rather draft 50 players and be done. but that being said would this format I'd play bUT I'll be all in on the cutline or fade it completely. just my thoughts.

[croakerkane]

I'd do it! Sounds fun.