Revised Serpentine draft

[godtomsatan]

Its not where you draft, its who you draft.

 

I hate to say this, but this is what I would agree with most. I proposed adopting this for the local (fairly casual group) and was met with a deer in the headlights look. It's just not seen as an issue. As pointed out, if you pick up Steven Jackson at #10 (like many did in 2006), you did really well. IF you picked Shaun Alexander at #1 (like many did) you probably didn't. Same thing will happne this year with someone outperforming their draft position, and others underperforming. You'll never be able to take that out of the equation no matter what the draft order is.

 

And besides, an easier way around draft disparity is to go to an auction format. tt's not tremendously more difficult and levels the playing field.

Edited August 2, 2007 by godtomsatan

[Caveman_Nick]

But mostly this is about altering round 3.

 

 

Err....I get that. Again, I would need justification from data comparing championships to draft position over time to make the change.

[Caveman_Nick]

I hate to say this, but this is what I would agree with most. I proposed adopting this for the local (fairly casual group) and was met with a deer in the headlights look. It's just not seen as an issue. As pointed out, if you pick up Steven Jackson at #10 (like many did in 2006), you did really well. IF you picked Shaun Alexander at #1 (like many did) you probably didn't. Same thing will happne this year with someone outperforming their draft position, and others underperforming. You'll never be able to take that out of the equation no matter what the draft order is.

 

And besides, an easier way around draft disparity is to go to an auction format. tt's not tremendously more difficult and levels the playing field.

 

Other examples just from last year...

 

If you got caught up in the Mike Bell hype and drafted him early, you probably didn't do well. If you drank the Frank Gore kool-aid, you probably did well. If you drafted Larry Fitzgerald you probably didn't do as well as you liked. If you waited on getting a QB and got Brees or Kitna, you probably did well. If you took Edgerrin James, Ronnie Brown, C Williams in the first round, you probably did poorly.

 

All about who you draft.

[Bronco Billy]

Yea, how many took LT #1 overall last yr. You dont seem to be getting my POINT BB. LT went #3 in most of drafts, not 1.

 

That being said, the owner who was lucky enough to get LT had a advantage last yr. But that doesnt guarantee anything, THIS YEAR Just like SA the year before, as compared to last yr. Or like SJax and Gore last yr, who were drafted much later.

 

Its not where you draft, its who you draft.

I understood your scenerio the first time, and I dont agree with it. You dont need to enlighten me, you need to consider the other side of the argument, as you are asking me to do.....

 

Well, good.

 

Since you are so sure that owners drafting later in round 1 have an advanatge, i'll give you a chance to put up or shut up.

 

In the Huddle Ladder Hall of Fame draft, you had the 1.01 and 2.12 picks. I had the 1.09 and 2.04 picks. You picked LT with 1.01 and Harrison with 2.12. I picked Parker with 1.09 and S Smith with 2.04.

 

All four guys went at appropriate value, so according to you, I should have an advantage. Being magnanimous like I am, I'm willing to relinquish that advanatge to you.

 

I'll swap you Parker & Smith for LT & Harrison. Your #1 RB/#1 WR for my #1 RB/#1 WR. I'll send you the offer at the mfl.com site and expect your acceptance.

 

Let's see if you believe what you're shoveling here:

 

Bronco Billy have proposed a trade with Sgt. Ryan

 

Bronco Billy will give up:

Parker, Willie PIT RB

Smith, Steve CAR WR

 

Sgt. Ryan will give up:

Tomlinson, Ladainian SDC RB

Harrison, Marvin IND WR

[Bronco Billy]

BB, you'd be great in middle management in a large corporation, because you show a similar ability to use "logic" to make a "statistical" argument that has absolutely no grounding in either logic or statistics.

 

A number only has statistical validity if the numbers it is based on actually represent something. The argument you are making is based on numbers that are completely made up -- a valuation system based on past performances as applied to future draft picks, in a world where all the players are drafted in exact proportion to their fantasy output at the end of the year, as accurately projected on the same cheat sheet used by everyone.

 

Well, that's just an outstanding argument.

 

So if a player gets to the craps table, rolls a 5 with their first roll, rolls another 4 rolls without crapping out, and their makes their number with the 6th roll, they've just proven that the theory of probability is a complete & total hoax, right?

 

There is a fundamental difference between the probability of expected events and the actual outcome. That's the exact same difference between player value in a FF draft and the outcome of performance during the season.

 

If you don't understand that fundamental difference, then this whole argument is moot.

[Brewer]

Well, good.

 

Since you are so sure that owners drafting later in round 1 have an advanatge, i'll give you a chance to put up or shut up.

 

In the Huddle Ladder Hall of Fame draft, you had the 1.01 and 2.12 picks. I had the 1.09 and 2.04 picks. You picked LT with 1.01 and Harrison with 2.12. I picked Parker with 1.09 and S Smith with 2.04.

 

All four guys went at appropriate value, so according to you, I should have an advantage. Being magnanimous like I am, I'm willing to relinquish that advanatge to you.

 

I'll swap you Parker & Smith for LT & Harrison. Your #1 RB/#1 WR for my #1 RB/#1 WR. I'll send you the offer at the mfl.com site and expect your acceptance.

 

Let's see if you believe what you're shoveling here:

 

Bronco Billy have proposed a trade with Sgt. Ryan

 

Bronco Billy will give up:

Parker, Willie PIT RB

Smith, Steve CAR WR

 

Sgt. Ryan will give up:

Tomlinson, Ladainian SDC RB

Harrison, Marvin IND WR

 

 

Gee. I wonder how this is going to turn out?

[Bronco Billy]

Gee. I wonder how this is going to turn out?

 

 

No you don't. You know, I know, and anyone with a smattering of FF knowledge knows that Sarge's 1/24 has significantly greater value during the draft than my 9/13. That's indisputable.

 

That also wouldn't be altered at this point if in the future during week 1, LT breaks his ankle and Harrison has his arm torn off in a freak accident immediately before the game, while Parker & S Smith go on to play full seasons and have all-Pro years. That Sarge's players have more value right now is unquestionable.

 

But if he believes what he is saying, he'll make the trade and prove that I have no clue what I'm talking about. The trade is on the board at the site. Let's just see how he responds.

Edited August 2, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[Sgt. Ryan]

Well, good.

 

Since you are so sure that owners drafting later in round 1 have an advanatge, i'll give you a chance to put up or shut up.

 

In the Huddle Ladder Hall of Fame draft, you had the 1.01 and 2.12 picks. I had the 1.09 and 2.04 picks. You picked LT with 1.01 and Harrison with 2.12. I picked Parker with 1.09 and S Smith with 2.04.

 

All four guys went at appropriate value, so according to you, I should have an advantage. Being magnanimous like I am, I'm willing to relinquish that advanatge to you.

 

I'll swap you Parker & Smith for LT & Harrison. Your #1 RB/#1 WR for my #1 RB/#1 WR. I'll send you the offer at the mfl.com site and expect your acceptance.

 

Let's see if you believe what you're shoveling here:

 

Bronco Billy have proposed a trade with Sgt. Ryan

 

Bronco Billy will give up:

Parker, Willie PIT RB

Smith, Steve CAR WR

 

Sgt. Ryan will give up:

Tomlinson, Ladainian SDC RB

Harrison, Marvin IND WR

 

LMAO, you dropped the pouch as far as Im concerned. There is no way in hell Id have taken Willie Parker at 9, and though S Smith is a stud, I wouldnt have selected him over the RBs on the board at that time. Now had you taken Heny at 1.9, and Maroney or Benson at 2.4, Id have made that trade, for LT and harrison, at that time. . I dont believe LT will come close to last yrs numbers and I see all 3 of those players busting out this yr. But you simply dont have the goods to get a deal done with me, sorry.... Maybe had you selected better.

[Bronco Billy]

LMAO, you dropped the pouch as far as Im concerned. There is no way in hell Id have taken Willie Parker at 9, and though S Smith is a stud, I wouldnt have selected him over the RBs on the board at that time. Now had you taken Heny at 1.9, and Maroney or Benson at 2.4, Id have made that trade, for LT and harrison, at that time. . I dont believe LT will come close to last yrs numbers and I see all 3 of those players busting out this yr. But you simply dont have the goods to get a deal done with me, sorry.... Maybe had you selected better.

 

 

I can't believe you just made that argument as your sorry excuse to not back up your B.S. - not in front of everyone here.

 

Tell you what, peepinmofo made Henry his 1.11 and T Jones his 2.02. I know for a fact that you love Jones' chances to produce this year, and you just stated above that Henry is good value at 1.09, much less 1.11.

 

How about we ask peeps if he'll trade Henry & Jones for LT & Harrison?

Edited August 2, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[FishFreak]

BB, you'd be great in middle management in a large corporation, because you show a similar ability to use "logic" to make a "statistical" argument that has absolutely no grounding in either logic or statistics.

 

A number only has statistical validity if the numbers it is based on actually represent something. The argument you are making is based on numbers that are completely made up -- a valuation system based on past performances as applied to future draft picks, in a world where all the players are drafted in exact proportion to their fantasy output at the end of the year, as accurately projected on the same cheat sheet used by everyone.

 

You can argue that you prefer the system of think it's more fair, but don't drag "statistiics" into this, because you don't have any. You (or rather, whomever created this at a "rival website") are just making up values to justify the argument.

 

By comparison, take the Huddle perfect scoring system. That actually uses real numbers -- there are 6 points for a TD, etc. You can use numbers to make the case that such a scoring system is better than a traditional performance scoring system. You can't do the same with this sytem because there are no real numbers -- just made up stuff that would never happen in the real world.

 

I think sarge is dead on right in every single point he's made about this issue. The worst thing about this "revised" system is that it gives credence to the idea that your draft position plays a defining role in your team's performance -- in other words, it simply gives people an excuse to suck. Of all people, BB, you should not be advocating a system that encourages people to blame something else for their own errors of judgment (or, in many cases, just bad luck).

 

Very well said. I think this is the best counter argument posted thus far. However, reversing the 3rd round is simply about correcting a flaw in the draft system. Making value picks and getting late round gems always helps but excluding trades, pick-ups, etc., your first three picks can either sink your team or push it into contention.

 

Too many relies are focusing on the results of player performance picked throughout all rounds. This discussion is not really about that. It's about fixing the fact (assuming all things being equal) that the owners picking 1, 2 or 3 are choosing three players out of the first 27 picks. Meanwhile, the owners picking 10,11 or 13 are choosing three players out of the first 36 picks. That's not fair (in theory). I'll be the first to admit and agree, it doesn't really matter where you pick but rather who you pick. Again, that's not the premise of this change even though it's been going in that direction. Maybe I set this discussion up initially in the wrong way focusing on the distinct advantage LT owners got last year with his incredible production.

[Sgt. Ryan]

 

I can't believe you just made that argument as your sorry excuse to not back up your B.S. - not in front of everyone here.

 

Tell you what, peepinmofo made Henry his 1.11 and T Jones his 2.02. I know for a fact that you love Jones' chances to produce this year, and you just stated above that Henry is good value at 1.09, much less 1.11.

 

How about we ask peeps if he'll trade Henry & Jones for LT & Harrison?

 

 

Made what argument. I built my team around LT. Its too late to change strategy now. . No way Id have taken Norwood in round 5, if I had 2 RBs already. What about that, dont you understand. I said, at the time, Id have made that deal, had you drafted better. You didnt, that time is now passed, and Im building around LT. I dont get, what you dont understand about that.

[Bronco Billy]

Made what argument. I built my team around LT. Its too late to change strategy now. . No way Id have taken Norwood in round 5, if I had 2 RBs already. What about that, dont you understand. I said, at the time, Id have made that deal, had you drafted better. You didnt, that time is now passed, and Im building around LT. I dont get, what you dont understand about that.

 

 

You sure think you know how to weasel your way out of spewing crap, don't you.

 

"Had I drafted better." You're a freakin' girl.

 

Post edit - BTW, BJ & DMD, no need to pull the plug on this. This is going nowhere with Ol' Sargey & I'm done going head to head with him.

Edited August 2, 2007 by Bronco Billy

[Big Country]

This discussion is not really about that. It's about fixing the fact (assuming all things being equal) that the owners picking 1, 2 or 3 are choosing three players out of the first 27 picks. Meanwhile, the owners picking 10,11 or 13 are choosing three players out of the first 36 picks. That's not fair (in theory).

 

Hate to burst your bubble, but no matter what draft order you do, be it serpentine, modified serpentine as described here or redraw draft position every two rounds, someone will be getting 3 of the first 27 players and someone will be getting 3 of the first 36 players.

[Sturphy]

Wow.

 

My own 2 cents: I'd like to try that revised Serpentine.

 

I think some of this conflict involves whether you're left brained or right brained.

[LooGie]

i think this is a terrible idea. The joy of the draft is the luck of the draw.

Putting together a winning strategy when you dont get the lucky #1 pick is a big time feeling too.The kind that keeps us coming back, when we consistently lose, or consistently draft in the lower slots anyway.

 

I'm not worried about the luck of the draw, and I certainly won't plan for it. That's part of the fun, talking trash and making everyone else hate you for your lucky pick, or when their lucky pick didn't pan out.

 

And most people took SA AND LJ over LT2 last year anyway so the first pick with SA, ended up burning 90% of people anyway. Get my drift?

[peepinmofo]

People... Last year (it might have been the year before) we were saying how drafting in the top 3 was the worst spot because of the uncertainty. 4-8 was supposedly the best spot. This varies from year to year, and this year just happens to be a great year for a top 3. Hell, top 7 as far as Im concerned. Its after that where the uncertainty comes this year.

 

Dont believe me? Ask that guy peepinmofo. He'll tell you.Or maybe Big John might be able to ressurect a thread about it?

[Luger]

You are all dancing around the issue why drafting is not fair no matter how you slice it. In years when there is a huge stud player (read LT or Terrel Davis) 1/24 has better team. In years of transition of flatter value 12/13 does better. BooHoo.

 

As someone said earlier, if you don't have the stones for an auction where EVERYONE has a chance at any player they want, quit bitching.

 

Another way to help this is add IDP so more points flow in to the game minimizing the impact of one player.

[PantherDave]

http://freemeeting.6.football.nfl.com/meet..._single_scoring

 

 

Scroll up if it does not show the draft order-NFL.com use to be a traditional snake, but it appears it may be this way for their draft this year(Huddler Nation-BotH).

[BS Miscreant]

Okay, Sarge, let's go to a cheat sheet. We'll use very simple .1/6 scoring. The #1 player listed on most cheatsheets this year is LT. The #12/#13 players are players like Travis Henry, Rudi Johnson, and Laurence Maroney. At #24 you'll find players like Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, and Thomas Jones. We'll use RBs since it might make it easier to comprehend in your mind.

 

So let's use rhino's valuable work and look at the players.

 

LT's weekly average is 22.5 ppw

The best 2 of Henry, Rudi, & Maroney is 14.0 & 13.9 ppw

The worst of Brown, Benson, & Jones is 12.1 ppw

 

Now, that is skewed as far as player value & scoring to the 12/13 pick owner.

 

LT plus the worst of the #24 pick = 22.5 ppw + 12.1 ppw = 34.6 ppw

The best 2 of the 12/13 picks = 14.0 ppw + 13.9 ppw = 27.9 ppw

 

Using these projections, LT plus the worst #24 has a 24% scoring edge over the 12/13 picks owner. Even if the 12/13 owner gets to pick first in round 3 (3rd round reversal), they still pick 12 in round 4, and the point differenetial between 3rd and 4th round players is significantly less than the top 1st round players and the rest of the players in rounds 1 & 2. But a serpentine draft compounds the advantage by letting the 1/24 owner draft the #25 player also. That magnifies the advantage they already enjoy.

 

Therefore, it should be clear to even someone like you who clearly doesn't understand player value that the owner of the #1 pick has a significant theoretical edge.

The major problem here is, like Misfit stated earlier, you are assuming two things that can't fairly be assumed with any accuracy.

#1 - You're using past statistics to predict future statistics in a world where a great deal changes from year to year and variability can be immense. Even with something as simple as a dice roll you cannot predict with any accuracy what the next roll will be. That's why the house has the advantage. No matter what you roll the first ten times, every time you pick the dice back up the probability of a certain roll occuring resets to the original probability. Craps is a pretty simple game with few variables and yet nearly impossible to predict. How am I supposed to believe that you can take a situation with endless variables and predict outcomes with any accuracy?

 

#2 - You are assuming cheatsheets/rankings to be correct or even close to correct. I addressed this earlier in this thread with the following...

"3 of the top 25 players" Says who? They are pre-season ranked by human beings and quite often different people have very different rankings and most of those people end up being wrong more often than right. The number 2 RB in FF last year and I believe #1 during the FF playoff stretch was SJax and he was drafted in the latter half of the 1st round in about 9,000,000 drafts last year. Last year, Parker, Gore, Jones-Drew, Betts, Addai, McAllister and Green all ended up top 15 RBs but a couple were rarely picked in the top 25 and several didn't get picked until the 4th or 5th rounds, if even drafted at all. So this begs the question, who really are the top 25 players?

Bottom line, with great respect for DMD, rhino and anyone else who does a nice job providing tools for draft preparation, we have to remember that what they provide are in fact tools that merely help but are not the gospel and certainly not truth with regard to the upcoming season.

[FishFreak]

Hate to burst your bubble, but no matter what draft order you do, be it serpentine, modified serpentine as described here or redraw draft position every two rounds, someone will be getting 3 of the first 27 players and someone will be getting 3 of the first 36 players.

 

Yeah but owner one picking 1,24, 36 and the owner picking twelve getting picks 12, 13, 25 in the revised draft is more even. I don't know how else to explain it. BB, gave a great example with the players drafted in the league he's in with Sgt. Ryan. This is definately a touchy subject. It looks like we will need a 8-4 vote or better in my league to make the switch and that might be tough.

[Hat Trick]

Maybe I'm more biased towards it because my league awards the championship to the team with the most overall points. The Super Bowl playoff system is old and doesn't always reward the best overall team. In fact it usually doesn't.

 

SD was the best team last year, yet they didn't win the Super Bowl. So are you saying the NFL playoff system is flawed and needs to award the team that finishes with the best record?

[Big Country]

Yeah but owner one picking 1,24, 36 and the owner picking twelve getting picks 12, 13, 25 in the revised draft is more even. I don't know how else to explain it. BB, gave a great example with the players drafted in the league he's in with Sgt. Ryan. This is definately a touchy subject. It looks like we will need a 8-4 vote or better in my league to make the switch and that might be tough.

 

The reason it is a tough sell is that so far no on has provided any example with a strong sample size. It is all anecdotal or using particular players drafted in a particular spot in a particular draft.

 

Like I said earlier, show me results from a large number of leagues over a period of time to minimize variance, like say the results of every WCOFF league for 10 years (I use WCOFF as an example because then you are using approx. 70 leagues with the exact same setup, another key point here). I need it over time because the makeup of the NFL varies from year to year. It was not too long ago (10 years or so) that common strategy was to get Steve Young or Brett Favre early and build from there. THe NFL was just different then. Now there are less and less true stud RBs, and more and more QBs putting up similar numbers. Ten years from now we may see another shift, so, if as the dynamics of the NFL change, you can show that an early draft pick in a traditional serpentine draft over a large sample size does indeed generate better results than a later pick, you have an argument. Granted, in order to show any "balance" with the modified draft order, you would want to run the same experiment and get 10 years worth of data from a multitude of leagues with the same setup and compare the results.

[PantherDave]

Has anyone crunched the numbers to see if picking early is actually an advantage in winning championships? I would need to see some kind of justification for a switch before I agreed to it.

 

 

I can only speak from my now shut down local that ran from 1989-2005, and the majority of championships came from the spots between 4-7.

[Hat Trick]

I think sarge is dead on right in every single point he's made about this issue. The worst thing about this "revised" system is that it gives credence to the idea that your draft position plays a defining role in your team's performance -- in other words, it simply gives people an excuse to suck. Of all people, BB, you should not be advocating a system that encourages people to blame something else for their own errors of judgment (or, in many cases, just bad luck).

 

+1

[LooGie]

I can only speak from my now shut down local that ran from 1989-2005, and the majority of championships came from the spots between 4-7.

Exactly!

 

And if you have a long running local, or longer than 1 year that is, next year, you can do it NFL style, and the championship team drafts last, and the loser drafts 1, if you're worried about it.