3RR, Socialized Fantasy Medicine?

[ultimatefs]

Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by RiFF:
And I believe this perceived advantage gained is at the peril of the early mid slots and NOT the 1st few slots.This brings up yet another question. Do statistics show that the middle slots (7 and 8) have a higher rate of success than the lower ones? It seems to me that this would have to be true for 3RR to be justified since 3RR it NOT helping the middle slots in any way - only the lower ones? [/QUOTE]The mid slots are being helped.

Blocking the top 3 picks in round 2 was always part of the decision process whenever I was a 4-8 pick coming back in round 2.

That pretty much goes away now. I can now choose totally what's best for my team instead of choosing someone to block the huge advantage (like Manning to go with LT2 and a TOP WR) that a top 3 team could get when picks slip through.

It could very well turn out that this was a major reason why mid pick numbers don't fare as well and that could be corrected a bit by 3rr.

This makes those picks a little better than they were before.

[ February 15, 2007, 12:58 PM: Message edited by: UFS ]

[renman]

A few random thoughts before heading back to work..

Leroys Aces,

You are saying nearly word for word what I have said about walking that fine line between what seems fun to ME PERSONALLY as a fantasy player and what is best for the overal event and product. The NFFC is as good as it gets in terms of high stakes fantasy football and it is and has been steadily growing (I think it will explode further this coming season).

Some of the new rule change ideas can excite some of the message board regulars here but few take the time to think about how it would impact or appeal to the regular newbie fantasy player who might be thinking about taking the leap from his $100 entry home league into the $1300 NFFC with tbe big boys. This was my position when we debated the idea of BBDS being part of the NFFC... Shockingly, I was attacked for daring to have this opinion...

-3RR appeals to me for numerous reasons, most of which is taking away some of the predictability of the flow in picks for the first 3-4 rounds. Thus allowing for differing strategies no matter what draft slot you get... you wont feel as pigeon holed or forced to take certain positions.

-I hope 3RR eliminates some of the pathetic whining and cry baby stuff from those who have a bad fantasy season and cry "no fair!!!" because others are doing well. I also hope ALL WINNING OWNERS will get the respect and admiration they deserve as opposed to how some do not get it based on where they drafted from.

-We will still have teams at the top of the standings having many similar players regardless of 3RR being part of the event. If we had 3RR last season we likely still would have had 18 league winners with Tomlinson, 3RR would have done little to impact a season like he had.

-Maybe 3RR will appeal to those who fear drafting from the back of the board and could maybe increase interest... who knows...

[ultimatefs]

Originally posted by renman:

-3RR appeals to me for numerous reasons, most of which is taking away some of the predictability of the flow in picks for the first 3-4 rounds. Are newbies so stupid they can't see this?

Rest assured that if you can see it, a newbie can see it.

[Leroy's Aces]

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by Leroy's Aces:
GG,

I am speaking in terms of having the NFFC attract more competitors and be more successful, which strengthens the event long-term. I do not think that adding more rules like this does that that. The reasons I stated are why this event is never sold out and has problems attracting competitors. It makes the event more of a unique, specialty event, which is actually great for players like me and you, but casual entrants get scared off from it. If that is fine with Greg, that is fine with me, but it limits the event.

I did state that personally I like the idea, and I would be more likely to join had I not played in it before. But I am not the type of fantasy player this event needs to attract. You need the people that have not played in an event like this before. Dave,

All good points made by a fellow Cheesehead. There is no question that from a more traditional standpoint, the WCOFF has more standard rules than the NFFC. But traditional players didn't play with 1 point per reception rules at one time or 0.1 point per yard rushing and now suddently those are "standard" rules. Serpentine drafts are also standard, but change is constant in this world and maybe 3RR will be as standard as 1 point per reception leagues some day.

But you are exactly right about your assessment on both contests. If I had thought of doing this first, I definitely would have done a 12-team format. In fact, I had never competed in a 14-team fantasy football league before I devised these rules. I remember writing the rules up, checking them over several times, checking with Tom again and struggling to post the rules with this 14-team format because I knew it was different. But I also knew it would create the ultimate competition for die-hard fantasy football players. My baseball contest was created before the baseball event and I went with a 15-team format for that as well, not because it was a "standard" format but because it was the ultimate competition.

I'd be a fool to say I don't want to be the biggest and the best game in the industry. I think we could handle 800+ teams and the money that comes with it! But we have created a better game for players and if that hurts our growth, well, then I guess we just budget accordingly. We don't need to be fat cats up here, just fat!

I'm happy with our growth in the NFFC and the NFBC and I expect that growth to continue in 2007. In fact, our baseball event right now is just on fire. 3RR is unique, but don't be surprised if you see a lot of magazines write about this concept this year as I'm going to do my best to spread the word. Maybe 3RR won't be as hard to sell to customers as some people think. I actually think the 14-team format is a tougher sell than 3RR or FAAB or KDS.

But all points are well taken by me and it just means we have to work harder to appeal to fantasy players out there. I'm capable of doing that, trust me! [/QUOTE]Greg, great post.

I agree that the 14 team format is the toughest sell of all. I really want your event to get more and more people. That is why I brought up those points.

By offering a more service-friendly product, you are definitely doing what players like. I really think that if there is an area that fantasy pay leagues have always dropped the ball, it is customer service. Antsports leagues suck, ESPN leagues suck, Yahoo is terrible, Sportsline is truly a joke, (I heard Fantasy Jungle was good) and WCOFF has made a number of fantasy players upset for various reasons. I have never personally had a problem with WCOFF, but I have heard some stories. Plus, the 2006 Xpert league free agent glitch was quite a pain.

I guess what also needs to be done to help the NFFC is 14 team formats need to try to become the standard league size, or at least develop to the point that 30% of local leagues are 14 teamers. THEN, you would really see the growth. Many more leagues on a "local" level need to use 14 team formats. More publishing needs to be done on the quality and skill of playing in a 14 team league. If it get ingrained that the best players are in 14 team leagues, then fantasy players will seek that out more. I know that enough message board posters over here yell about how great 14 team leagues are, that is for sure. But that just shows their passion for it, which is great.

I really enjoyed the event and the challenge of drafting/co-managing with Bald is Beautiful for our 2006 NFFC team.

Thanks!

Dave
Leroy's Aces

[ February 15, 2007, 01:17 PM: Message edited by: Leroy's Aces ]

[ultimatefs]

Originally posted by Leroy's Aces:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
quote:Originally posted by Leroy's Aces:
GG,

I am speaking in terms of having the NFFC attract more competitors and be more successful, which strengthens the event long-term. I do not think that adding more rules like this does that that. The reasons I stated are why this event is never sold out and has problems attracting competitors. It makes the event more of a unique, specialty event, which is actually great for players like me and you, but casual entrants get scared off from it. If that is fine with Greg, that is fine with me, but it limits the event.

I did state that personally I like the idea, and I would be more likely to join had I not played in it before. But I am not the type of fantasy player this event needs to attract. You need the people that have not played in an event like this before. Dave,

All good points made by a fellow Cheesehead. There is no question that from a more traditional standpoint, the WCOFF has more standard rules than the NFFC. But traditional players didn't play with 1 point per reception rules at one time or 0.1 point per yard rushing and now suddently those are "standard" rules. Serpentine drafts are also standard, but change is constant in this world and maybe 3RR will be as standard as 1 point per reception leagues some day.

But you are exactly right about your assessment on both contests. If I had thought of doing this first, I definitely would have done a 12-team format. In fact, I had never competed in a 14-team fantasy football league before I devised these rules. I remember writing the rules up, checking them over several times, checking with Tom again and struggling to post the rules with this 14-team format because I knew it was different. But I also knew it would create the ultimate competition for die-hard fantasy football players. My baseball contest was created before the baseball event and I went with a 15-team format for that as well, not because it was a "standard" format but because it was the ultimate competition.

I'd be a fool to say I don't want to be the biggest and the best game in the industry. I think we could handle 800+ teams and the money that comes with it! But we have created a better game for players and if that hurts our growth, well, then I guess we just budget accordingly. We don't need to be fat cats up here, just fat!

I'm happy with our growth in the NFFC and the NFBC and I expect that growth to continue in 2007. In fact, our baseball event right now is just on fire. 3RR is unique, but don't be surprised if you see a lot of magazines write about this concept this year as I'm going to do my best to spread the word. Maybe 3RR won't be as hard to sell to customers as some people think. I actually think the 14-team format is a tougher sell than 3RR or FAAB or KDS.

But all points are well taken by me and it just means we have to work harder to appeal to fantasy players out there. I'm capable of doing that, trust me! [/QUOTE]Greg, great post.

I do think that you are doing the right thing by trying to differentiate your event.

I agree that the 14 team format is the toughest sell of all. I really want your event to get more and more people. That is why I brought up those points.

By offering a more service-friendly product, you are definitely doing what players like. I really think that if there is an area that fantasy pay leagues have always dropped the ball, it is customer service. Antsports leagues suck, ESPN leagues suck, Yahoo is terrible, Sportsline is truly a joke, and WCOFF has made a number of fantasy players upset for various reasons. I have never personally had a problem with WCOFF, but I have heard some stories. Plus, the 2006 Xpert league free agent glitch was quite a pain.

I guess what also needs to be done to help the NFFC is 14 team formats need to try to become the standard league size, or at least develop to the point that 30% of local leagues are 14 teamers. THEN, you would really see the growth. Many more leagues on a "local" level need to use 14 team formats. More publishing needs to be done on the quality and skill of playing in a 14 team league. If it get ingrained that the best players are in 14 team leagues, then fantasy players will seek that out more. I know that enough message board posters over here yell about how great 14 team leagues are, that is for sure. But that just shows their passion for it, which is great.

I really enjoyed the event and the challenge of drafting/co-managing with Bald is Beautiful for our 2006 NFFC team.

Thanks!

Dave
Leroy's Aces [/QUOTE]Dave, great posts today.

The better players will gravitate towards 14 teams because they want more of a challenge.

It's this theory that built my biz.

This is the point where Greg asks me to start advertising 14 team leagues again

[Nag']

Originally posted by UFS:
The mid slots are being helped.

Blocking the top 3 picks in round 2 was always part of the decision process whenever I was a 4-8 pick coming back in round 2.

That pretty much goes away now. I can now choose totally what's best for my team instead of choosing someone to block the huge advantage (like Manning to go with LT2 and a TOP WR) that a top 3 team could get when picks slip through.

It could very well turn out that this was a major reason why mid pick numbers don't fare as well and that could be corrected a bit by 3rr.

This makes those picks a little better than they were before. What you have described is how 3RR will effect YOUR personal approach to the draft.

What I am looking for is someone to show me how 3RR will actually help slots 7-8 in a statistical sense? Isn't that the point of 3RR to remove the statistical advantage enjoyed by the top slots and distribute it evenly to the rest? I see how the lower slots are benefiting, how will the middle ones?

[RiFF]

Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by Nag':
quote:Originally posted by RiFF:
And I believe this perceived advantage gained is at the peril of the early mid slots and NOT the 1st few slots.This brings up yet another question. Do statistics show that the middle slots (7 and 8) have a higher rate of success than the lower ones? It seems to me that this would have to be true for 3RR to be justified since 3RR it NOT helping the middle slots in any way - only the lower ones? [/QUOTE]The mid slots are being helped.

Blocking the top 3 picks in round 2 was always part of the decision process whenever I was a 4-8 pick coming back in round 2.

That pretty much goes away now. I can now choose totally what's best for my team instead of choosing someone to block the huge advantage (like Manning to go with LT2 and a TOP WR) that a top 3 team could get when picks slip through.

It could very well turn out that this was a major reason why mid pick numbers don't fare as well and that could be corrected a bit by 3rr.

This makes those picks a little better than they were before. [/QUOTE]This makes absolutely perfect sense if competing in an event like the City Challenges that are a part of this competition. BUT, although I've also seen others espouse this dictum, I still don't understand its point or why anyone would really do it. This is an individual, not team event and your only obligation is to attempt to construct the best squad possible for your benefit. By making a pick that you believe weakens your team but also potentially weakens the ability of an early draft slot to maximize his squad , while theoreitically giving team 11, 12, 13 or 14 a potentially better chance of winning makes NO sense. In a straight serpentine draft or a draft using 3RR, imo, teams 4, 5, 6 or 7 or any slot, should choose the player that he/she feels will give him/her the greatest opportunity to win or place with a high finish REGARDLESS of what impact that choice will have on the other 13 slots. (of course this view is altered in a City Challenge) So, I do not believe 3RR should have any impact on these slots in the manner you state. And I don't believe this was an overriding reason for any poor historical performance for these draft slots. If, in your example you believe Manning gives YOU the best chance to succeed you should select him. If on the contrary you are only selecting him because you feel that its the best chance to diminish an early draft slot from winning but it diminishes your chances also, well, that makes absolutely no sense. Your pick should, imo, maximize your team NOT be an attempt to minimize another team. 3RR shouldn't change that.

[Gordon Gekko]

Originally posted by Nag':
I see how the lower slots are benefiting, how will the middle ones? nag - twice today you missed the boat. if the early draft slots are losing value because of 3RR, ALL other draft slots benefit, either directly or indirectly. this principle is something i learned in grade school.

[ February 15, 2007, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

[Greg Ambrosius]

John, Ultimate Fantasy Sports really needs to advertise those 14-team leagues and a great place to start is our next issue of Fantasy Sports Magazine. I have a deal for you!!!

Just bring the case of Corona's to Phoenix for our LABR drafts and we'll discuss ad rates!

[Nag']

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Nag':
I see how the lower slots are benefiting, how will the middle ones? nag - twice today you missed the boat. if the early draft slots are losing value because of 3RR, ALL other draft slots benefit, either directly or indirectly. this principle is something i learned in grade school. [/QUOTE]I missed no boat. My questions are rhetorical and I already know the answer. I don't think any of the 3RR loyalists do.
What you are apparently refusing to admit is that lower slots are benefiting and are GAINING on the middle slots thanks to 3RR. This is the DIRECT RESULT OF 3RR. Top slots lose, lower slots gain, middle slots stay the same. End result - middle slots lose.

[ February 15, 2007, 02:01 PM: Message edited by: Nag' ]