Auction Rules Change for 2006

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:46 pm

Originally posted by JerseyPaul:

quote:Originally posted by fandango:

it was a panic on JERSEY PAUL's part , cause he had 15th pick...he wanted to stir up the pot, but what he suceeded in was finishing out of the money and pissing off a lot of people in the process! The good news is that another team had the same strategy so I can beat them at K's and W's because they don't have any MRs. That gives me a potential of 49 pitching points out of 75.

Obviously everybody does great according to their own projections, but I hit all my targets for the hitting categories. According to the reputable service I use the projections for my starters are:

.291 average

1234 runs

1170 rbis

318 hrs

190 sbs

That would put me 1st in each category. Obviously that won't happen in the real world but I realistically can hope for 68 hitting points out of 75.

68 + 48 = 116 (The average 1st place score last year)

Panic? No, I don't think so.

C Olivo (13)

C Lieberthal (15) b/u Y. Molina (26)

1B Mike Sweeney (11) b/u Carlos Pena (17)

2B Tony Womack (10) b/u Luis Gonzalez (27)

3B Aramis Ramirez (2)

SS Derek Jeter (1) b/u Alex Gonzalez (22)

CI Chipper Jones (4)

MI Tadahito Iguchi (12)

OF Dave Roberts (7)

OF Andruw Jones (8)

OF Lew Ford (9)

OF Eric Byrnes (14)

OF Cliff Floyd (16) b/u Bigbie (20) or move Chipper to OF

Okay, Sweeney is an injury risk but Pena is certainly a very good backup for him. Likewise with Floyd where I can move Pena to CI and play Chipper in the OF.

Closers:

Billy Wagner and b/u Tim Worrell

Keith Foulke

Strong Candidates due to injury:

Yancy Brazoban

JJ Putz

Good ERA/WHIP MRs

Ryan Madson

Huston Street

Scott Linebrink

Chris Hammond

Steve Kline

and a defense move: Alfonseca, the backup to Team 3's number 3 closer

Panic? Yes, the rest of the league. [/QUOTE]Hate too burst your bubble, but your assuming everyone has their highest projected season. Using 6 publications you're looking more at the following stats, which willget you about 45 out of 75 points on Offense:

Runs 1118

HR 254

RBI 1008

SB 174

AVG .284

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:02 pm

I also used the closer only strategy in LV league 1. Those who cry about it in my estimation simply weren't prepared. It is total BS to say that it is "not the way the game was meant to be played". What, by your local league? Any analysis of drafts in last year's NCOFB and WCOFB would have seen that strategy employed. Again, lack of preparation if you are whining about it. Might as well whine that player selection must follow the particular magazine you are using. What, drafting Albert Pujols as the the 3rd pick? That's not the way the game is meant to be played! My magazine said he was the number 4 pick! I'm filing a complaint!!!

The richness of fantasy baseball is due to in part the multitude of strategies. If you don't like it, simply play fantasy football where there is almost no strategy.

Don't just study the baseball players. Study the rules. Use them to your advantage. The excellent players know not only the baseball players but also how to adjust and react to the stragies of their fellow competitors. Don't play if you expect everyone else to use your logic.

PW Express · Post by **PW Express** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:15 pm

I was in NY League 7 and was happy to see to "Einsteins" using the strategy they used. Neither has ANY CHANCE whatsoever of winning the overall prive and JerseyPaul is sniffing glue if he thinks he will finish anywhere near the top in our league with that team. Neither team that employed that strategy will finish in the money as far as I can see.

Jeff(Team 8)

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:16 pm

what love in NY. figures. the year i don't go...tons of fireworks.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:23 pm

Its all been tried before. Without success I might add. You might be able to pull it off in a 4x4 single league if everything breaks right and theres trading. Not the case here.

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:33 pm

Well you may be right. I'm hoping not. If you study some fantasy baseball history you would see that the strategy HAS been used successfully before in a 5x5 league. I won my WCOFB division using it in 2003. Last year I placed 4th in my respective WCOFB and NCOFB divisions using the strategy - good, but out of the money. I learned from my mistakes and made adjustments this year (hopefully). It is indeed a high risk strategy. I and a few others simply don't adhere to the herd mentality. Maybe I will come in 15th in my league. Could happen. You should be happy to take our money.

Bandit · Post by **Bandit** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:37 pm

What I'd like to change is that you must fill a complete roster with your dollars.

Either allow you to nominate reserves or make it a full 30 player auction.

And good luck with LIMA

PW Express · Post by **PW Express** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:40 pm

Walla, I couldnt agree with you more. Tanking two categories is quite the strategy. You think the geniuses that utilized that strategy might have thought that if it was so successful, how come there arent books written about it by the so called experts. Guess they thought it was top secret or something.

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 2:47 pm

Understood. I would have no problem with that rule change as long as it is explicitly spelled out. Again, spend time studying the rules and trying to predict what strategies might arise from them. Be prepared to adjust accordingly. After the third year of this high stakes competition and spending some time with some these guys I learned that there are some very, very good players. People with excellent backgrounds in statistical analysis and mathematics. They use these skills. I was reminded of the book Bringing Down the House. Don't understimate your competition.

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:02 pm

PW, I'm no genius and not even close to the level of an expert. I do have a 2003 WCOFB division title (high stakes league) using this strategy - lack of books nonwithstanding. Where did your strategy cause you to place in these highstakes leagues?

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:04 pm

Originally posted by JerseyPaul:

quote:Originally posted by :

JerseyPaul,

When you calculated those projections, how do you get to 318 HRs? I'd like to see a breakdown because those offensive numbers are good for 1st overall...

Could it be that you included you bench players

Here goes:

C Olivo 22 (15)

C Lieberthal 22 (15)

1B Mike Sweeney 30 (18)

2B Tony Womack 5 (4)

3B Aramis Ramirez 37 (36)

SS Derek Jeter 21 (18)

CI Chipper Jones 33 (28)

MI Tadahito Iguchi 17 (12)

OF Dave Roberts 6 (3)

OF Andruw Jones 31 (34)

OF Lew Ford 17 (14)

OF Eric Byrnes 21 (20)

OF Cliff Floyd 25 (20)

DH Hafner 31 (32)

Total 318

Carlos Pena at 29 will be available to boost the total by sitting Roberts and moving Chipper to OF if some of those don't happen. Alex Gonzalez instead of Womack can also boost power at the cost of speed. [/QUOTE]Jersey,

On my projections, 269 HRs, 30 less than my team projects out. Custom projections, I don't use the magazines. My ests in parentheses above.

JerseyPaul · Post by **JerseyPaul** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:04 pm

Thanks Zefurs. I suspect that your numbers are pretty good. I'll probably wind up with Carlos Pena active and Roberts on the bench for a lot of the year, especially when the weather gets good and the balls start flying and/or play Gonzalez (COL) for Womack.

Paley · Post by **Paley** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:18 pm

Some quick thoughts on the null pitcher and/or no starter plans...

Zero divided by zero is undefined. It is not zero. It is not infinity. There are situations such as L'Hopital's Rule in calculus where you can get some meaning for it in special situations. But I don't know how you deal with an undefined value in terms of allocating points.

Tom and I heard about what Perry did. It took us very little time to go, "Wow, that pretty much has to be a good strategy, doesn't it?" Personally, I think that those folks who figured it out first were brilliant. Barring a huge rash of injuries, teams of that type will likely finish in the money.

We did not take a starter all weekend. We took a bunch of middle relievers and we did spend a little on closers to try and capture large chunks of eight categories. But the principle is still the same. It does not look or feel like a sensible baseball team. That said, I feel no guilt about the approach.

I would feel guilty if we had applied a strategy that we thought to be less effective than a strategy which we thought was optimal. The point of the exercise is to accumulate points.

I do feel somewhat for Greg Ambrosius as it is no fun to see this happen at your event. On the bright side, it is one year, and he has plenty of time to consider how he wishes to modify the rules for next year.

Paley · Post by **Paley** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:24 pm

To address Walla Walla's note, I would point out that getting 8 categories out of 10 in a 5x5 is much better than getting 6 categories out of 8 in 4x4.

5x5: 15*8 + 1*2 = 122 points out of 150 (81.3%)

4x4: 15*6 + 1*2 = 92 points out of 120 (76.7%)

This, of course, assumes that all categories are captured. But one could miss out on a fair number of points and still do extremely well by tanking two categories.

mdz129 · Post by **mdz129** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 7:13 pm

Roto baseball I believe has always had a minimum of 1000 IP and 3400 AB. The rules need to be changed for next year to have some reasonable number of IP-- 800?.

I heard about this strategy just before the AL Auction at 4pm on Friday. I'm donating my $650, having tried this concept with 2 closers, 7 minor leaguers, and only a decent offense because of poor decisions. In retrospect, I don't see the fun in having this team and league and I'm looking forward to next year's rule changes.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:34 pm

Originally posted by Auction King:

Wow, little did I realize I would be competing with people looking to take advantage of the scoring system to win a league. I guess good for them if they win, but it doesn't seem like legit fantasy baseball to me. I heard Van Hook spent $9 on his pitching staff of players that will never throw an inning to load up on hitting and win 90-94 points. Two guys tried a 2 closer approach, all hitting strategy to try to finish top three at well in at least 3 different leagues that I know of. It totally distorts value of players. CDM had the same issue in their high roller league two years ago and they changed the rules to require a 900 ip rule to prevent that from happening again after the guy won the league. One owner that tried it in the NFBC had only played fantasy baseball for one year and figured he could win a league, not because he knew anything about fantasy baseball, but because from the numbers he ran, he figured he would be easily be in the top three. I would like to see feedback from some other auction owners as to what they thought of the strategy employed by several owners this weekend. While it is within the rules, it seems kind of bush leagues to me. Any owner trying that strategy must know they could not win a league any other way. Well as one of the NL auction guys who took 2 closers and minor league pitchers I have to say, that if you want to play for trophies or Tshirts I'm all for the purity of the game BS you're spouting, but when playing for a considerable amount of money I'm going to do all I can to win, including reading and understanding the rules and using them to my advantage. As far as that being the only way I can win, more BS, I finished third last year 2.5 points out of first after leading most of the year with a normal pitching staff that only generated 33 points. I may not win this year, there's lots of risk involved, but I'd be willing to bet I get more than 33 pitching points on less money than I spent last year. Rotoworld did a feature article early this year on auctions with no minimum innings requirements stating that what I did was the optimum winning strategy, having already decided to go that route I was not too happy to see that article published. If they want to change the rules for next year that's fine by me, but what I did this year was certainly within the rules and while I don't think it would work in the snake draft it's most definitely a strategy you could win a 13 team auction league with.

Sorry you think I've tarnished the contest somehow but I'm not looking for your approval, I just want your money.

[ March 21, 2005, 02:41 AM: Message edited by: Ken ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:19 am

Originally posted by viper:

What "0/0" qualifies as is a tough "after-the-fact" question. Hopefully that team asked about this ahead of time and got an answer from Greg. To decide after the fact makes for a very hard decision especially since this owner is singularily effected. Those that drafted only closers at least will have a mathematical ERA & WHIP. I do agree that zero divided by zero is not zero. This is NOT an after the fact ruling as this is a scoring rule that has already been in place. If someone is ASSUMING that by having no innings pitched they automatically win two categories then they could be in for a hard fall (and no he did not contact me beforehand to ask about this ruling). You would need to qualify for that category first to generate any points, which is pretty standard from any industry stat service.

Yes, there is talk that people now want me to institute a minimum innings pitched strategy for 2006 and go back to the 40-man roster eligibility rule we had last year for Draft Day. We'll see if that's needed. I certainly feel like I was trying to allow a system where different strategies could play out and to avoid all of the confusion we had on Draft Day last year when guys couldn't quite figure out if hot shot prospects were officially on MLB 40-man rosters or not. Now I may have to change that.

Let's see which strategies pay off in 2005 first. By dumping two categories (or in some cases three categories), it's a risky proposition to win it all. Those teams have to be perfect in the other 7-8 categories. So let's see how it plays out, but yes there will be some rule changes in 2006 as a result of what happened on Draft Day 2005.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:36 am

Originally posted by Paley:

I do feel somewhat for Greg Ambrosius as it is no fun to see this happen at your event. On the bright side, it is one year, and he has plenty of time to consider how he wishes to modify the rules for next year. Please Josh, don't shed a tear for me. The no minimum innings pitched rule was in effect last year as well and I don't remember our overall champion coming from this strategy. In fact, Artie used the opposite strategy: going with just one closer on Draft Day. As Hank said, several people tried this strategy last year and a few had success and others didn't.

What I was shocked by though was the strategy Perry used in the LV Mixed League and that will be addressed. It's one thing to draft all relievers and another to draft all Class A players. That loophole will be closed and the NFBC will be better for it.

As a veteran fantasy baseball player, I could never implement the all reliever strategy. NOt because I think it's wrong, just because I'm more of a baseball guy that a mathematician. But I don't think it's wrong. Hell, one guy tried it in the $5K NFBC Ultimate League yesterday and I don't see those 14 other owners on these boards saying it was a farce. It was a different strategy that honestly I think 14 other guys think will backfire on that owner. We'll have to wait and see.

Hank is exactly right that the NFBC brings out the best baseball players in the country and the best minds out there. Fantasy baseball is a marathon and at this point nobody has jumped the gun from the starting line. Let's see if these "all offense" teams dominate the competition. I have a feeling they won't. And if they do, I have a feeling I still won't implement a 900 IP minimum. Maybe 250 IP or maybe 500 IP. Maybe a lot less, maybe not. We'll see. But to be upset and call your league a joke because all 15 owners didn't attack the process the same way is crazy. Adjust on the fly and when you see a guy doing this, make sure you are grabbing the starting pitchers who can help you win the two other pitching categories and finish high enough in the eight other categories to finish ahead of this other owner. Simple as that.

kd.gray · Post by **kd.gray** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 3:59 am

I'm not complaining about stratagies that anybody uses...good luck to them. I will say that wouldn't it be funny if one or two of those single A players got september callups and gave up a 3-run homer in their first inning of work. Myself, I can't remember seeing the all reliever strategy working for a first place finish. I have seen extra SP strategy work in 5x5 leagues that enforced a certain number of SP and RP on your roster. People would look for players listed as relievers that were becoming starters.

The only negative I see to the funky strategies is that it throws a wrench into everyone else's draft strategy and is frustrating to watch during the draft. You guys that are complaining won't feel so bad when the standings come out.

Top Dawg · Post by **Top Dawg** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:02 am

The A, AA player approach has a very clear advantage in an auction. It allows one to bid higher than anyone else on every offensive category player they want to fill their needs; insuring they score tops in each offensive category. Coupled with maybe 2 solidly low ERA/WHIP closers it's almost impossible to beat a team like that. I'm upset that I didn't think of it for my NY AL auction. Perry, you should have shared that little secret with me and we could both be getting yelled at today.

I was also in the Ultimate Draft in NYC yesterday and team 8 ended up with no starters. I don't honestly think it was his intention, but it's what he ended up with. Neither was it my intention (not my partner's) to end up with NO closers or relievers. The draft just went in that direction. We wanted to fill 5-6 rounds of offense first; and by that time most teams had 2 closers. So we moved in a different direction.

Good luck to those who knew the rules. If given a vote, I would vote to add back a minimum innings pitched rule and a minimum at bats rule too. It does make the game more fun to play, at least for me, when I can see my guys doing something other than pitching well in a single A game.

Of course, if the rules are not changed, then more teams will try this approach, watering down the "advantage" somewhat, if not totally watering it down.

Best regards,

Pete

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:45 am

I think use of this unique strategy only 'throws a wrench' in the strategies of those other drafters who are not prepared. I'm glad to thow wrenches - it helps me win if other guys are so distracted they forget what the hell they are doing. A veteran drafter recognizes the strategy immediately and dynamically adjusts. For example, knowing that a certain team or two is not going to pick up a starting pitcher immediately provides an edge in predicting what will be available to you come your turn. You simply can't go into a draft with a static system in your head. You're in trouble if you do. I also agree wholeheartedly that when more teams employ this strategy it will water down the effect. I think that is great and is why we should retain it. I don't mind if the minor leaguers are removed. That may even provide a premium on the injured guys like Steve Trachsel - imagine.

Ken · Post by **Ken** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 5:53 am

It doesn't matter to me how the rules are set up for next year, 40 man rosters, minimum innings, or whatever. I might like one set of rules better than the other but I'll adjust to any rules and not complain or cry if someone drafts his team different than me. When you pay $1250 to play in a contest you should be able to do whatever you want with your team within the rules. I doubt Greg will have to change the rules too much though because this will be a one year shot, if the closers and no starters strategy works this year everyone will try it next year effectively killing it and if it doesn't work no one will try it next year. I think you have to be careful in putting too many restrictions on the game. We could end up with position requirements that could eliminate punting saves, streaming starters, and other strategies. In the big draft if your strategy is draft offense first and closers late, if 2 or 3 people decided to punt saves in your league and leave you some nice closers late, it's an edge for you that won't be there for someone using the same strategy in a different league where no one punted saves. But the playing field will never be perfectly level as long as the option of using different strategies exists and I can live with the fact someone got an advantage over me because someone in his league used a perfectly legal strategy.

I took a big risk in doing what I did that could blow up in my face, but hey, it's my nickle and that song was in the juke box and if I think I can dance to it I'm going to play it. If I fall on my a$$ you can laugh at me, I've got a good sense of humor and I'll laugh with you

but if I win I'm not giving the money back.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:04 am

For the guy a few posts ago who said they ended up with no starters and didn't mean to... uh, LOL

For those who think that punting a 'category or two' is some surefire way to win ... uh, counting cards in Blackjack is a surefire way to win cash gambling - but, what... maybe 5% of the people who try can pull it off?

For those that think ANY strategy is cheating or should be outlawed - that's ridiculous. Just the opposite should be encouraged. ANY strategy you want, any time you want to use it. Being able to bid into specific hitters isn't really all that much of an advantage is it? Most people went into the auction bidding 80-85% of their budget on hitters to begin with. Now someone bids 98% and they gain an EDGE, but my gosh what was given up for that edge... On the flipside, every time someone punts starters they become cheaper for EVERYONE else. Let him have his top scores in hitting any time he likes. The Colorado Rockies (notice I didn't just say defending World Series Champion Colorado Rockies) do the same thing in MLB.

Dave

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:23 am

Imagine there's no starters

Its easy if you try

No wins or strikeouts

Would anybody cry?

You may think that I'm a dreamer

But I'm not the only one

Maybe somedy you'll join us

And your ERA will be at 1.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:32 am

Originally posted by hankstr:

Imagine there's no starters

Its easy if you try

No wins or strikeouts

Would anybody cry?

You may think that I'm a dreamer

But I'm not the only one

Maybe somedy you'll join us

And your ERA will be at 1. If your ERA is higher than your win total... you might be a punter.

If you have more homers in March than strikeouts all season... you might be a punter.

If your pitching staff is calling you to help get them fake ID's to go clubbing... you might be a punter.

If your stockpile of hitters at the end of the auction looks bigger than Imelda Marcos' collection of shoes... you might be a punter.

If your pitching coach starts off the clubhouse meetings with a Spongebob Video... you might be a punter.