Can You Win From Any Draft Slot?

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Mon May 02, 2005 5:36 am

Greg

I'd like to throw out a different reason why I prefer draft slot bidding. Data is good to a point but is still subject to individualism in this instance. In other words, if every draft order last year was reversed, I'll bet we'd have different stat lines because the picks would've been different.

My reason to vote in favor of DSB is simple - perception.

If I'm given the opportunity to draft from whatever position I feel is the most advantagous to my success and I suck - then I have no one to blame but myself. The contest fairness cannot be challenged in this regard. Isn't that better for the NFFC?

Maybe MY best draft strategy comes from the #4 hole. Even if I'm wrong - I'd like the chance to be right.

RC

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon May 02, 2005 5:48 am

Agreed, RC. But I don't think the NFFC is ready to institute a draft-slot bidding system at this point. Maybe we can offer a side league that allows that, like we did with the mid-season leagues last year. Besides, preparing for any possible draft spot and then adjusting once you find out where you're drafting is part of the off-season regimen, isn't it?

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Mon May 02, 2005 6:06 am

Originally posted by Route C:
Greg

I'd like to throw out a different reason why I prefer draft slot bidding. Data is good to a point but is still subject to individualism in this instance. In other words, if every draft order last year was reversed, I'll bet we'd have different stat lines because the picks would've been different.

My reason to vote in favor of DSB is simple - perception.

If I'm given the opportunity to draft from whatever position I feel is the most advantagous to my success and I suck - then I have no one to blame but myself. The contest fairness cannot be challenged in this regard. Isn't that better for the NFFC?

Maybe MY best draft strategy comes from the #4 hole. Even if I'm wrong - I'd like the chance to be right.

RC Excellent points - agreed on all counts. I have said from the beginning that draft slot bidding IS an interesting and innovative idea and would add to one's draft strategy and I totally agree that certain draft slots are better than others, year to year. But the idea that higher draft slots are better, across the board, is ludicrous and using this premise as a lobbying platform for implementing draft slot bidding is only hurting this innovative concept - too bad your man Gekko does not see that.
As for Greg and NFFC, he needs to do what’s best for the league and the majority of its participants, which is why draft slot bidding may not fly just yet, but I’m sure Greg will continue giving it worthy consideration in the future.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon May 02, 2005 6:14 am

Originally posted by Nag':
But the idea that higher draft slots are better, across the board, is ludicrous not to put you on the spot, but where is your data, other than in your head?

Originally posted by Nag':
using this premise as a lobbying platform for implementing draft slot bidding is only hurting this innovative concept - too bad your man Gekko does not see that. there are many reasons why draft slot bidding is good. i never said this is the only reason. Route C brought up a good point. I'll have to review my old posts on this subject. i didn't think we'd "go to war" so quickly again on this subject. let me get my chit in order and make my case again.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon May 02, 2005 6:18 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Agreed, RC. But I don't think the NFFC is ready to institute a draft-slot bidding system at this point. i'd be happy to write an article about this new phenomenon for the second edition of Fantasy Sports this year. give me the word, and I'll get it done.

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Mon May 02, 2005 6:57 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
not to put you on the spot, but where is your data, other than in your head?You're not putting me on the spot, and yes, my data IS in my head in the form of the 8-10 years experience in playing FF.
The mistake you are making is taking you personal preference of the top draft slots and trying to prove it as undisputed fact. You've shown data from ONE year of the NFFC, which doesn't even support your claim (see Greg's post above). But even if we look at YOUR spin of this one year's data, which is in your favor, and you're still making a major mistake in using extremely limited FF data as factual support.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon May 02, 2005 7:21 am

Originally posted by Nag':
You're not putting me on the spot, and yes, my data IS in my head in the form of the 8-10 years experience in playing FF.
the data in my head says you're wrong. the data from the last TWO WCOFF events says you're wrong. you were WRONG to say "Stats from 2003 will totally kill Gekko's argument". more on that later.

i still need to look at the NFFC data, but i expect that to be a mixed bag for a YEAR 1 event.

Originally posted by Nag':
The mistake you are making is taking you personal preference of the top draft slots and trying to prove it as undisputed fact. the data (other than in nags head) sides with my assumption.

Originally posted by Nag':
You've shown data from ONE year of the NFFC, which doesn't even support your claim (see Greg's post above). But even if we look at YOUR spin of this one year's data, which is in your favor, and you're still making a major mistake in using extremely limited FF data as factual support. agreed. you need a sufficient population size...which is why my results will show 2004 NFFC; 2004 WCOFF; 2003 WCOFF. if all three of these events point towards the same conslusion, will that help bolster my claim?

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Mon May 02, 2005 7:57 am

Instead of the "my data proves this and that", which is what I keep hearing from you, I'll propose the following specific question: Using data from WCOFF 02(if you can),03,04 and NFFC 04, list the 2 top teams per league and their draft slots. If the top 4 draft slots yields more winning teams than the bottom 4 (by more than 5%), then I will concede that your claim has merit. I suggest excluding the 4-6 middle draft slots for the purpose of this test as we are looking to compare strictly the top and bottom slots. Agreed?

JerseyPaul · Post by **JerseyPaul** » Mon May 02, 2005 8:14 am

Ridiculous... Final results are not a reflection of draft slot value.

Is Ladainian Tomlinson (#1 or #2 last year) better than Kevin Barlow (average 1.12) by a mile, of course. If the Barlow owner picked up Reuben Droughns and Nick Goings and beat the LT owner, does that mean it was better to draft at 1.12 and take Barlow?

We all know that perceived player value decreases at a decreasing rate in the draft. That makes earlier picks more valuable because the differences between players gets smaller as the draft goes on. That DOES NOT mean the better draft will win. It just means the later drafters have to be just a little better to overcome that edge.

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Mon May 02, 2005 8:51 am

You're 100% right, Paul, but he is saying it's EASIER to win from the top slots. That means (I assume) that you don't have to work as hard the rest of the draft making good picks. I know, I know, that still SOUNDS ridiculous, and that's why I'm actually looking forward to the results of the data I asked for.