NFFC Satellite League Results

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:37 am

Originally posted by fandango:
Greg, what was the percentage of winning teams that came from positions 1 and 2 last year?

was that high number what prompted 3RR?

would you consider 3RR and 4RR if the percentage of winners from 1-2 position remains constant?

it seems to me that position 1 and 2 this year are shaping up to be VERY STRONG TEAMS...especially with the depth of WR this year 18 of the top 32 teams in total points for the main event came from the top three draft spots. My decision to go with 3RR was based on past results in the NFFC over the last three years, the perception that our owners had about drafting toward the back of a straight serpentine 14-team draft, and the fact that 3RR actually makes a lot of sense for football where one player can be so dominant. I don't think our format needs further tinkering with like 4RR as right now the combination of KDS/3RR seems to be make most folks happy with the worst part of my job: Assigning draft spots.

Yes, 1 and 2 are still strong even with 3RR. But the back-end teams are solid too and I'm watching the middle because I own that spot in the WCOFF and I sure like the talent still available there. Without 3RR, man I'd take 1 or 2 now without ANY hesitation. No question about that.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:43 am

Originally posted by RiFF:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
. Do you guys want to see more of these?? Greg, could you identify these as either an 18 teamer or a DC. Without knowing that, its not as meaningful. [/QUOTE]These today were all 18-round drafts.

freddiezee · Post by **freddiezee** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:10 am

Even with 3RR, I'd take picks 1 or 2 without hesitation but after that I have a hard time deciding if I'd like 3 more than a pick in the middle or at the end. If LT or SJax broke his leg tomorrow, I would probably only take pick 1 without hesitation. Last year, I would have taken 1, 2 or 3 even with 3RR....this year only 1 or 2, next year who knows?
3RR is a great thing because it punishes the top picks a little bit. Getting a true stud is worth the punishment, but the amount of true studs will vary from year to year.
And let's not forget that someone might pick in the top 3 and draft this year's Shaun Alexander. Don't know who that guy is yet, though. That guy will be in big trouble, relying on picks 26, 40 and 45 to win his league.

RiFF · Post by **RiFF** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:45 am

Originally posted by freddiezee:
And let's not forget that someone might pick in the top 3 and draft this year's Shaun Alexander. Don't know who that guy is yet, though. That guy will be in big trouble, relying on picks 26, 40 and 45 to win his league. Yeah maybe...and someone might pick 8th or 9th and get stuck with this years Travis...eerrr.. Lamont Jordan.

3INTBOY · Post by **3INTBOY** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:57 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by fandango:
Greg, what was the percentage of winning teams that came from positions 1 and 2 last year?

was that high number what prompted 3RR?

would you consider 3RR and 4RR if the percentage of winners from 1-2 position remains constant?

it seems to me that position 1 and 2 this year are shaping up to be VERY STRONG TEAMS...especially with the depth of WR this year 18 of the top 32 teams in total points for the main event came from the top three draft spots. My decision to go with 3RR was based on past results in the NFFC over the last three years, the perception that our owners had about drafting toward the back of a straight serpentine 14-team draft, and the fact that 3RR actually makes a lot of sense for football where one player can be so dominant. I don't think our format needs further tinkering with like 4RR as right now the combination of KDS/3RR seems to be make most folks happy with the worst part of my job: Assigning draft spots.

Yes, 1 and 2 are still strong even with 3RR. But the back-end teams are solid too and I'm watching the middle because I own that spot in the WCOFF and I sure like the talent still available there. Without 3RR, man I'd take 1 or 2 now without ANY hesitation. No question about that. [/QUOTE]Greg, I understand you need to sell the concept of 3RR hard, but all the comments about solid teams and 3RR's success are premature aren't they?

The bottom line to me is a team at the top of a 3RR draft that owns one of the coveted players has 4 starters before the bottom of the draft, in a good drafters hands the Top selections will gather an even greater advantage, but that's just speculation too. I guess.

3'

3INTBOY · Post by **3INTBOY** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:00 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Okay, here's a new one from one of our four drafts last night. Do you guys want to see more of these?? There's little discussion of the results. Here we go:

FIRST ROUND (TEAMS 1-14):
1. LaDainian Tomlinson
2. Steven Jackson
3. Frank Gore
4. Larry Johnson
5. Brian Westbrook
6. Joseph Addai
7. Peyton Manning
8. Maurice Jones-Drew
9. Shaun Alexander
10. Rudi Johnson
11. Travis Henry
12. Willie Parker
13. Reggie Bush
14. Steve Smith

SECOND ROUND (14-1):
15. Chad Johnson
16. Willis McGahee
17. Laurence Maroney
18. Cedric Benson
19. Edgerrin James
20. Terrell Owens
21. Marvin Harrison
22. Torry Holt
23. Ronnie Brown
24. Deuce McAllister
25. Thomas Jones
26. Cadillac Williams
27. Reggie Wayne
28. Marshawn Lynch

THIRD ROUND (TEAMS 14-1):
29. Carson Palmer (Team 14)
30. Clinton Portis (13)
31. Larry Fitzgerald (12)
32. Javon Walker (11)
33. Brandon Jacobs (10)
34. Drew Brees (9)
35. Antonio Gates (8)
36. Roy Williams (7)
37. Anquan Boldin (6)
38. T.J. Houshmandzadeh (5)
39. Andre Johnson (4)
40. Lee Evans (3)
41. Marques Colston (2)
42. Marc Bulger (1)

FOURTH ROUND (1-14):
43. Donald Driver
44. Plaxico Burress
45. Jerious Norwood
46. Hines Ward
47. Marion Barber
48. Randy Moss
49. DeAngelo Williams
50. Jamal Lewis
51. Julius Jones
52. Tom Brady
53. Adrian Peterson
54. Fred Taylor
55. Darrell Jackson
56. Ahman Green

FIFTH ROUND (14-1):
57. Chester Taylor
58. Laveranues Coles
59. Donovan McNabb
60. Calvin Johnson
61. Reggie Brown
62. Chris Chambers
63. Jon Kitna
64. Chicago D
65. Tatum Bell
66. Deion Branch
67. Ladell Betts
68. Tony Romo
69. DeShaun Foster
70. LaMont Jordan

SIXTH ROUND (1-14):
71. Joey Galloway
72. Vincent Jackson
73. Santana Moss
74. Tony Gonzalez
75. Todd Heap
76. Vernon Davis
77. Jeremy Shockey
78. Brandon Jackson
79. Donte Stallworth
80. Chris Cooley
81. Kellen Winslow
82. Braylon Edwards
83. Alge Crumpler
84. Warrick Dunn

Thoughts? Wow from last night?
I just caught that. Nice...

3'

LETSROLL2007 · Post by **LETSROLL2007** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:02 am

This is amusing. Anytime someone departs from the "sacred ADP report" people blow a fuse and question the meaning of life. Facts are the winners always follow their instincts.

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:20 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
My decision to go with 3RR was based on past results in the NFFC over the last three years...Since 2004 NFFC season was OVERWHELMINGLY successful for the bottom and middle slots and not very much for the top 3. I think it's more accurate to say that your decision to go with 3RR was based on results on the NFFC over the last TWO years.

...the perception that our owners had about drafting toward the back of a straight serpentine 14-team draft...Yes, it certainly is about perception.

...and the fact that 3RR actually makes a lot of sense for football where one player can be so dominant.So what happens if that one player isn't as dominant?

Sorry, I really don't mean to unload on you Greg, but your own comments here pretty much support VERBATUM what I've been saying about 3RR for a year: that it's based on 2 years of data and mostly a result of the most dominant season in FF history.

[ August 16, 2007, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Nag' ]

RiFF · Post by **RiFF** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:36 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Without 3RR, man I'd take 1 or 2 now without ANY hesitation. No question about that. WITH 3RR, man (or woman) I'd take 1 or 2 now without ANY hesitation. No question about that. But maybe, just maybe, I'd take 12, 13 or 14 with less remorse

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Aug 17, 2007 3:47 am

Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
My decision to go with 3RR was based on past results in the NFFC over the last three years...Since 2004 NFFC season was OVERWHELMINGLY successful for the bottom and middle slots and not very much for the top 3. I think it's more accurate to say that your decision to go with 3RR was based on results on the NFFC over the last TWO years.

...the perception that our owners had about drafting toward the back of a straight serpentine 14-team draft...Yes, it certainly is about perception.

...and the fact that 3RR actually makes a lot of sense for football where one player can be so dominant.So what happens if that one player isn't as dominant?

Sorry, I really don't mean to unload on you Greg, but your own comments here pretty much support VERBATUM what I've been saying about 3RR for a year: that it's based on 2 years of data and mostly a result of the most dominant season in FF history. [/QUOTE]Nag, whatever turns you and Lou on about 3RR is fine by me. In 2004 with a serpentine draft, the bottom picks did not succeed OVERWHELMINGLY. That's incredibly inaccurate. In 2004, not a single NFFC owner WANTED the 14th pick and of course EVERYONE wanted the No. 1 pick. People were unsure about competing in a 14-team league because they didn't want to pick from the back-end. We tried to address that with KDS last year and this year I felt the combination of KDS/3RR made the most sense.

I'm no idiot and 3RR isn't needed in every sport. We run 15-team leagues in baseball and guys are winning from every area of the draft this year. 3RR isn't needed in baseball as the top picks aren't as dominant as they are in football. I think 3RR is a good addition to the NFFC and we'll see how it plays out this year. It's been successful so far on the perception side. You are right, now let's see what the final numbers play out.

And Lou, if 3RR makes the top picks even STRONGER, then it's apparent that not everyone is anticipating that as you can see from the KDS preferences being set now. Let the games begin and see how this all plays out. You'll have a first hand view of the action.