Tom/Greg - Website Requests

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 2:42 am

Liquid, I think the live scoring was rather steady in Week 2 and I know it will be smooth going forward. From talking with STATS, two additions in the last two weeks have brought the live scoring up to speed.

I will talk to STATS about getting all of the bids posted. I'm sure we can do this, but I had not requested that initially. Again, I'm requesting on the other points.

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:00 am

On live scoring, it looks like the page auto reloads frequently and tells you which game is being updated. When you first log in, you get your game, then it loads one game at a time until all are done.

My guess is they did it this way for all the games to refresh faster. On TQStats, they refresh like every ten minutes.

There is a roster grid page on the site too.

johnbriganti · Post by **johnbriganti** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 6:30 am

Just curious, why would anyone want to see the losing bids? Is there value in know that Team A that bid less and lost a free agent to team B?

I'm thinking that you might see value in knowing Team A was going for a specific position, but you know that by looking at any teams roster.

Was there anybody in Chicago -4 who saw my RBs as M. Williams, L. Sugggs, G. Hearst, R. Dayne and Chris Perry that didn't know, or doesn't know that I need help at the RB position?

this is a high stakes, national league supposedly drawing some of the most experience fantasy football players in the country. Maybe we should have Stats inc select our starting lineups each week too!

just a thought.

john

TradeStar28 · Post by **TradeStar28** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 6:58 am

Originally posted by John:
Just curious, why would anyone want to see the losing bids? Is there value in know that Team A that bid less and lost a free agent to team B?

I'm thinking that you might see value in knowing Team A was going for a specific position, but you know that by looking at any teams roster.

Was there anybody in Chicago -4 who saw my RBs as M. Williams, L. Sugggs, G. Hearst, R. Dayne and Chris Perry that didn't know, or doesn't know that I need help at the RB position?

this is a high stakes, national league supposedly drawing some of the most experience fantasy football players in the country. Maybe we should have Stats inc select our starting lineups each week too!

just a thought.

john If you were even remotely close to my rationale of why I would like to see losing bids...then maybe I can classify you into the category of "the most experienced fantasy football players in the country".

:rolleyes:

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 7:12 am

So, do you care to share the rationale?

I don't like people seeing what I'm trying to do. If someone could look at the complete set of bids I put in they might figure out a strategy and move to counter me instead of doing what is 'logical' for their team, they may instead break logic and seek to harm me as a competitive choice.

Obviously in football this is far less important, but in baseball where I identify prospects I'd like if I can't get Player A then seeing my losing bids would let someone else know that 'Dave really likes that Freddy Guzman kid' - and bid accordingly.

Seeing people's conditional bids also tends to set a 'market' for a player's value for future comparison. Knowing that only 2 people are bidding on WR and 1 of them just got a solid producing person would help me design my bids for next week knowing I may only be bidding against one person.

Checking out my opponent's bidding pattern by noticing they never bid more than $51 on a specific player may help me, etc.

All those things are good - but are they better 'known' or 'unknown' ?

I don't care if bids are disclosed or not, but I don't see any clear rationale one way or the other. Information can be used in many ways

Dave

TamuScarecrow · Post by **TamuScarecrow** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 7:17 am

Liquid, you're unique. Nobody is close to your rationale. I don't want anyone to see my losing bid but I would like to know how many people bid on a particular player. That way Liquid could beat his chest a little bit harder knowing he outbid 8 other teams for a player.

And you didn't answer my question, union steward or sports agent or just plain lawyer or law student? And one more question, Liquid, why does the NFFC have to copy what the WCOFF does in order to be successful? I don't see them as being better than this league. I don't think you can view anyone in this industry as the best yet.

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 7:45 am

Per the rules:

“The free agent system will be a ‘blind bidding’ process for each individual league.”

My interpretation of “blind bidding” is that you do NOT see other’s bids, both before and after the fact. The national precedent I have to point to is the NFBC, where in fact this assumption holds true.

My position is that per the rules losing bids cannot be disclosed.

TamuScarecrow · Post by **TamuScarecrow** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 7:54 am

Now this is psychotic. aNNOY and I both agree on this. Only in America, podnah, only in America!!

johnbriganti · Post by **johnbriganti** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 10:35 am

Liquid,

To suggest that one is not even remotely "close to your rationale" sounds like yours is the superior. I don't know if it is or isn't and it doesn't matter. As Dave so eloquantly said it, "Information can be used in many ways".

The only reason, as Dave suggests, that you prefer to see the losing bids is to get an edge on the other players in your league - something that I suggested you can do without knowing what the losing bids were.

I'm not going to get into a war of words with you. I'll keep an eye on your team and we'll talk again.

John

johnbriganti · Post by **johnbriganti** » Wed Sep 22, 2004 10:39 am

Greg,

For the record I agree with nnoy. I don't want to see the rule changed. If we want to consider this for next year fine, but we all signed up for this league after reading the rules. It wouldn't be right to change them, for any reason.

John Briganti