NFBC Success by_Venue

[Gordon Gekko II]

Folks,

I NOW have the data I’ve been looking for. Post will come later this morning. I owe one Venue an apology, and one Venue gets a HUGE "WTF. Are you kidding me?"

[Gordon Gekko II]

Summary of what I looked at. The numbers are all FACTS, so don’t shoot the messenger.



I used main event data from the last three years. In 2007, there were 25 leagues. In 2008, 26 leagues. In 2009, 26 leagues. I took the top 25 main event overall teams from 2007, the top 26 teams from 2008, and the top 26 teams from 2009. In summary, the top 77 elite teams from the past three main events is my sample size.



Before I get to the results, it’s important to note the # of leagues by Venue that during the past three years:

Chicago 12

Las Vegas 31

New York 25

Florida 7

Online/Phone 2



Accordingly, the top 77 teams from the main event overall should be represented by these Venue numbers, i.e. 12 of the top 77 teams should be from Chicago. 31 from Las Vegas, etc…Here’s the actual results:

Chicago 16 (33% MORE than it should be)

Las Vegas 27 (13% less than it should be)

New York 25 (exactly the number it should be)

Florida 6 (14% less than it should be)

Online/Phone 3 (50% MORE than it should be)



Initial conclusion on Venues by Elite teams: Online/Phone % in the top 77 is a joke. Could be based on too small a sample size though. We’ll come back to this in a bit. Chicago (as I suspected), produces more elite teams than EVERY OTHER VENUE. Las Vegas is tough (as I suspected). Florida is surprisingly tougher than I thought. My apologies to Florida drafters. Your clamor over the years of drafting with tougher competitors appears to have some validity.



But to really tie this all together, we need to look at the opposite of the elite teams. We need to look at the real bottom dwellers of the competition, i.e. the 77 worst performing main event teams (25 from 2007, 26 from 2008, 26 from 2009).



Again, the results should be:

Chicago 12

Las Vegas 31

New York 25

Florida 7

Online/Phone 2



The real results:

Chicago 13 (8% MORE than it should be)

Las Vegas 33 (6% MORE than it should be)

New York 24 (4% less than it should be)

Florida 3 (57% less than it should be)

Online/Phone 4 (100% MORE than it should be)



Initial conclusion on Venues by Worst teams:

Online/Phone contains TWICE as many poor teams as it should. WOW! And the kicker is THREE of the worst 77 teams from the past three years are from a SINGLE league…Phone/Online League 1!!! :rolleyes: Based on this information, I would conclude that Phone/Online League 1 probably has a couple highly ranked “elite” owners. Sure enough, TWO teams from Phone/Online League 1 are in the top 77 elite teams. These two teams may or may not be owned by good managers. What I’m certain of is they are getting helped by being in such a poor league. Chicago and Las Vegas have more deadbeats than normal. New York has less deadbeats than normal. And Florida jumps off the charts with more than 50% less deadbeats than normal!! Floridians, I owe you an apology. The numbers say you’ve been playing in tough leagues. Since I’m a numbers guy, I have to accept this. My apologies for my bashing the past two years.



Final Conclusion coming up…

[Greg Ambrosius]

GG, be careful of who you are calling deadbeat owners. Take a look at the list again and some folks you are trying to single out are NFBC veterans who have had success in the past and believe it or not could be having a down year with lots of injuries. Or just a down year. And if you're trying to single out one of the phone leagues as your case study through 12 weeks of one season, go to that league and look at the list of owners again before singling out this crew. Dobies. Joe Thelen. Will Robertson. Donn Johnson. Ira Kerker. Lots of NFBC vets who would make any league tough.



Feel free to continue with your facts, but you're already apologizing to folks for your past assumptions. By the look of things, you may need to do it again.

[Gordon Gekko II]

Tying together Venues by Elite teams and Worst teams gives me this:



Makeup of 77 Elite teams:

Chicago 16 (33% MORE than it should be)

Las Vegas 27 (13% less than it should be)

New York 25 (exactly the number it should be)

Florida 6 (14% less than it should be)

Online/Phone 3 (50% MORE than it should be)



Makeup of 77 Worst teams:

Chicago 13 (8% MORE than it should be)

Las Vegas 33 (6% MORE than it should be)

New York 24 (4% less than it should be)

Florida 3 (57% less than it should be)

Online/Phone 4 (100% MORE than it should be)



Chicago – Has some talented owners. Also, is ranked the 2nd worst venue by % of deadbeat teams.

Las Vegas – Talent level may be lacking, or maybe a decent enough % of people are mentally drained from the flight to Vegas and/or whatever partying they do before the main event. They have more than their share of deadbeats, but that hasn’t translated into results yet.

New York – Basically the most stable Venue. Results have played out as they should.

Florida – 57% less deadbeats than expected. WOW! I guess you won’t find me drafting there!!

Online/Phone – Total joke (based on the numbers). In addition, THREE teams from the SAME league (Phone/Online League 1!!!) are ranked in the 77 worst teams of the past three years. Quite an accomplishment…NOT!



Here’s an overall main event look at the bottom 5 teams in Phone/Online League 1

Overall 2009 ranking

361

364

374

376

378



That’s right, in the bottom 30 teams of the 2009 NFBC, FIVE of them are from Phone/Online League 1?!?!?! In reality, there should only be 1 or 2 teams expected to be in the bottom 30. FIVE is just so far off the charts that WTF is going on. A couple theories I have: 1) Some Phone/Online drafters could be doing so because they are too busy to go to a “live” venue. But, I have to wonder, if you are too busy to do that, maybe you’re also to busy to do a satisfactory job on your baseball prep and managing your team. 2) The less money invested, the less time people put into it. No air fare, parking fees, hotel bills, food expenses, taxi, etc.. Either way, these Online/Phone league need to be looked at closely. The numbers NEVER lie. Let’s see what they look like at the end of the season.



My rankings as far as toughest venues to win the 100K.

1 - New York (toughest)

2 – Florida

3 – Las Vegas

.

.

.

{Small break}

.

.

.

4 – Chicago

.

.

.

.

.

{Big Break}

.

.

.

.

.

5 - Online/Phone (easiest)

[Gordon Gekko II]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

And if you're trying to single out one of the phone leagues as your case study through 12 weeks of one season i go by numbers greg. once the numbers came out, Florida deserved an apology. i was basing my initial bashing WITHOUT looking at all the facts. now that i have the data in front of me, it is crystal clear.



as for the phone/online leagues...in the bottom 30 teams of the 2009 NFBC, FIVE of them are from Phone/Online League 1?!?!?! In reality, there should only be 1 or 2 teams expected to be in the bottom 30. FIVE is just so far off the charts that WTF is going on.

[Gordon Gekko II]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

GG, be careful of who you are calling deadbeat owners. deadbeat TEAMS, not deadbeat OWNERS. i actually removed the team name and owner name from my analysis, so i don't even know which owners or teams they are. i just know the numbers.

[Less than Dave]

I don't care if it is much easier, I'd MUCH rather draft live at an event than online or over the phone... there's nothing like a live draft...

[Gordon Gekko II]

Originally posted by Less than Dave:

I don't care if it is much easier, I'd MUCH rather draft live at an event than online or over the phone... there's nothing like a live draft... some would say...there's nothing like 100K!

[DOUGHBOYS]

Hypothetical, Mark-



Would you rather draft against 14 other sharks from Chicago or 14 guppies from New york?



What I'm getting at, even with your numbers, the stars still have to align in your favor for league draws.

[Chest Rockwell]

Originally posted by Less than Dave:

I don't care if it is much easier, I'd MUCH rather draft live at an event than online or over the phone... there's nothing like a live draft... My super league is for more money and my team is better. I still am much more emotionally tied to my main event team. Why? Because one was done in person and the other one over the phone. I agree..



If you are in this for the money you may want to listen to some of Mark's thoughts. I would still encourage any new person to go to the city where you will have the most fun. If there is anything to this analysis ( I personally do not)and you seek winning money first then you may want to pay attention. Bottom line is the competition is tough everywhere.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

And if you're trying to single out one of the phone leagues as your case study through 12 weeks of one season i go by numbers greg. once the numbers came out, Florida deserved an apology. i was basing my initial bashing WITHOUT looking at all the facts. now that i have the data in front of me, it is crystal clear.



as for the phone/online leagues...in the bottom 30 teams of the 2009 NFBC, FIVE of them are from Phone/Online League 1?!?!?! In reality, there should only be 1 or 2 teams expected to be in the bottom 30. FIVE is just so far off the charts that WTF is going on. [/QUOTE]If you feel 12 weeks of data is crystal clear, then no need to apologize again. We'll see. But it's good to see you apologize to Florida after two years of bashing that destination "WITHOUT looking at the facts." Pretty crazy.



Phone/Online League 2 has only one team among the bottom 36 teams. What does that tell you?? Considering there are 26 leagues, that's WAY off the charts. Must be a tougher phone league.



Honestly, it's fine to throw FACTS out there to create a dialogue. I'm not sure what the goal here is. If it's to find the easiest way to win $100,000, then it's valuable. But yesterday you felt Chicago was the yellow brick road to the wizard and today it's finding the right phone league that includes several past NFBC champions. What will the analysis be tomorrow?



Again, carry on with the FACTS. The data from the first three seasons are just as easy to access as the last three years, so feel free to post a more complete city-by-city analysis of the NFBC. Those early years produced our NY champions, remember?

[headhunters]

dear ad hominem- admit i have not read the whole post and will trust your facts. the problem isn't the facts- it is the conclusions you draw from the facts. those conclusions are not supported by the facts. but hey -if it makes you feel better so be it. your the guy that knows a coin toss is 50-50, sees 12 heads in a row. lets everyone know that gee- heads came up 12 times in a row and i conclude THIS. you can't conclude anything. people that think they can- just don't get it. no matter how many facts, #'s ,statistical analysis you do that next toss is........ 50/50. the best part about games that involve some luck and some skill is that the people that have skill and spend time will win more than others. they just won't win all the time because this isn't chess. in fact i bet someone that wanted to could make a pretty good case that it is harder to win a league with 5 bad owners and 3 good ones. of course we would 1st have to define bad and good. and of course if someone wanted to- when they had a bad result they could make an excuse. say they came to chicago and did poorly- they could make an excuse. beltran and johann aren't making any. gotta admire that.

[Gordon Gekko II]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

If you feel 12 weeks of data is crystal clear, then no need to apologize again. We'll see. But it's good to see you apologize to Florida after two years of bashing that destination "WITHOUT looking at the facts." Pretty crazy.



Phone/Online League 2 has only one team among the bottom 36 teams. What does that tell you?? Considering there are 26 leagues, that's WAY off the charts. Must be a tougher phone league.



Honestly, it's fine to throw FACTS out there to create a dialogue. I'm not sure what the goal here is. If it's to find the easiest way to win $100,000, then it's valuable. But yesterday you felt Chicago was the yellow brick road to the wizard and today it's finding the right phone league that includes several past NFBC champions. What will the analysis be tomorrow?



Again, carry on with the FACTS. The data from the first three seasons are just as easy to access as the last three years, so feel free to post a more complete city-by-city analysis of the NFBC. Those early years produced our NY champions, remember? See how much more intelligent I sound when the data is actually looked at. My fault for not looking at the data more closely before.



12 weeks of 2009 data is what it is. Someone is leading the overall chase for 100K with only 12 weeks of data. I’m sure that data point is meaningful for someone. 5 teams FROM THE SAME LEAGUE IN THE BOTTOM 30 is meaningful to me. I’m not sure if there was EVER 5 teams in the bottom 30 ANY year of the NFBC. If there was, I’d love to see where the top teams from that league finished. Maybe I’ll look at that over the weekend. Hopefully over the course of the season, the numbers change for the better. Guys that look at and value normal distributions could use some of that. “Touchy feely” guys don’t care, and that’s fine. There are 26 leagues so, on average, 1 team from every league should be in the bottom 30. Some leagues will have two teams. Some leagues may even have 3, but they would be in the minority. But 5!!



I believe this is the first year of separate online/phone leagues, so I think it’s important to see how those leagues play out, from a statistical perspective. I’m just reporting the numbers as they stand as of June 26th. I’ll report them at the end of the season as well. Hopefully I’ll have better news to report.

[Edwards Kings]

My two cents, and we all know what two cents are worth.



Mark, the analysis is interesting, but can you accept that the primary inference on the Online League data is predicated on incomplete data? I know it may be the only data available, but it may not be enough to draw any real information.



I appreciate you did not look at specific teams and owners because you did not want to specifically call anyone out. That would be unfair. But without looking at how those experienced online owners who are not having their 2009 NFBC experience go as well as they had hoped fared when they previously attended live events leaves a hole in the data and making the inference (or conclusion) that the Online leagues are somehow offering an easier road to the $100k very shakey.



Also, this is the first year of the Online Leagues. Remember that dog I mentioned in an earlier post? This a part of the first year for this option. We haven't seen enough. You will need a few more years of complete data in order to draw an assumption (and no matter what, it will always end in an assumption) that a savvy owner looking for better odds can bank on.



In short, I hear what you are saying and thanks for recognizing that Florida drafters can hold their own.

[Edwards Kings]

Sorry...you made some of the same points as I was typing.

[Gordon Gekko II]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I'm not sure what the goal here is. kinda thinking outloud right now.

[Gordon Gekko II]

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Hypothetical, Mark-



Would you rather draft against 14 other sharks from Chicago or 14 guppies from New york?



What I'm getting at, even with your numbers, the stars still have to align in your favor for league draws. even though we say our indivudual draft and individual faab bids are the most important attributes of having a good/bad season. we forget that a key component of BOTH of them is the skill of your leaguemates.



you have a better draft if you are going against guppies. worse vs sharks.



you are able to pick up better talent on the waiver wire vs guppies. not as much vs sharks.



i'll take the guppies every time. i don't care what venue they are in.

[Less than Dave]

Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:

quote:Originally posted by Less than Dave:

I don't care if it is much easier, I'd MUCH rather draft live at an event than online or over the phone... there's nothing like a live draft... My super league is for more money and my team is better. I still am much more emotionally tied to my main event team. Why? Because one was done in person and the other one over the phone. I agree..



If you are in this for the money you may want to listen to some of Mark's thoughts. I would still encourage any new person to go to the city where you will have the most fun. If there is anything to this analysis ( I personally do not)and you seek winning money first then you may want to pay attention. Bottom line is the competition is tough everywhere. [/QUOTE]Kent, I agree... however I think what makes me more invested in the main event is the collectiveness of it... everyone is rated on one large scale instead of just one 15-team league... it's more exciting to see how you stack up against the entirety of the best fantasy baseball players in the world (or something close to).. also, the shot at the $100,000 and the relative fame that comes with that is enticing as well (get your pic and an article in a fantasy baseball magazine)...

[sportsbettingman]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

[QUOTE]The data from the first three seasons are just as easy to access as the last three years, so feel free to post a more complete city-by-city analysis of the NFBC. Those early years produced our NY champions, remember? JMO, but the first year, or even the first two of a NEW event (15 team leagues for baseball or 14 team leagues for football) are much less important to study than the more modern years when most participants have gone through the learning curve of what it takes to win such an event.



On a separate subject...I also think it would be more fair to adjust the overall lifetime rankings based on modern sellouts, rather than the number used currently. Winning in a sellout year deserves more credit than winning when there were far less teams to beat.

[Gordon Gekko II]

here is the average overall ranking for the top 5 teams in each league for 2009.



Phone/Online League 1 ; 33 :rolleyes:

Chicago League 4 ; 35 :rolleyes:

Chicago League 2 ; 36 :rolleyes:

Las Vegas League 8 ; 41

Las Vegas League 1 ; 45

Phone/Online League 2 ; 48

New York League 1 ; 52

Las Vegas League 5 ; 57

Orlando League 2 ; 58

Las Vegas League 4 ; 66

Las Vegas League 9 ; 67

Las Vegas League 10 ; 67

Las Vegas League 7 ; 73

Las Vegas League 3 ; 73

Las Vegas League 11 ; 76

Las Vegas League 6 ; 77

Orlando League 1 ; 77

Las Vegas League 2 ; 79

Chicago League 1 ; 80

New York League 2 ; 81

New York League 3 ; 84

New York League 7 ; 86

New York League 4 ; 87

New York League 5 ; 89

Chicago League 3 ; 100

New York League 6 ; 104





Anyone want to bet that they are inversely proportional to how bad the bottom 5 teams in each league are? meaning New York League 6 has some of the 'best' worst teams in the NFBC and Phone/Online League 1 has some of the worst of the worst teams



[ June 26, 2009, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko II ]

[Gordon Gekko II]

here is the average overall ranking for the BOTTOM 5 teams in each league for 2009.



New York League 5 ; 282

New York League 6 ; 292

Las Vegas League 10 ; 293

Las Vegas League 9 ; 297

Phone/Online League 2 ; 300

New York League 3 ; 307

Las Vegas League 7 ; 307

Las Vegas League 11 ; 309

Chicago League 3 ; 311

Las Vegas League 2 ; 311

Las Vegas League 1 ; 314

Las Vegas League 6 ; 320

Las Vegas League 3 ; 323

New York League 4 ; 324

Orlando League 1 ; 324

Las Vegas League 4 ; 330

New York League 2 ; 332

Orlando League 2 ; 332

New York League 7 ; 333

Chicago League 1 ; 335

Chicago League 2 ; 337

Chicago League 4 ; 338

New York League 1 ; 339

Las Vegas League 5 ; 340

Las Vegas League 8 ; 356

Phone/Online League 1 ; 371

[Top Dawg]

Mark - My buddy is in phone leage one. He tends to agree with some of what you are saying here. In fact, he brought it to my attention a couple of weeks ago when he noticed his league had 6 teams in the top 40 and 3 in the top 16. It appears to him (as supported by your data) that several teams in his league are not competitive at all. Ironically, it makes winning his league a bit harder (he feels) as the top 5-6 teams are eating up points gained each week, making it harder to pass the better teams as the weaker teams fall by the wayside. But, it also makes climbing the ladder for the $100K easier.



When you pool people, you will get some leagues with a batch of top rated players and other leagues with more of the lower ranked players. That is often luck of the draw. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the balance of the year.



Pete



Pete

[Edwards Kings]

Originally posted by Top Dawg:

Mark - My buddy is in phone leage one. It appears to him (as supported by your data) that several teams in his league are not competitive at all.

Pete Pete, ask your buddy, are the teams bringing up the rear still active? Are they trying, or have they stopped making moves?

[Gordon Gekko II]

Originally posted by Top Dawg:

Mark - My buddy is in phone leage one. He tends to agree with some of what you are saying here. In fact, he brought it to my attention a couple of weeks ago when he noticed his league had 6 teams in the top 40 and 3 in the top 16. It appears to him (as supported by your data) that several teams in his league are not competitive at all. Ironically, it makes winning his league a bit harder (he feels) as the top 5-6 teams are eating up points gained each week, making it harder to pass the better teams as the weaker teams fall by the wayside. But, it also makes climbing the ladder for the $100K easier.



When you pool people, you will get some leagues with a batch of top rated players and other leagues with more of the lower ranked players. That is often luck of the draw. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the balance of the year.



Pete



Pete so I was on to something and headhunters had his head buried in the sand. just like i said.



pete - you are correct. makes winning your league harder, but the 100K is EASIER with a bunch of deadbeat teams in your league.



thanks for posting pete. it probably took some courage to do so.

[King of Queens]

Originally posted by Top Dawg:

When you pool people, you will get some leagues with a batch of top rated players and other leagues with more of the lower ranked players. Hi Pete!