NFFC Message Boards

Can we talk rationally for just a few posts?

Some givens:

1. Of course you can win from any spot.
2. Draft + FA + Luck = Winner
3. There is a bias in the draft that FAs and luck must overcome. How big is that bias? Let’s take a look.

Assume for a moment that all the owners are perfect drafters with perfect information. Assume they are all drafting from the same cheatsheet and that cheatsheet happens to be from FBGs (source is irrelevant to the discussion). The best measure of “value” for each player is his VBD points. After 4 rounds of serpentine drafting the VBD totals for each slot are as follows:

1 511
2 505
3 463
4 458
5 445
6 447
7 449
8 448
9 449
10 426
11 421
12 424
13 416
14 411

The reason for the edge is that the difference between players decreases the deeper you go into the draft. After 7 weeks the difference (actual) between RB1 and RB4 is 24 points, the difference between RB11 and RB14 is 3 points! This should not be a shock to anybody.

So with everybody drafting perfectly the bias from 1st pick to last pick is something over 100 points (1st 4 rounds only, although the problem gets much smaller in later rounds). Totals for our regular season will be in the range of 1500. The edge of the 1st slot over the 14th slot is a lot more than the house edge in blackjack.

Why the resistance to a methodology to level the field? Is it the weaker players hoping for an edge? Is it just resistance to change? Yes, I know everybody will now attack the study saying that you don't know the numbers before the draft. Before you guys say that, it doesn't matter. The inherent bias is there anyway even without perfect information. So go ahead and fire away.

Curious if the numbers look the same for 8, 10 and 12-team leagues

I ran 12 for fun, the difference decreases to about 80 points.

Why don't go back and use real people and real drafts? You have 16 leagues of information. Give me those totals!! You are wasting my time reading this crap. There has never been a draft by the book. And there never will be, we all have too many opinions!!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JerseyPaul:
[QB] Can we talk rationally for just a few posts?

JP - you know I have agreed with you on previous posts on this subject. I have a couple of thoughts to add to your data.

Some givens:

1. Of course you can win from any spot.
2. Draft + FA + Luck = Winner
3.

+ adjusting draft strategy based on scoring system.


Assume for a moment that all the owners are perfect drafters with perfect information. Assume they are all drafting from the same cheatsheet and that cheatsheet happens to be from FBGs (source is irrelevant to the discussion). After 4 rounds of serpentine drafting the VBD totals for each slot are as follows:

4 rounds isn't enough as it weighs heavily in favor of the pro RB draft (assuming everyone places the same value on getting them early)

1 511
2 505
3 463
4 458
5 445
6 447
7 449
8 448
9 449
10 426
11 421
12 424
13 416
14 411

The reason for the edge is that the difference between players decreases the deeper you go into the draft. After 7 weeks the difference (actual) between RB1 and RB4 is 24 points, the difference between RB11 and RB14 is 3 points! This should not be a shock to anybody.

So with everybody drafting perfectly the bias from 1st pick to last pick is something over 100 points (

All the mocks I did prior to the actual draft had the choice spots at 4 and 9. VBD is over-rated because it turns people into robots, which makes them too predictable. The smart owner will use this to his/her advantage.

I'll tell you why the 13-14 spots are getting no respect. VBD cattle following the herd. Who's arm was twisted to draft at least 1 RB in the first 2 rounds? How many leagues had these players available at the turn:

Culpepper,Manning,McNabb,Ward,Owens,C.Johnson,Holt

These are not chance players. They were all rated in the top 5 at their positions. With the exception of Holt and Johnson so far, all have been worthy early picks.

Isn't it possible that this oversight by some owners at the turn led to stronger teams on down the line? This event is completely different, yet owners still drafted according to tradition. I could go on but this post is long enough already.

With all that said, I still like the idea of bidding on draft slots. Not because I think the playing field needs to be leveled, but because it would be alot of fun

I think the point that JP is making here is that using the actuals provides a good baseline. What this really says is that if every owner has a perfect draft certain draft positions may have advantages. The reason why it doesn't work out that way is that nobody has a perfect draft.

But the "flaw" in the system is that a good drafter can win from a lower position only if he is able to exploit other people's mistakes.

This is all hypothetical, but you have to strive for a system where if everyone does the best possible job from their spot nobody has a meaningful advantage.

The real argument is what that system is. Draft slot bidding, although interesting, doesn't really address that issue and I am uneasy about tieing the draft and free agent bidding together. From a strategy perspective, I am not sure why they should be related and from a marketing perspective for the league, you really are taking a chance that someone will screw themselves royally by bidding too much for a draft spot and walking away from the NFFC with a bad taste in their mouth.

Originally posted by I Cojones:
I think the point that JP is making here is that using the actuals provides a good baseline. What this really says is that if every owner has a perfect draft certain draft positions may have advantages. The reason why it doesn't work out that way is that nobody has a perfect draft.

But the "flaw" in the system is that a good drafter can win from a lower position only if he is able to exploit other people's mistakes.

This is all hypothetical, but you have to strive for a system where if everyone does the best possible job from their spot nobody has a meaningful advantage.

The real argument is what that system is. Draft slot bidding, although interesting, doesn't really address that issue and I am uneasy about tieing the draft and free agent bidding together. From a strategy perspective, I am not sure why they should be related and from a marketing perspective for the league, you really are taking a chance that someone will screw themselves royally by bidding too much for a draft spot and walking away from the NFFC with a bad taste in their mouth. Very well said Cojones, until I get to your conclusion about slot bidding not addressing the issue.

The logical tie between draft and FAAB is that if you bid to get an advantage, and theoretically to have a better draft, you are at a disadvantage when it comes to picking up players after the draft in FAAB. Can't get more logical, and I think, fair, than that.

As for people screwing themselves. That is what a contest is all about. Make a bad selection, bid too much for a slot, pay too much for a FA, they are all the same. You make the decision, you live with the consequences. You can't protect people from their own stupidity, and in a contest of skill that shouldn't even be a consideration.

[ October 27, 2004, 07:03 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

Originally posted by JerseyPaul:
Can we talk rationally for just a few posts?

Some givens:

1. Of course you can win from any spot.
2. Draft + FA + Luck = Winner
3. There is a bias in the draft that FAs and luck must overcome. How big is that bias? Let’s take a look.

Assume for a moment that all the owners are perfect drafters with perfect information. Assume they are all drafting from the same cheatsheet and that cheatsheet happens to be from FBGs (source is irrelevant to the discussion). The best measure of “value” for each player is his VBD points. After 4 rounds of serpentine drafting the VBD totals for each slot are as follows:

1 511
2 505
3 463
4 458
5 445
6 447
7 449
8 448
9 449
10 426
11 421
12 424
13 416
14 411

The reason for the edge is that the difference between players decreases the deeper you go into the draft. After 7 weeks the difference (actual) between RB1 and RB4 is 24 points, the difference between RB11 and RB14 is 3 points! This should not be a shock to anybody.

So with everybody drafting perfectly the bias from 1st pick to last pick is something over 100 points (1st 4 rounds only, although the problem gets much smaller in later rounds). Totals for our regular season will be in the range of 1500. The edge of the 1st slot over the 14th slot is a lot more than the house edge in blackjack.

Why the resistance to a methodology to level the field? Is it the weaker players hoping for an edge? Is it just resistance to change? Yes, I know everybody will now attack the study saying that you don't know the numbers before the draft. Before you guys say that, it doesn't matter. The inherent bias is there anyway even without perfect information. So go ahead and fire away. Good post JP.

Interesting that this looks at how a draft goes based on expectations, which are known at the time, versus the relentless discussion of how slot positions don't matter because of results, which of course is based on actual results which are unknown until after the fact.

Originally posted by I Cojones:
I think the point that JP is making here is that using the actuals provides a good baseline. What this really says is that if every owner has a perfect draft certain draft positions may have advantages. The reason why it doesn't work out that way is that nobody has a perfect draft.

But the "flaw" in the system is that a good drafter can win from a lower position only if he is able to exploit other people's mistakes.

This is all hypothetical, but you have to strive for a system where if everyone does the best possible job from their spot nobody has a meaningful advantage.

The real argument is what that system is. Draft slot bidding, although interesting, doesn't really address that issue and I am uneasy about tieing the draft and free agent bidding together. From a strategy perspective, I am not sure why they should be related and from a marketing perspective for the league, you really are taking a chance that someone will screw themselves royally by bidding too much for a draft spot and walking away from the NFFC with a bad taste in their mouth. IC, the crucial point here is that if they screw THEMSELVES they may walk away from the NFFC with a bitter taste in their mouth. That same person could have randomly gotten what they perceive of as a bad draft position and walk away bitter anyway. With bidding for their slots it can more clearly be identified as THEIR fault. If you need to, you can limit the max bid on a position to $900 out of $1,000... guaranteeing that every team has some dollars for FA if you want.

I think what many are saying is that it sucks to have NO control over the situation and simply be randomly victimized (to whatever degree depends on the person) by pure and outright luck.

Personally, I see what JP is doing and I would still take the last part of the draft. I'm absolutely positive I can take advantage of mistakes and I'm absolutely positive I can reasonably identify later round sleepers who can fill whatever gaps I have as well as more accurately handle matchups and waiver money. I don't have any pretense that I can always win, but that I know I can be competitive.

That's not to say JP's data above is incorrect... on the contrary, I believe it to be absolutly true. I wonder how it would look to extend it 2 more rounds to 6 rounds and if it wouldn't begin to level off a bit... ending it after 4 rounds lets the top of the order get better picks without accounting for the bottom getting top dibs in the 5th round of what's left... which they would naturally be able to do. to stop it after 4 rounds seems incomplete and naturally exagerrates the early drafter's VBD benefit.

And that not withstanding the obvious flaws of VBD being inaccurate projections of reality. I accept all that.

Dave

Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by I Cojones:
I think the point that JP is making here is that using the actuals provides a good baseline. What this really says is that if every owner has a perfect draft certain draft positions may have advantages. The reason why it doesn't work out that way is that nobody has a perfect draft.

But the "flaw" in the system is that a good drafter can win from a lower position only if he is able to exploit other people's mistakes.

This is all hypothetical, but you have to strive for a system where if everyone does the best possible job from their spot nobody has a meaningful advantage.

The real argument is what that system is. Draft slot bidding, although interesting, doesn't really address that issue and I am uneasy about tieing the draft and free agent bidding together. From a strategy perspective, I am not sure why they should be related and from a marketing perspective for the league, you really are taking a chance that someone will screw themselves royally by bidding too much for a draft spot and walking away from the NFFC with a bad taste in their mouth. Very well said Cojones, until I get to your conclusion about slot bidding not addressing the issue.

The logical tie between draft and FAAB is that if you bid to get an advantage, and theoretically to have a better draft, you are at a disadvantage when it comes to picking up players after the draft in FAAB. Can't get more logical, and I think, fair, than that.

As for people screwing themselves. That is what a contest is all about. Make a bad selection, bid too much for a slot, pay too much for a FA, they are all the same. You make the decision, you live with the consequences. You can't protect people from their own stupidity, and in a contest of skill that shouldn't even be a consideration. [/QUOTE]Agreed, let stupid people be stupid... and build up the event and the surrounding fun to bring them back. I would love the NFFC to be 80% occupied by idiots. I'm afraid at our current levels we only have maybe 30-35% idiots. Work on getting in more idiots with disposable income, Greg!

Dave