Week 9 Drops

Atlas · Post by **Atlas** » Tue May 27, 2008 11:01 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote: I drafted alot of crappy players, that is the strategy. Well, at least it's not a difficult strategy to implement. [/QUOTE]Yeah, I seem to avail myself of this strategy more often than I would like

Hard Heads · Post by **Hard Heads** » Tue May 27, 2008 12:23 pm

Have nothing to do with this league, but for all the other NFBC leagues I say good decision. It was never answered if his best friend in 2nd had a lot of FAAB money left.

thinkjohn · Post by **thinkjohn** » Tue May 27, 2008 12:30 pm

Originally posted by crazytown.gov:

MDZ: Of course he changes the outcome of the league. With me having a better chance to win. He has a better chance of me helping on another roster than mine. The league leader has 100 FAAB remaining. He is not getting McLouth.(I know collusion, since my best friend is in 2nd).

BJOAK:I drafted alot of crappy players, that is the strategy. Didn't you see my roster? But as far as he is concerned I thought he would steal more bases.

I understand the collusion aspect as well. Last year late in the season I dropped Braun because I didn't need him. He was removed from the pool. McLouth is no Ryan Braun.

Also, the reason the minimum innings is only 600 as opposed to a higher number is so that participants can use different strategies. Many don't seem to like different strategies. crazytown,

What I fail to see is how McClouth is not valuable to you. The only Batting category you can gain points in is AVG. Right now you have 3 points and you could easily get to 15 points with a few high(er) avg hitters.

Anyone hitting over .280 is valuable since .285 will get you 15 points. McClouth hitting .320 helps this strategy.

With that being said, this is why I thought collusion might be involved in the decision.

crazytown · Post by **crazytown** » Wed May 28, 2008 12:51 am

My friend in 2nd place was stated in jest. You'll probably find this hard to imagine, but I have no friends.

As far as Mclouth helping me this year: I felt he will regress to prior years stats. He has never hit more than .258. The FAAB discussion was secondary in my motives. I knew only 1 player could get him and believed it would not be an owner in the top spots. This league could be won by a point and I was hoping to help another owner in a category that I will not win therefore giving the top guys that 1 less point. THat was my primary motivation. 1 owner with less Free agent money shouldn't affect me that much. Mclouth will have no higher value than he has now. If I did this 2 weeks ago, he might have slid through. If he keeps it up his average will obviously help me and the SB's can't hurt. I haven't started him the last couple of weeks and lost his contributions. I guess if he stays hot, I'll start him.

thinkjohn · Post by **thinkjohn** » Wed May 28, 2008 2:54 am

Originally posted by crazytown.gov:

My friend in 2nd place was stated in jest. You'll probably find this hard to imagine, but I have no friends.

As far as Mclouth helping me this year: I felt he will regress to prior years stats. He has never hit more than .258. The FAAB discussion was secondary in my motives. I knew only 1 player could get him and believed it would not be an owner in the top spots. This league could be won by a point and I was hoping to help another owner in a category that I will not win therefore giving the top guys that 1 less point. THat was my primary motivation. 1 owner with less Free agent money shouldn't affect me that much. Mclouth will have no higher value than he has now. If I did this 2 weeks ago, he might have slid through. If he keeps it up his average will obviously help me and the SB's can't hurt. I haven't started him the last couple of weeks and lost his contributions. I guess if he stays hot, I'll start him. I am glad that I did not choose to try one of these "cute" strategies because that is just too much analysis of the standings for me to do in May.

Good Luck the rest of the way...

crazytown · Post by **crazytown** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:41 am

ThinkJohn: just think about all of the time you spend/waste on selecting free agent hitters and their appropiate free agent dollars that you will bid. Not to mention wondering weather or not they will pan out in the end. How about lineup selection. I rarely have to spend a dollar on hitters. That's alot of time.

A point is a point. I know it is only 1 but how many leagues over the last 4 years have been won by 1 point or even 1/2 point. Especially 2nd and 3rd place.

By the way, I believe I am almost guaranteed finishing in the top 5 every time I try this. My only success in 4 attempts has been a 2nd place in 2006 AL only auction.

I also offered a side bet at the draft to a number of owners. I will take my team 1 on 1 versus every other team in the draft for any dollar amount. But all teams have to participate.

Just some more thoughts.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Wed May 28, 2008 3:53 am

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me to play in a league where 3rd place is most likely the best I can finish. I pony up $1300 to win my money back.

I think Greg should put in minimum at bats to eliminate baby sitting leagues like this.

By you leaving 8 to 10 bats in the field, you are almost guarantying 3 or 4 teams to better in offense. One of those teams will get the pitching right. I think you will never win an NFBC 15 team league using this strategy.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed May 28, 2008 4:55 am

I think evberyone in all my leagues should use these strategies and I fully support crazytown.

crazytown · Post by **crazytown** » Wed May 28, 2008 5:51 am

I can only worry about me. Not what everyone else is thinking. So many posters and owners that don't post always say the same thing. What I am doing is completely losing 3 categories. Okay 3 is a lot and I understand that.

But is everybodies complaint that it is 3 categories. Is 2 okay. Or is 1 okay. Or none. If it is none then that is fine.

But there are numerous owners in the main, satellite, and auctions that do not draft a closer on their original roster. They hope to, and often do, pick up saves through FAAB. But some don't.

So I guess my point is that people always have opposition to my strategy but never say a thing about not using a closer.

If the game is about getting as many points in all categories(as the game was intended) then rules drafting closers and attempting to acquire saves should be in the rules as well. Or should we just blow them off?

crazytown · Post by **crazytown** » Wed May 28, 2008 6:03 am

CC

Ichiro is not hitting. Figgins barely plays. I think I have 3 points in batting average. I have 89 overall. league leader has 98. Typical Ichiro season and my average is much higher. I think I have a 15 in batting average points every time I have tried this system. I obviously think I can win with it. Or at least come in 3rd. 12 others will finish out of the money. To have this much fun and breakeven, you can't beat it.

I think I mentioned it above but I am in the $2500 super league as well. A normal strategy there.

I think I am a lesser player than most of the participants in these high $$ leagues. I don't read Shandler or use any rankings from my own computer program. I do minimal preparation. I cross off names at the draft table. I never look at minor league stats. But I like the ACTION so I play.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed May 28, 2008 7:14 am

Top three in LV3: 136, 110, 108. You'd need *perfect* scores in all 7 categories you are not punting to even be tied for third place. But I support what you are doing!

[ May 28, 2008, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

crazytown · Post by **crazytown** » Wed May 28, 2008 8:15 am

That goes into the high $$ games. I figure I get the best or near best participants. I need everybody to draft similar squads. 1 or 2 really bad teams hurts me. IN the main there are guys shooting for the stars. Dead money as they say. In this auction the leader today only has 98. Why do you think some guys, and I believe others in the future, will draft in Orlando or other locales that they feel will have lesser opponents. I participate in the high dollar leagues because I know everybody will give it their best effort.

RobG · Post by **RobG** » Wed May 28, 2008 8:53 am

Originally posted by crazytown.gov:

Why do you think some guys, and I believe others in the future, will draft in Orlando or other locales that they feel will have lesser opponents. Here we go again with the suggestion that drafting anywhere but Vegas means the competition is weaker. Not true, it all varies from year to year. I think the opponents are just as strong as they are in any of the four locales.

crazytown · Post by **crazytown** » Wed May 28, 2008 9:21 am

They feel they have a better chance. I am not saying that they do have a better chance.

Also, after I win this league, I am not going to Orlando, I'm going to Vegas.

Hard Heads · Post by **Hard Heads** » Wed May 28, 2008 10:27 am

Problem is, you won't win that league.

Asumijet · Post by **Asumijet** » Wed May 28, 2008 10:53 am

1) As newbie "dead money", we made the decision to go to Vegas for the fun and sun. I would think that is a common theme for other "dead money". I met a lot of first timers in my own league. So, I would think Vegas to be easier for the sharks.

2) If I were Crazy, I would be pretty upset that I could not drop the player I wanted in an attempt to improve my chances of winning (in a single league) as long as there was no evidence or perception of collusion. As dumb as the strategy and decision might be to the rest of us, he paid the $$$ and believes his strategy will improve his chances of winning. It is game theory and owners have to be prepared to act against the unexpected as long as the "unexpected" is within the rules. I think in this case, Crazy's decision was within the rules, absent the "commissioner's decision" rule which I am guessing Greg and Tom hate to have to use.

3) That said, NFBC has to protect against the perception of collusion as well and the right decision was made form that very important perspective. But it begs the question, "Where do you draw the line?" Tulo was pulled earlier when dropped in the Main Event. But when some newbie "dead money" team dropped D. Cabrera despite his reasonably effective stats, Cabrera was allowed to stay in the FAAB pool. He went for $459 the next week. Completely different, but there is some middle ground between Tulo and Cabrera that may need to be defined better.

A suggestion or solution might be a "no cut list" with pre-determined criteria. Then going into the competition everyone (including Crazy) knows who can and can't be cut and that the list has the potential to change over the season based on certain criteria. And that the "no cut list" is in effect in all leagues, not just the main. If then an owner wants to cut one of those players, we all know the player will not go back into the FAAB. No ambiguity.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Wed May 28, 2008 12:17 pm

Originally posted by Asumijet:

2) If I were Crazy, I would be pretty upset that I could not drop the player I wanted in an attempt to improve my chances of winning (in a single league) as long as there was no evidence or perception of collusion. As dumb as the strategy and decision might be to the rest of us, he paid the $$$ and believes his strategy will improve his chances of winning. It is game theory and owners have to be prepared to act against the unexpected as long as the "unexpected" is within the rules. I think in this case, Crazy's decision was within the rules, absent the "commissioner's decision" rule which I am guessing Greg and Tom hate to have to use.

3) That said, NFBC has to protect against the perception of collusion as well and the right decision was made form that very important perspective. But it begs the question, "Where do you draw the line?" Tulo was pulled earlier when dropped in the Main Event. But when some newbie "dead money" team dropped D. Cabrera despite his reasonably effective stats, Cabrera was allowed to stay in the FAAB pool. He went for $459 the next week. Completely different, but there is some middle ground between Tulo and Cabrera that may need to be defined better.

A suggestion or solution might be a "no cut list" with pre-determined criteria. Then going into the competition everyone (including Crazy) knows who can and can't be cut and that the list has the potential to change over the season based on certain criteria. And that the "no cut list" is in effect in all leagues, not just the main. If then an owner wants to cut one of those players, we all know the player will not go back into the FAAB. No ambiguity. The no-cut list has been discussed too much here already in the past, and has been dismissed. Rightly so in the opinion of many of us, and more importantly by Greg. Crazy did this last season so he probably knew what would happen this time around, and if not certainly knew it was a risk. These issues come down to judgements by the commishioner at the time they are made, which is important because player values can change quickly over the course of a season. If you want to employ an FAAB-sucking strategy, your best bet would probably be to ask before you drop.

[ May 28, 2008, 06:19 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Wed May 28, 2008 4:03 pm

I understand Greg's reversal...but I would have allowed the move, and removed McLouth from that league player pool 100%.

To keep giving guys chances to screw around and have re-do's is not good IMO.

He would not have had a leg to stand on with the removal of McLouth.

...he may have even learned a lesson.

~Lance