Now Presenting: Conditional Bid DEMO!!!

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:36 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Greg, I am in favor of this method. I'll make that perfectly clear.

BUT, the number one rule in any fantasy sports endeavor is to never change rules after sign ups.

This rule trumps every other rule or suggestion.

Again,I am in favor, but not this year. One reason I don't like the new method is that it takes more time - not executing, just thinking. FAAB days already are crunched, wouldn't look forward to spending even more time.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:00 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

Greg, I am in favor of this method. I'll make that perfectly clear.

BUT, the number one rule in any fantasy sports endeavor is to never change rules after sign ups.

This rule trumps every other rule or suggestion.

Again,I am in favor, but not this year. One reason I don't like the new method is that it takes more time - not executing, just thinking. FAAB days already are crunched, wouldn't look forward to spending even more time. [/QUOTE]Again, I have no problem admitting that I pushed for something that I thought would be an improvement for our players on the old system but may be more complicated after all. Keeping it simple stupid is probably the best advice. This was my idea to change it and maybe the time isn't right, which I'll admit.

I know we have programming time invested in this already, but I'll talk with Cory and the team and go back to highest bid for all bids including conditional bids if that makes more sense. And Dan is right, that is in our rules that way. No problem. Now I just have to apologize to our programming team.

This is my fault. Now let's keep looking at the functional setup of the software and I'll take care of the other part. Sound good?

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:12 am

Greg - At a time where many news things are being thrown at us, it's probably best to table changing FAAB until next year.

Good job on the possible improvement though. If you could have the programming team remove the "auction style bidding" I described with the Heyward example, I think you'd be on the right track!

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:13 am

And someone else alrady mentioned it, let's make sure we have at the minimum all of the functionality we had with STATS. if that is accomplished at a minimum, you will have a lot of happy owners

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:16 am

Personnally i like being able to bid a lower amount on my first choice than my second choice. If my second choice is more high profile player then it would take a higher bid, To get my first priority i might have to overbid and ive never thought this was right. It was the only thing that i liked better than what we had before and now the intellectually challenged having a problem with it.

[ March 06, 2010, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: Bama ]

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:21 am

Originally posted by Bama:

To get my first priority i might have to overbid and ive never thought this was right. It was the only thing that i liked better than what we had before and now the intellectually challenged having a problem with it. THEN DON'T OVERBID!!!! DUH!!!!

intellectually challenged IS RIGHT!!!

Plymouth · Post by **Plymouth** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:21 am

Thanks Greg, going back to the old way of bidding is best in this point in time.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:23 am

Originally posted by Bama:

Personnally i like being able to bid a lower amount on my first choice than my second choice. If my second choice is more high profile player then it would take a higher bid, To get my first priority i might have to overbid and ive never thought this was right. It was the only thing that i liked better than what we had before and now the intellectually challenged having a problem with it. Well, that's what I thought too, but maybe that's something to be discussed down the road. Maybe I jumped the gun here.

ALL-IN JD · Post by **ALL-IN JD** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:37 am

Greg, I absolutely agree with your thinking and it would make the FAAB process even better as an owner should definitely have an option if they would like to go higher with a bid for the second, third or whatever option. That being said, I also think that introducing this so close to start of the season, along with unveiling the draft software, is just not prudent. As a previous poster said, it would be great to have this next year, with a whole year to fine tune the process. Just my two cents.

Jeff

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:41 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Bama:

Personnally i like being able to bid a lower amount on my first choice than my second choice. If my second choice is more high profile player then it would take a higher bid, To get my first priority i might have to overbid and ive never thought this was right. It was the only thing that i liked better than what we had before and now the intellectually challenged having a problem with it. Well, that's what I thought too, but maybe that's something to be discussed down the road. Maybe I jumped the gun here. [/QUOTE]I think it has been discussed ad nauseum

and the conclusion i thought was we would if we could and now that we can we cant. I dont get it. We get all the bad changes without discussion but something fore the better then it cant be done.

ALL-IN JD · Post by **ALL-IN JD** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:44 am

Bama, i'm with you 1000 percent but unfortunately I do not believe can or can not is the issue at hand.

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:48 am

Originally posted by fireballs:

Bama, i'm with you 1000 percent but unfortunately I do not believe can or can not is the issue at hand. The way the Faab is set up is changing so now is the time to do it. The contest is a month away so i dont really see the problem.

[ March 06, 2010, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: Bama ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 5:50 am

Originally posted by Gekko:

And someone else alrady mentioned it, let's make sure we have at the minimum all of the functionality we had with STATS. if that is accomplished at a minimum, you will have a lot of happy owners

KJ's list is a great starting point and we'll talk with the IT team on Monday to see what is possible to add. Again, this is just the demo that we wanted input on, while also assuring you that we were working on this and had a good base set up. We can improve on what we have with everyone's suggestions. Thanks all.

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 6:01 am

Someone made a good point on not changing the rules. Now I'm not sure where you can find the rules from the main site but on the satellite signup thread, the satellite rules are posted.

And one say:

Conditional Bids: Conditional bids also can be offered. In the event you may lose out on a player, you can place one or more conditional bids for other players during the bidding time frame. The first conditional bid will become relevant only if you lose out on your primary bid. Subsequent conditional bids will become relevant only if the previous conditional bid fails. Bids do not require conditional bids. Bids may have several sequential conditional bids. Participants should note that the computer takes the HIGHEST BIDS and processes each bid in that order if you have multiple FAAB acquisition bids. Conditional Bids: Conditional bids also can be offered. In the event you may lose out on a player, you can place one or more conditional bids for other players during the bidding time frame. The first conditional bid will become relevant only if you lose out on your primary bid. Subsequent conditional bids will become relevant only if the previous conditional bid fails. Bids do not require conditional bids. Bids may have several sequential conditional bids. Participants should note that the computer takes the HIGHEST BIDS and processes each bid in that order if you have multiple FAAB acquisition bids. In addition, putting a larger bid on a conditional bid than a primary bid is not allowed. In addition, putting a larger bid on a conditional bid than a primary bid is not allowed.

These are the rules we signed up for. I guess I would be somewhat upset if I didn't follow this thread and something else was done on the first FAAB process.

Bama · Post by **Bama** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 6:18 am

Im glad someone found a set of rules. Most people signed up Before rules were published and still havent found them. The rules with regard to faab from my standpoint dont come relevent till the contest starts. We change eligibility rules midstream and no one complains. Change the stuff that dont need changing things but dont do the needed changes.

george k · Post by **george k** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 7:38 am

We have followed these FAAB rules for six years. Maybe Mr. OBama will want to change health care

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:15 am

Originally posted by Bama:

Im glad someone found a set of rules. Most people signed up Before rules were published and still havent found them. The rules with regard to faab from my standpoint dont come relevent till the contest starts. We change eligibility rules midstream and no one complains. Change the stuff that dont need changing things but dont do the needed changes. To some extent, things have started. Actual draft have been completed. If the rules that were in place were changed, I would suggest that people should have the option to opt out and receive a refund. This would include those who have yet to draft and those who have already drafted. We all know that isn't going to happen for those drafted. I suspect a person who has not drafted could ask for a refund.

From the majority of posts on specific situations, I have seen several answers given. Maybe the software could be run to give the actual answer. At a minimum that would seem prudent. The most reasonable option would be to wait until at least a select mid-season league to try this out. How many of the 100s of participants actually know what is being considered? Not everyone reads all these posts.

Greg, Tom and the entire crew earned a lot of respect and goodwill that first season when only 195 signed up. There were no satellites to offset expenses for the main event payoff. The prize list was based on 300 as I recall. The prize list was not modified and they paid off according to that number. The total payoff percent exceeded 100% of income. This FAAB process has been in place since that first year. Changing it now after leagues have already drafted might not be the best tactic.

Sebadiah23 · Post by **Sebadiah23** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:37 am

If not mentioned already, please add the crucial stats such as games or at least at-bats. NFBBC has this flaw and it's extremely annoying to judge a player in the last week if you don't know how many games they played (in basketball) or in the case of baseball, how many at-bats or innings.

This is a huge, huge point for doing effective research without spending hours to do it.

-Craig Kielinski

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:48 am

Originally posted by George Kleemann:

We have followed these FAAB rules for six years. Maybe Mr. OBama will want to change health care

Sandi, you are getting a little cranky here. Yikes.

Change is never easy, but we'll keep the rules the same. I think I said that already. We're going to be okay with this online setup, I promise you. And either way, you know you and George can call me before, during or after an online draft and I'll be there to help. So hang on, the world isn't coming to an end with this new setup.

The Mighty Men · Post by **The Mighty Men** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:53 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by George Kleemann:

We have followed these FAAB rules for six years. Maybe Mr. OBama will want to change health care

Sandi, you are getting a little cranky here. Yikes.

Change is never easy, but we'll keep the rules the same. I think I said that already. We're going to be okay with this online setup, I promise you. And either way, you know you and George can call me before, during or after an online draft and I'll be there to help. So hang on, the world isn't coming to an end with this new setup. [/QUOTE]Man, you are dedicated. I thought you'd be getting hammered right about now.

Oaktown · Post by **Oaktown** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 12:02 pm

Originally posted by Sebadiah23:

If not mentioned already, please add the crucial stats such as games or at least at-bats. NFBBC has this flaw and it's extremely annoying to judge a player in the last week if you don't know how many games they played (in basketball) or in the case of baseball, how many at-bats or innings.

This is a huge, huge point for doing effective research without spending hours to do it.

-Craig Kielinski Agree 100% here...as well as % ownership as there was with Stats.

husky88fan · Post by **husky88fan** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 2:07 pm

I may be missing something here, but as long as the faab algorithm is set up to take the highest bid for each free agent, it shouldn't matter where on the list that bid appears. The highest valid bid will always win. Essentially, your highest bid will always be your primary bid no matter how your conditionals are listed.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 2:36 pm

All,

What happend to the ability to copy a thread of bids between teams? If one of the players isn't available in that league, you get a preview and it shows the player bids that will 'disapear'

This would really make is much much easier to manage more teams!!!

Red Sox Nation · Post by **Red Sox Nation** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 2:59 pm

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

All,

What happend to the ability to copy a thread of bids between teams? If one of the players isn't available in that league, you get a preview and it shows the player bids that will 'disapear'

This would really make is much much easier to manage more teams!!! YES. This would save hours. Please get the tekkies on this. Thanks

Bull Pen Pugs · Post by **Bull Pen Pugs** » Sat Mar 06, 2010 4:41 pm

1. I think spacing of rows/columns is way to big... (small issue)

Goes without saying, need to see all bids saved on same page. Need to be able to bid on a player and then make condional bids, while being able to change positions to select different players.

You are getting close.

[ March 06, 2010, 10:58 PM: Message edited by: Bull Pen Pugs ]