Once Again Please, Why Not Vicory for FAAB ???

Chameleon · Post by **Chameleon** » Sun Jun 14, 2009 2:44 pm

I have played in the NFBC since its inception, and recall Message Board posts and related discussions from time to time about FAAB -- and the Vicory system (+1 dollar over the next highest bid)...

Greg, Tom -- whoever ... can someone please explain to me again why the NFBC doesn't use this system for FAAB? I do understand that the current system has its pros and cons, and a completely different competitive dynamic (i.e., you're always faced with the very real threat of blowing needless FAAB dollars on players you value highly, but others do not).

I understand the logic for other recently discussed rule changes, including the Friday DL rule etc. But seriously, surely the NFBC FAAB system can be made to work on a Vicory format... Which again begs the question, why are not doing this? Help me understand why the current system is better, or more fair, than Vicory?

Thanks.

Jesse Homer · Post by **Jesse Homer** » Sun Jun 14, 2009 3:20 pm

I think that is part of what makes it fun. In one league today I spent $50 on francoeur nobody else even put a bid in.

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Sun Jun 14, 2009 3:34 pm

The system is perfect.Sounds like someone blew there money.

billywaz · Post by **billywaz** » Sun Jun 14, 2009 11:52 pm

Originally posted by eddiejag:

The system is perfect.Sounds like someone blew there money. ditto

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 12:09 am

Originally posted by TTBoy:

I have played in the NFBC since its inception, and recall Message Board posts and related discussions from time to time about FAAB -- and the Vicory system (+1 dollar over the next highest bid)...

Greg, Tom -- whoever ... can someone please explain to me again why the NFBC doesn't use this system for FAAB? I do understand that the current system has its pros and cons, and a completely different competitive dynamic (i.e., you're always faced with the very real threat of blowing needless FAAB dollars on players you value highly, but others do not).

I understand the logic for other recently discussed rule changes, including the Friday DL rule etc. But seriously, surely the NFBC FAAB system can be made to work on a Vicory format... Which again begs the question, why are not doing this? Help me understand why the current system is better, or more fair, than Vicory?

Thanks. For me, it is better because of the reason you alluded to...the strategy. Or more clearly stated, more strategy. Kind of like the real baseball played in the NL, as opposed to the Desecrated Hitter rule in the AL.

I have ended up out bidding others by a buck and have been beaten many times by a buck. In the Vicory (don't recall ever have hearing it called that before), takes that whole "what will the rest of my league think about this guy" or "what are the needs in the league" either totally away or diminish it materially. Just grossly over bid and you probably get him with no risk (other than wasting your money, which is also a risk in the current system).

I have competed in both systems and, personally, I just do not see the Vicory System adding to the contest.

[ June 15, 2009, 06:10 AM: Message edited by: Edwards Kings ]

MichiganFantasyTeam · Post by **MichiganFantasyTeam** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:09 am

I think the rules are outstanding and this specific FAAB rule adds a sweet demension to the game.

Please post the players you went nuts on with your fa bucks! I have a strange feeling that if you would have won your bids by a buck, you would have never posted your post.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:53 am

The original post has some merit if you wanted to achieve “live” auction results. In the real world, the majority of auctions (ebay, in-person, etc…) are done by simply bidding the next increment higher than your competitors. This type of auction usually makes the winning buyer feel very good. They “bought” their item for the lowest possible cost.

Yes, I realize some auctions are “blind”. Meaning, people/firms send in their bid proposals and are locked in to the pricing submitted, independent of what any other people/firms bid. This type of auction makes the winning bidder feel very good ONLY A SMALL % OF THE TIME. They usually “buy” their item for a much higher price than a “live” auction. The “seller” aka NFBC and the “buyer’s” NFBC competitors are usually very happy with this type of auction as the “overbidding” can be insane at times. But, this type of blind bidding goes right in line with how the NFBC restricts the minor leaguer player pool. Uber-hype is created and overbidding is rampant in such systems, esp for high profile minor leaguers. Sharks like this system as it gives them an edge over most players.

Personally, I like the current FAAB system. It’s far better than any BS system I used in the past (non high stakes), first come first served and waiver wire list. However, the current FAAB system is the only one I have used in playing high stakes.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 2:29 am

Originally posted by TTBoy:

I have played in the NFBC since its inception, and recall Message Board posts and related discussions from time to time about FAAB -- and the Vicory system (+1 dollar over the next highest bid)...

Greg, Tom -- whoever ... can someone please explain to me again why the NFBC doesn't use this system for FAAB? I do understand that the current system has its pros and cons, and a completely different competitive dynamic (i.e., you're always faced with the very real threat of blowing needless FAAB dollars on players you value highly, but others do not).

I understand the logic for other recently discussed rule changes, including the Friday DL rule etc. But seriously, surely the NFBC FAAB system can be made to work on a Vicory format... Which again begs the question, why are not doing this? Help me understand why the current system is better, or more fair, than Vicory?

Thanks. I do not see a need or a logical reason for Vickrey in the NFBC for one major reason: This is a national contest with 26 different leagues and Vickrey would reward owners in passive leagues. In other words, if one owner was more aggressive than others in his/her league and kept getting FAAB money back because the runner-up bid was much lower than theirs, this owner would get even more free agents than he/she would get in our current FAAB system. Owners in leagues that didn't have aggressive bidders would be unfairly ahead of other owners in more aggressive leagues.

Honestly, an owner could win the overall title much easier with Vickrey than in our current system thanks to multiple key free agent pickups. In our current system, if you want someone bad enough you pay for him, but that leaves you with less FAAB for the rest of the year. With Vickrey, you could get that player and get a lot of your FAAB money back thanks to nobody else in your league valuing that free agent as highly as you.

Vickrey is okay for private leagues. Not for national contests.

Schwartzstops · Post by **Schwartzstops** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:12 am

Speaking as someone who competes in leagues of both formats (Vickrey vs. "true" bidding), I strongly prefer this format.

Vickrey encourages inflated bids because you aren't penalized for overbids. Therefore if you think a player's true value is $20, you might as well bid $40, because if you correctly value him you will get back the overbid amount.

In the NFBC "true" bid format you are forced to pay what you think the player is worth... the highest bidder sets the market. If you overbid, you are penalized for that by losing the money.

Therefore, the "true" bidding format encourages rational bid amounts, which is a much more preferable format for an expert/high-stakes competition.

My two cents.

Liquidhippo · Post by **Liquidhippo** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:12 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by TTBoy:

I have played in the NFBC since its inception, and recall Message Board posts and related discussions from time to time about FAAB -- and the Vicory system (+1 dollar over the next highest bid)...

Greg, Tom -- whoever ... can someone please explain to me again why the NFBC doesn't use this system for FAAB? I do understand that the current system has its pros and cons, and a completely different competitive dynamic (i.e., you're always faced with the very real threat of blowing needless FAAB dollars on players you value highly, but others do not).

I understand the logic for other recently discussed rule changes, including the Friday DL rule etc. But seriously, surely the NFBC FAAB system can be made to work on a Vicory format... Which again begs the question, why are not doing this? Help me understand why the current system is better, or more fair, than Vicory?

Thanks. I do not see a need or a logical reason for Vickrey in the NFBC for one major reason: This is a national contest with 26 different leagues and Vickrey would reward owners in passive leagues. In other words, if one owner was more aggressive than others in his/her league and kept getting FAAB money back because the runner-up bid was much lower than theirs, this owner would get even more free agents than he/she would get in our current FAAB system. Owners in leagues that didn't have aggressive bidders would be unfairly ahead of other owners in more aggressive leagues.

Honestly, an owner could win the overall title much easier with Vickrey than in our current system thanks to multiple key free agent pickups. In our current system, if you want someone bad enough you pay for him, but that leaves you with less FAAB for the rest of the year. With Vickrey, you could get that player and get a lot of your FAAB money back thanks to nobody else in your league valuing that free agent as highly as you.

Vickrey is okay for private leagues. Not for national contests. [/QUOTE]Greg, would you consider offering a Vickrey Satellite League or two next year for NFBC participants who prefer the Vickrey FAAB system?

Thanks

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:37 am

Originally posted by Schwartzstops:

In the NFBC "true" bid format you are forced to pay what you think the player is worth... “Worth” – That’s a very misleading word. If you think A.McCutchen is worth $150 FAAB, will you only bid his worth ($150 FAAB) or will you increase that bid because other people may value McCutchen around $150? Of course you will increase your bid. What a player is “worth” is your baseline. Other things totally unrelated to the player’s actual worth (his stats) factor into your actual FAAB bid. Among them include: media hype (websites, MB’s, etc…), whether he was a new add to the FAAB pool, your frame of mind (how desperate are you), alternatives if you miss out on acquiring the player, how far along you are in the season, other owners FAAB balances, etc…

Like my friend once put it to me. There are two types of bids.

First, there is the “I’d like to get this guy” bid. This is used for a player that you’d like to have, but certainly isn’t a deal breaker. You place a respectable bid on him. If you don’t acquire him, that’s okay, he went for fair market value.

Second, there is the “I’m buying this guy” bid. This is used for a player that you MUST have. You double or triple that earlier “respectable” bid. If you don’t acquire him, that’s sucks, and it means there is someone crazier or more desperate than you.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:05 am

Originally posted by Liquidhippo:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by TTBoy:

I have played in the NFBC since its inception, and recall Message Board posts and related discussions from time to time about FAAB -- and the Vicory system (+1 dollar over the next highest bid)...

Greg, Tom -- whoever ... can someone please explain to me again why the NFBC doesn't use this system for FAAB? I do understand that the current system has its pros and cons, and a completely different competitive dynamic (i.e., you're always faced with the very real threat of blowing needless FAAB dollars on players you value highly, but others do not).

I understand the logic for other recently discussed rule changes, including the Friday DL rule etc. But seriously, surely the NFBC FAAB system can be made to work on a Vicory format... Which again begs the question, why are not doing this? Help me understand why the current system is better, or more fair, than Vicory?

Thanks. I do not see a need or a logical reason for Vickrey in the NFBC for one major reason: This is a national contest with 26 different leagues and Vickrey would reward owners in passive leagues. In other words, if one owner was more aggressive than others in his/her league and kept getting FAAB money back because the runner-up bid was much lower than theirs, this owner would get even more free agents than he/she would get in our current FAAB system. Owners in leagues that didn't have aggressive bidders would be unfairly ahead of other owners in more aggressive leagues.

Honestly, an owner could win the overall title much easier with Vickrey than in our current system thanks to multiple key free agent pickups. In our current system, if you want someone bad enough you pay for him, but that leaves you with less FAAB for the rest of the year. With Vickrey, you could get that player and get a lot of your FAAB money back thanks to nobody else in your league valuing that free agent as highly as you.

Vickrey is okay for private leagues. Not for national contests. [/QUOTE]Greg, would you consider offering a Vickrey Satellite League or two next year for NFBC participants who prefer the Vickrey FAAB system?

Thanks [/QUOTE]I can't say that I will Greg. This would need additional programming from STATS or we'd have to do it manually. I'm not sure how other commissioner products handle this, but I know we don't have this set up under our system with STATS. So it would be something extra we'd have to factor in. I can check with STATS to see how we could handle this and see if it makes sense We'll see, I guess.

Chameleon · Post by **Chameleon** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:13 am

Well thanks for everyone posting to this query on my part. I appreciate everyone's point of view, and thanks Greg for the words of clarification.

I have grown accustomed to the current FAAB system, and will make it work for me. I was just curious again why we don't use the Vickery system, and that's been answered.

BTW -- the bid which pi___ed me off this week was SP Fernando Nieve for the Mets. I bid about $60 on him, and didn't even have a runner-up bid (why, I don't know, but that does happen from time to time. Thus, Vickery would have helped me immensely here... Hope he works out).

Cheers and out for now. Thanks again for posting....

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:27 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

[QUOTE]This is a national contest with 26 different leagues and Vickrey would reward owners in passive leagues. In other words, if one owner was more aggressive than others in his/her league and kept getting FAAB money back because the runner-up bid was much lower than theirs, this owner would get even more free agents than he/she would get in our current FAAB system. Owners in leagues that didn't have aggressive bidders would be unfairly ahead of other owners in more aggressive leagues.

Honestly, an owner could win the overall title much easier with Vickrey than in our current system thanks to multiple key free agent pickups. So long as I can muster up the brain power to recall this post...I'll never complain about blind bidding again! (live would ROCK!)

It is fun...like Christmas every bid processing night!

~Lance

Liquidhippo · Post by **Liquidhippo** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 7:32 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Liquidhippo:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by TTBoy:

I have played in the NFBC since its inception, and recall Message Board posts and related discussions from time to time about FAAB -- and the Vicory system (+1 dollar over the next highest bid)...

Greg, Tom -- whoever ... can someone please explain to me again why the NFBC doesn't use this system for FAAB? I do understand that the current system has its pros and cons, and a completely different competitive dynamic (i.e., you're always faced with the very real threat of blowing needless FAAB dollars on players you value highly, but others do not).

I understand the logic for other recently discussed rule changes, including the Friday DL rule etc. But seriously, surely the NFBC FAAB system can be made to work on a Vicory format... Which again begs the question, why are not doing this? Help me understand why the current system is better, or more fair, than Vicory?

Thanks. I do not see a need or a logical reason for Vickrey in the NFBC for one major reason: This is a national contest with 26 different leagues and Vickrey would reward owners in passive leagues. In other words, if one owner was more aggressive than others in his/her league and kept getting FAAB money back because the runner-up bid was much lower than theirs, this owner would get even more free agents than he/she would get in our current FAAB system. Owners in leagues that didn't have aggressive bidders would be unfairly ahead of other owners in more aggressive leagues.

Honestly, an owner could win the overall title much easier with Vickrey than in our current system thanks to multiple key free agent pickups. In our current system, if you want someone bad enough you pay for him, but that leaves you with less FAAB for the rest of the year. With Vickrey, you could get that player and get a lot of your FAAB money back thanks to nobody else in your league valuing that free agent as highly as you.

Vickrey is okay for private leagues. Not for national contests. [/QUOTE]Greg, would you consider offering a Vickrey Satellite League or two next year for NFBC participants who prefer the Vickrey FAAB system?

Thanks [/QUOTE]I can't say that I will Greg. This would need additional programming from STATS or we'd have to do it manually. I'm not sure how other commissioner products handle this, but I know we don't have this set up under our system with STATS. So it would be something extra we'd have to factor in. I can check with STATS to see how we could handle this and see if it makes sense We'll see, I guess. [/QUOTE]Ok, well thanks for considering. I'll probably be first in line if you do.

huskyfan88 · Post by **huskyfan88** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:21 am

Weekly live free agent auctions would probably produce the best results but is probably not a practical system. But it would be interesting!

Schwartzstops · Post by **Schwartzstops** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:58 pm

"Worth" – That's a very misleading word. If you think A.McCutchen is worth $150 FAAB, will you only bid his worth ($150 FAAB) or will you increase that bid because other people may value McCutchen around $150? Of course you will increase your bid... Actually that's exactly the point I was making. Figuring out the player's "true" value isn't really the objective, it's figuring out what you think it will cost you to get him and whether or not you want to bid that much. But in general we agree: if you want the player, you bid the money and take your chances.

The difference between Vickrey (not Vickory, folks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickrey_auction) and "true" bidding is that Vickrey rewards reckless bidding... if you overbid and get the player, you get a rebate. There is no real incentive to figure out the "true" value, you simply throw a stack of money at the player and get back change.

In "true" bidding on the other hand, you have to carefully figure what the player is "worth" (to you, as GG noted), and bid accordingly. Get it right and you get the guy at a price you can live with, since you bid it. Get it wrong, and you either waste money (overbid) or don't get him at all (underbid). Either way there is a penalty, unlike with Vickrey. Therefore, "true" bidding is indeed a greater test of skill, and Vickrey is an exercise in recklessness.

Liquidhippo · Post by **Liquidhippo** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:12 pm

Originally posted by Schwartzstops:

quote:

"Worth" – That's a very misleading word. If you think A.McCutchen is worth $150 FAAB, will you only bid his worth ($150 FAAB) or will you increase that bid because other people may value McCutchen around $150? Of course you will increase your bid... Actually that's exactly the point I was making. Figuring out the player's "true" value isn't really the objective, it's figuring out what you think it will cost you to get him and whether or not you want to bid that much. But in general we agree: if you want the player, you bid the money and take your chances.

The difference between Vickrey (not Vickory, folks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickrey_auction) and "true" bidding is that Vickrey rewards reckless bidding... if you overbid and get the player, you get a rebate. There is no real incentive to figure out the "true" value, you simply throw a stack of money at the player and get back change.

In "true" bidding on the other hand, you have to carefully figure what the player is "worth" (to you, as GG noted), and bid accordingly. Get it right and you get the guy at a price you can live with, since you bid it. Get it wrong, and you either waste money (overbid) or don't get him at all (underbid). Either way there is a penalty, unlike with Vickrey. Therefore, "true" bidding is indeed a greater test of skill, and Vickrey is an exercise in recklessness. [/QUOTE]Wow, is this for real? Or is it just meant to get a rise out of the Vickrey backers? I would have to say that I don't think I've disagreed with a post(this last post) more in the history of the NFBC Message Boards. It's interesting how perceptions differ, as my experience has been completely, and emphatically, 100% opposite of almost everything in this post. Your description of Vickrey(exercise in recklessness) to me sounds like an apt description of the 100+ Blind FAAB leagues I've participated in over the years.(there's a little bit of skill involved with Blind FAAB, but usually luck wins the day)

Vickrey takes a good chunk of the luck aspect out of Blind FAAB, by rewarding those who can properly assess the value of players, the typical avg. market value(avg. FAAB bid amount in an avg. league), and the difference between the two. It also affords the prospective buyer a greater quantity of 'sure' waiver pickups, so if you're good at separating the wheat from the chaff in the free agent pool, you'll be rewarded tenfold with the Vickrey System over Blind FAAB, which gives you only 2-3 'guaranteed' pickups per year.

[ June 15, 2009, 11:37 PM: Message edited by: Liquidhippo ]

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 7:24 pm

Vickrey reduces the risk to your budget = the weaker of two systems.

Dub · Post by **Dub** » Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:58 pm

Do you like 7 card, 3 raise limit or Texas hold em- no limit?

Schwartzstops · Post by **Schwartzstops** » Tue Jun 16, 2009 9:10 am

Originally posted by Liquidhippo:

Wow, is this for real? Or is it just meant to get a rise out of the Vickrey backers? I would have to say that I don't think I've disagreed with a post(this last post) more in the history of the NFBC Message Boards. It's interesting how perceptions differ, as my experience has been completely, and emphatically, 100% opposite of almost everything in this post. Your description of Vickrey(exercise in recklessness) to me sounds like an apt description of the 100+ Blind FAAB leagues I've participated in over the years.(there's a little bit of skill involved with Blind FAAB, but usually luck wins the day)

Vickrey takes a good chunk of the luck aspect out of Blind FAAB, by rewarding those who can properly assess the value of players, the typical avg. market value(avg. FAAB bid amount in an avg. league), and the difference between the two. It also affords the prospective buyer a greater quantity of 'sure' waiver pickups, so if you're good at separating the wheat from the chaff in the free agent pool, you'll be rewarded tenfold with the Vickrey System over Blind FAAB, which gives you only 2-3 'guaranteed' pickups per year. Yep, I meant what I said and I stand by it. In fact, your assertion that Vickrey is better because it buys a greater quantity of "sure" pickups is precisely why it's less challenging and less appropriate for a competition like NFBC.

Quack & Willy · Post by **Quack & Willy** » Tue Jun 16, 2009 9:23 am

One other note if you decided to use the +1 system that would cause issues:

Better have something in the system that prevents an owner from bidding max on two separate bids, with no priority.

Agree, someone must have blown their money on a big triple digit bid, with no runner-up bid.

Liquidhippo · Post by **Liquidhippo** » Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:04 am

Originally posted by Schwartzstops:

quote:Originally posted by Liquidhippo:

Wow, is this for real? Or is it just meant to get a rise out of the Vickrey backers? I would have to say that I don't think I've disagreed with a post(this last post) more in the history of the NFBC Message Boards. It's interesting how perceptions differ, as my experience has been completely, and emphatically, 100% opposite of almost everything in this post. Your description of Vickrey(exercise in recklessness) to me sounds like an apt description of the 100+ Blind FAAB leagues I've participated in over the years.(there's a little bit of skill involved with Blind FAAB, but usually luck wins the day)

Vickrey takes a good chunk of the luck aspect out of Blind FAAB, by rewarding those who can properly assess the value of players, the typical avg. market value(avg. FAAB bid amount in an avg. league), and the difference between the two. It also affords the prospective buyer a greater quantity of 'sure' waiver pickups, so if you're good at separating the wheat from the chaff in the free agent pool, you'll be rewarded tenfold with the Vickrey System over Blind FAAB, which gives you only 2-3 'guaranteed' pickups per year. Yep, I meant what I said and I stand by it. In fact, your assertion that Vickrey is better because it buys a greater quantity of "sure" pickups is precisely why it's less challenging and less appropriate for a competition like NFBC. [/QUOTE]Well, it certainly makes the draft preeminent, and really the only element to the contest in which the player has a considerable amount of control over which players comprise the roster.....It's also 'challenging' to win the lottery, but not necessarily intriguing to those who would prefer a system that maximizes the skill elements. I would prefer a system that rewards the fantasy player's assessment of baseball player skills, and proper player valuation as part of that. I would prefer some realistic amount of control beyond 2-3 sure pickups and dozens of random lotto tickets. I don't see much challenge in having such a tiny amount of control over roster additions post draft day. Instead with blind FAAB, to me, it's closer to a modified DC , except with a small roster and weekly random drawings as to who 'wins' players.

[ June 16, 2009, 05:05 PM: Message edited by: Liquidhippo ]

Chameleon · Post by **Chameleon** » Tue Jun 16, 2009 12:05 pm

I actually agree with GG and Schwartzstops ... and I started this post! You two are right (for the most part), that Vickrey "could" (and likely does) encourage "reckless", yet probably successful, bidding.

But there is a very real downside to Vickrey that nobody has raised on this post, and in my mind, it largely counters the "reckless" bidding argument.

Let's take a real example from the past few weeks in the NFBC. Say in your Main Event league, you were one of the what -- 30% or so of leagues that did not have an owner that rostered A. McCutcheon. Say also that you need speed desperately on your team, and you ARE CONVINCED this guy can is the last tweak you need for success. So -- under the current FAAB system, you might bid, say, $200 dollars. (say for argument's sake you have $600 left). But with Vickrey, you say "screw it ... I'll bid $550", knowing that I'm getting my "bonus" back, because it is likely that no one will go that high.

But here's the rub -- what if they do? If you've playing in the NFBC long enough, you'll recall the crazy bids on specific players each year. Jered Weaver when he first came up a few years ago; and I got a tremendous kick out of the Max Scherzer sweepstakes last year. You get the point.

The reality is that there are 14 other owners in your league. And one of them, on any given week, is just as likely to be an "idiot" / nonsensical with their bidding, and "drive the price" way, way up on highly sought after free agents.

So I actually think that with Vickrey in the NFBC, yes, you'd get that "rebate" so-to-speak on your everday, B.S. needed pick-ups each week (e.g., I need a catcher for 2 weeks because my C2 went on the DL, so why should I pay more than a few bucks for a roster filler catcher). But you would also get your bell rung more often than not with elite FAAB targets like prospects coming up, guys coming off the long-term DL, "new" closers etc. because someone -- at least 1 owner -- in your league would go "all in", or close to it.

I guess all this is a long way of saying that in my view, with Vickrey, "reckless" bidding would very likely be countered by the fact that in my hypothetical example above, you might say "screw it ... McCutcheon for $550 of my remaining $600" ... and then ... gulp ... you are forced to pay very close to that, leaving you with MUCH less than you expected to for the rest of the year. It would happen to dozens of owners every week ... almost certainly AN OWNER in EVERY league each week on some FAAB target. And in my mind, that would be a large enough disincentive to NOT "spray and pray", so-to-speak, on your FAAB'ing, because you are faced with the very real risk that someone in your league each week might markedly "overbid" the true value of a player (whatever that is).

So in the end, Vickrey would require just as much strategy, foresight, and planning in an event with owners as savvy as the NFBC, in my view. At a minimum, it would create it's own competitive dynamics which would cause just as much stress and consternation as the current system. But remember -- you'd be getting that "rebate" where you really need it ... on your everyday, garden variety FAAB pickups -- NOT the elite, highly touted targets which emerge every couple of weeks. And what's wrong with that?

Just my (further) 2 cents ... but again, wasted keystrokes as this will never, ever happen.

Cheers!

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue Jun 16, 2009 12:17 pm

Fun debate...but it seems to boil down to this re: a multi-league main event.

Say every league has a guy top bid $300 for Ben Sheets when he gets added into the NFBC system.

LV league #1's second place bid is $44

LV league #8's second place bid is $177

NY league #4's second place bid is $227

This, my friends is what you'd call an UNEVEN PLAYING FIELD...and thus is not good for this setup.

All leagues can have whatever second place bids the way it's set up now...and each of those owners will still lose the entire $300 they bid.

Single league setup...Vickery is fine.