3RR Point/Counterpoint For The Magazine

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:03 am

Okay, Lou Tranquilli asked for some response from the NFFC members about 3RR and we got a lot of it, but unfortunately that thread has deteriorated once again into an MB scrum. So it's time to start a new one and get 3-4 intelligent responses before someone hijacks it again.

Here's what I want to do: 3RR is going to be used in the NFFC in 2007, yet in our first football issue of Fantasy Sports Magazine it's important that we explain all sides of this new procedure and show the good and bad about it. Tom and I usually do a Point/Counterpoint column about an interesting subject in each issue and we'll invite two NFFC members to write one for the first football issue, which goes to press in mid May.

Lou or Nag, you are invited to write the Counterpoint. I don't expect you to take an anti-3RR position because from your postings I don't see that. But I do like the angle of "is this a knee jerk reaction to LT's historic season?" or "is this even needed in fantasy football?" You come up with the angle and it's fine by me. Even bashing 3RR is permitted if it's justified. If someone else can step up with a better Counterpoint than Lou or Alex, I'll take your Counterpoint.

Gekko or UFS or someone else can write the Point angle about 3RR and we'll run them side by side. Again, I'm not looking for a kiss ass article, just a reasoning from a gamer's point of view why 3RR makes this high-stakes contest more fair in your eyes. I'll need color photos of each of the writers, whomever we choose, to run with the column.

Use this thread to help those involved write the columns or whatever else you want. But we'll definitely run the piece in Fantasy Sports Magazine and it should be a fun article to read. Now have fun with this thread, but once it gets out of hand I'm going to delete every post that diverts from the position at hand.

GOD Loves You · Post by **GOD Loves You** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:24 am

Renman, you're a moron!!

Sorry Greg, couldn't resist. Plus he knows I'm kidding.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:24 am

Ok greg, sign me up. I need a new pic in the mag. I didn't like the last one. Thanks for the opp

Team Legacy · Post by **Team Legacy** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:27 am

There's a STRONG possibility that this proposal of 3RR will ASSUREDLY HELP (maybe not solve) but HELP lessen the advantage that the top picks have enjoyed the last few years.

Will 3RR perfect the issue so that evenly across the board every spot wins evenly? NO, I'm sure it won't, but let's just say if currently, the top 4 picks win 50% of the time compared to the 28.5% of the time the laws of averages state would be "even" (4 out of 14), we have a problem.

There IS a concern that some have mentioned that the advantage simply SHIFTS to the bottom half of the draft while the "middle" shows no improvement. Even if this were to happen, the "distance" between the teams drafting at the top, compared to everyone else has been lessened, which will make for a more even competition. I think I speak for most people when saying everyone wants to be on equal footing on draft day, no matter what pick you receive. What you do with the picks are obviously up to you.

3RR doesn't GUARANTEE anything, but one would think it has to help. Anyone stating WHAT it will do definitively is gambling, but common sense tells us its gotta help lessen the edge.

Thankfully, the guys that WIN the draft spot lottery won't be counting their winning checks as fast as they have in the past.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 4:46 am

Originally posted by Team Legacy:
There's a STRONG possibility that this proposal of 3RR will ASSUREDLY HELP (maybe not solve) but HELP lessen the advantage that the top picks have enjoyed the last few years.

Will 3RR perfect the issue so that evenly across the board every spot wins evenly? NO, I'm sure it won't, but let's just say if currently, the top 4 picks win 50% of the time compared to the 28.5% of the time the laws of averages state would be "even" (4 out of 14), we have a problem.

There IS a concern that some have mentioned that the advantage simply SHIFTS to the bottom half of the draft while the "middle" shows no improvement. Even if this were to happen, the "distance" between the teams drafting at the top, compared to everyone else has been lessened, which will make for a more even competition. I think I speak for most people when saying everyone wants to be on equal footing on draft day, no matter what pick you receive. What you do with the picks are obviously up to you.

3RR doesn't GUARANTEE anything, but one would think it has to help. Anyone stating WHAT it will do definitively is gambling, but common sense tells us its gotta help lessen the edge.

Thankfully, the guys that WIN the draft spot lottery won't be counting their winning checks as fast as they have in the past. Oh boy, Scott is making a solid play for the POINT article. Gekko, you better come through if you want to top this!!

You get the article going, I'll find a better picture of you. How about that NFFC photo of you when you were hung over?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:33 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:Oh boy, Scott is making a solid play for the POINT article. Gekko, you better come through if you want to top this!!

You get the article going, I'll find a better picture of you. How about that NFFC photo of you when you were hung over?

[/QB]I will supply a new pic.

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:41 am

I'm not really into writing articles. I'll leave that part up to my friend Lou.

My 3RR counterpoint that it IS a knee-jerk reaction is simple. It can be summed up in one sentence. One question, actually:

If this past NFFC 2006 final league statistics looked like those from the 2004 season, would there be a strong movement to go with 3RR, would the change have been made?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:47 am

Originally posted by Nag':
I'm not really into writing articles. I'll leave that part up to my friend Lou.

My 3RR counterpoint that it IS a knee-jerk reaction is simple. It can be summed up in one sentence. One question, actually:

If this past NFFC 2006 final league statistics looked like those from the 2004 season, would there be a strong movement to go with 3RR, would the change have been made? I can't say definitively YES, but I can say that the PERCEPTION that our 14-team format gave advantages to those who drafted near the top has always been a concern of mine. It helped our cause when GG won from the 13th spot and when TEAM NEW dominated the regular season from the 13th spot. That quieted folks down for awhile and proved that you can win from any spot, which of course you can. But as a high-stakes operator I need to keep making my product better so that EVERYONE feels they can win the $100,000 grand prize and there was enough data to convince me to move to this format for 2007 and for the future.

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:57 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
It helped our cause when GG won from the 13th spot and when TEAM NEW dominated the regular season from the 13th spot. Also...

None of the top 9 regular season finishers in 2004 drafted from the 1-3 slots.

Only ONE of the top 14 regular season finishers in 2004 drafted from the 1-3 slots.

Eight of the top 23 regular season finishers in 2004 drafted from the 12-14 slots, including 1st and 3rd overall.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:22 am

If anyone is hanging their hats on 2004 data (initial year for a brand new format to most everyone playing), your ship is sinking (and fast)