3RR Point/Counterpoint For The Magazine

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:51 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
Nag - when snake is on your side (7/8)...doom is not far behind. LOL! Yes, I agree. This is a major concern.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:11 pm

Originally posted by Nag':
I have actual ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002. That's not conjecture. Conjecture is when people are certain a theory is bound to work as planned without any proof to support that optimism.
ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002 and how they would fit in the NFFC (if it were around then)...is indeed 100% conjecture.

let us begin by asking...where did you get ADP for 14 team leagues for the year 2002.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:13 pm

greg - when do you need the article by?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:14 pm

Originally posted by Nag':
I have actual ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002. That's not conjecture. Conjecture is when people are certain a theory is bound to work as planned without any proof to support that optimism.
Conjecture = A statement, opinion, or conclusion based on guesswork

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 3:49 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Nag':
I have actual ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002. That's not conjecture. Conjecture is when people are certain a theory is bound to work as planned without any proof to support that optimism.
ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002 and how they would fit in the NFFC (if it were around then)...is indeed 100% conjecture.

let us begin by asking...where did you get ADP for 14 team leagues for the year 2002. [/QUOTE]I'd guess the ADP for a 14 team league and the ADP for a 12 team league...when speaking of the top 3 picks...would have no noteable differences.

Am I missing something...or are we not talking about the very begining of the draft?

~Lance

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:35 pm

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Nag':
I have actual ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002. That's not conjecture. Conjecture is when people are certain a theory is bound to work as planned without any proof to support that optimism.
ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002 and how they would fit in the NFFC (if it were around then)...is indeed 100% conjecture.

let us begin by asking...where did you get ADP for 14 team leagues for the year 2002. [/QUOTE]I'd guess the ADP for a 14 team league and the ADP for a 12 team league...when speaking of the top 3 picks...would have no noteable differences.

Am I missing something...or are we not talking about the very begining of the draft?

~Lance [/QUOTE]Gordon is fully aware of this, Lance. He knows all too well who the top 3 picks were and how they ended up in 2002. He also knows that these facts hurt his 3RR argument - badly. And he doesn't like that so what he'd like to do is to try and show that the failure of the top 3 picks doesn't necessarily mean that the 1-3 slot teams failed. He'd like to suggest that it was possible that 1-3 teams drafted breakout players later in the draft, like the 2/3 turn.
Of course this is total bullsh!t as the last 2 seasons prove. In 2005/2006, the success of the players drafted 1-3 propelled the top pick teams to success. It didn't matter who else they drafted - sure, individually, it mattered - but not when you looked at statistics for dozens or hundreds of leagues. The top 1-3 teams dominated because of the success of the 1st round players. So, logic and history dictates that just as when top 3 picks succeed, when the top 3 picks BOMB, the 1-3 teams will bomb as well. Yes, there will be exceptions - some teams will have superior drafts and will overcome the failure of their 1st overall but those will be few and far in between.
So that's what Gordon is trying to do - cast doubt. Instead of being objective, he's being an ideologue and wants to downplay the facts which show weakness in 3RR. I personally think it's bad form and is beneath him, but it is what it is.

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:40 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
Conjecture = A statement, opinion, or conclusion based on guesswork Exactly. And the effectiveness of 3RR is based entirely on conclusions based on guesswork. Therefore the effectiveness of 3RR is pure conjecture.
You can write and entire thesis on the subject and it won't change that fact.

Btw, your keen ability to use an online dictionary is highly impressive.

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:57 pm

Originally posted by Nag':
I think you've gone way too far into the world of unprovable theories. Like your 7/8 analysis. LOL.

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Tue Feb 20, 2007 7:43 pm

Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
Increase margin of error by using results of a 12 team league??? You aren't using ANY results, only conjecture. I have actual ADP statistics and final year end results from 2002. That's not conjecture. Conjecture is when people are certain a theory is bound to work as planned without any proof to support that optimism.

I'm looking for the truth. The 2002 wcoff top 10% regular season scorers may very well support your arguement, but I don't know until I see them. Btw, what year was the wcoff's first year? Was it 2001, 2002, or 2003? The first year was 2002. I remember it well although I don't have the stats for the regular season finishers. But there was plenty of discussion and breakdown on the WCOFF message boards (those threads are gone as well). The top slots were highly unsuccessful as none of the top 3 consensus players had good years. I'd love to be able to get a hold of that link, assuming it still exists. [/QUOTE]How is ADP info REMOTELY RELEVANT when 3RR used with KDS WILL and HAS IN TESTS altered every draft slot strategy significantly?

That data is USELESS.

The draft results, tone of the draft, and strategy changes I saw in the 3RR FB test here mirrored the changes I saw when I implemented a 3RR system in 15-team hoops leagues seven years ago.

The talent AT DRAFT TIME is more evenly distributed. The draft decisions by all picks are more the same. There will no longer be a HUGE perceived or statistically proven over any 10-year period advantage. End of Story.

All this BS talk about injuries in prior years is just that, after-the-fact BS.

You are going to see about 55% of the years with 3RR/KDS favor the top end of the draft, and about 45% of the drafts favor the bottom end of the draft, and most of that will be due to injuries, but some years, you will see a breakout from a bottom pick and that's all fine and dandy.

This will be a change from the current 75-80/20-25 ratio.

You'll see two straight years of the top end winning like the last two, you'll see two or three straight years of the bottom end winning, you'll see years where it flip-flops every year for a few years. YOU WILL SEE WHAT YOU'VE SEEN IF YOU'VE PLAYED NFBC BASEBALL EVERY YEAR.

Like Greg has mentioned, another layer of skill has been added to the contest. This makes the contest HARDER to win. Harder contests are more conducive to having long term success. Owners quit playing games that are easy to play.

This is my opinion based on hosting, inputting, managing, and personally analyzing over 1000 fantasy drafts over many moons.

At the end of the day, what matters most is that owners will still have to nail their picks to win.

It's going to be easier to nail picks from the back end now and it's about time.

Greg, use any or all of this for your article if you like.

[ February 21, 2007, 02:01 AM: Message edited by: UFS ]