Proposed Changes For 2005 NFFC

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:45 am

Originally posted by skipman:
Sorry you are afraid of cold hard analysis. There is no trashing going on in that thread. UMM.. your analysis is nice but it's not an indicator of a strong or weak draft. Some teams scored lower because of injuries or big name players (Portis, A.Green etc.) not panning out. These players were in the top 7 in most drafts.

I believe you started your original thought by mentioning weaker drafts i.e. the Buckhalter draft. It is possible that the other drafts (I'm not saying it is) you mentioned were full of mediocre owners, therefore making for a closer spread from top to bottom. I'm not afraid of your analysis - I'm just tired of talking to you. You made your point and so did I, let's move on.

RC

skipman · Post by **skipman** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:14 am

You make my point perfectly Route C,

There is now way to compare intra-league results in a meaningful way. So why weigh these points in the playoffs.

I could care less is you agree with me, I just hope the KP boys are reading, becuase it is obvious that there are problems with carrying regular season points over into the playoffs.

lichtman · Post by **lichtman** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:08 pm

How's this for a hedge -- I think total points scored by a league is a meaningful indicator of league strength, but I don't mind ditching regular season scores for the playoffs.

Here's my argument for the first point: The player universe is the same for all leagues and, for the most part, the player universe in each league is pretty similar to the others on a week to week basis. If you look at aggregate league totals you eliminate the effects of bad drafters (assuming you believe the above statement that the player universes for each league were essentially identical post-draft).

The discrepency between total points scored by each league (and I haven't done the work to determine that there actually is a statistically significant difference) can only be explained (I believe) by two things:

1. Lineup management strength, i.e. getting maximum points in your lineup vs. on your bench, and

2. Earlier selecting of high-scoring free agents, i.e. picking up/drafting and playing a Larry Johnson before his breakthrough week, not after.

I think it would be hard to argue that these two factors do not indicate a generally higher quality of overall ownership.

I don't think it is possible for one (or maybe even 2) bad drafters to make a big enough difference in a league. Think about it this way: Even if one owner picked terrible players in each round, it would only give the other owners the slight advantage you would see in a 13-team league team vs a 14-team league team. If the "bad" drafters make reasonable picks in the first 5 rounds, I don't think anything they could do the rest of the way could significantly effect overall league strength.

That being said, if next year's payouts are changed to make total points worth more during the regular season, I think that is reward enough and the playoff teams can start with an even footing.

skipman · Post by **skipman** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 3:12 pm

One other consideration is that some teams have a bad start and then pack it in, thus allowing the better teams to pick over the free agent market. In leagues that are very close, the FA market is thougher the whole season through.

[ December 19, 2004, 09:40 PM: Message edited by: skipman ]

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 5:54 pm

Originally posted by I Cojones:
How's this for a hedge -- I think total points scored by a league is a meaningful indicator of league strength, but I don't mind ditching regular season scores for the playoffs.

Here's my argument for the first point: The player universe is the same for all leagues and, for the most part, the player universe in each league is pretty similar to the others on a week to week basis. If you look at aggregate league totals you eliminate the effects of bad drafters (assuming you believe the above statement that the player universes for each league were essentially identical post-draft).

The discrepency between total points scored by each league (and I haven't done the work to determine that there actually is a statistically significant difference) can only be explained (I believe) by two things:

1. Lineup management strength, i.e. getting maximum points in your lineup vs. on your bench, and

2. Earlier selecting of high-scoring free agents, i.e. picking up/drafting and playing a Larry Johnson before his breakthrough week, not after.

I think it would be hard to argue that these two factors do not indicate a generally higher quality of overall ownership.

I don't think it is possible for one (or maybe even 2) bad drafters to make a big enough difference in a league. Think about it this way: Even if one owner picked terrible players in each round, it would only give the other owners the slight advantage you would see in a 13-team league team vs a 14-team league team. If the "bad" drafters make reasonable picks in the first 5 rounds, I don't think anything they could do the rest of the way could significantly effect overall league strength.

That being said, if next year's payouts are changed to make total points worth more during the regular season, I think that is reward enough and the playoff teams can start with an even footing. Well said ICO.

RC

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:15 pm

I can't believe I have to quote myself ... but some people are blowing what I said out of proportion and just making up what they think I have implied. So here goes nothing!

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
(5) Single average points! I could agree with double average points if the playoffs were against teams in your own league (teams that allowed you to accumulate those extra points).
I was one of the first people to vote against 1.5 or 2 times more handicap to start the playoffs with. I would have voted for zero handicap if that was one of the choices ... some teams in weaker leagues who got more points because of it ... already have the advantage of "A BETTER TEAM" because of a weaker league to draft against. Like every thing else, luck of the league, luck of the draft position, luck of injuries ... skill will put you in a position to get lucky. But skill will only "get you to the dance". I have no problem with this concept ... If skill always prevailed ... the best team would win once and no one would play him again. Anyone won their home league 12 years in a row? Me neither.

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:

By the way ... I was the guy who ran your draft.

Congrat's ... In my opinion ... after looking and talking to the other guys who ran the three other drafts ... most of us felt Chicago 3 had the toughest draft (of the 4 in Chicago). Everyone in the Chicago 3 draft was well prepared!!! Chicago 3 would probably benefit from the rule you feel is so unfair. Does it really look like I said the Chicago 3 was the toughest draft in the universe? Why would you question my impartiality when evaluating 4 league drafts? Do you think I might have a hidden agenda? FYI ... I was in two NFFC drafts (the Auction and the Champions Drafts) from noon till about 11:00PM on Friday. Same scoring, the Champions league also has 14 teams ... but we went 24 rounds (336 players) so I don't think I was WOW'd that you guy's drafted 252 deep the next day. I didn't get in the main event because I didn't like half of the prize money going to an overall winner (for all of the reasons you all are arguing about now) ... and I was asked to help with the draft because I wasn't in the main event. I might get in the main event next year if a higher percent of the prize money goes into the league prizes.

I not sure if this is YOUR first fantasy draft ever ... but as a rule ... people who are weak owners are usually slow drafters, more so in the latter rounds (That doesn't mean that good owners are always fast). In my opinion ... assuming I am still allowed one ... if you have a real fast draft ... you probably have all good well prepared owners. RC's draft finished 1 1/2 hours before the last league was done drafting! His draft didn't have any Buckhalter picks. And unlike the other 3 drafts ... IN MY OPINION ... there were no poorly drafted teams in Chicago 3 (like teams with only one starting RB). I had to stick around till the whole draft was over so I had 2 1/2 hours to evaluate the four draft boards. IN MY NOVICE OPINION ... I figured if I had got in the main event ... Chicago 3 was the last league I would have wanted to draft in ... give me slow drafting Buckhalter owners to draft against ALL DAY!!!

Again "GREAT JOB RC" You drafted in a tough league and prevailed ... if it really bothers other people to read an occasional unsolicited compliment ... don't read my posts ... realizing I have issued an unsolicited complimented once ... I just might compliment again without warning!!!

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:20 pm

Thanks UYT

By the way - you did a stand up job moderating the draft. Even when teams used most of their time (not often) you never made anyone feel rushed. Hope to see you in Chicago next year.

RC

skipman · Post by **skipman** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 3:01 am

Ugly and Route,

I don't know that route C's boyfriend is an objective source. Also, I still point out that the stripper manning our board in Vegas was very impressed with our league.

[ December 21, 2004, 05:11 PM: Message edited by: skipman ]

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:43 am

Originally posted by skipman:
Ugly and Route,

I don't know that route C's boyfriend is an objective score. Also, I still point out that the stripper manning our board in Vegas was very impressed with out league. Nice!

You wanted to twist my comments ... you suceeded.
You wanted to get personal and offend me ... you suceeded.
Are you really this much of a jerk in person ... or does the safty of the internet give you courage?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:50 am

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
Are you really this much of a jerk in person ... or does the safty of the internet give you courage? what you are saying was confirmed by MULTIPLE people in Las Vegas. i think the other half of Lumpy Losers (Derek) was an okay guy, it's the other guy that brings him down. let's see Derek calls himself Lumpy, i guess that leaves the Loser part for the other bloat?