I actually do agree with the strategy to a degree. Since he knew for a fact that no team would take a QB before that one team, it would've been correct imo to wait until right before that team picks to make your pick. And if none of the 3 WRs had been taken, then you take the QB, as you can be relatively sure that one of them will get back to you. And if two of them are taken then you immediately take the 3rd(you don't wait any longer after 2 have been taken). This is good strategy, even if many here don't see it.However, if just one is taken, then you are left in a bind and you have to make a split second decision. However, the decision to let the team that needs a QB to draft was completely wrong. What could you have possibly gained from that? I just don't see any benefits at all to that, as the entire strategy was centered around getting Garcia and one of the WRs and to let the other team that needs a QB to have a shot at Garcia is just assinine imo.Also, I'm still waiting for you to answer my first question in my series....I guess you like to ask the questions but not to answer them huh?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Time Limit Per Pick (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Z-Men
- Start date
I see a very slight advantage to doing this but overall the risk adds very little value. You can make assumptions on who other owners will take but when you enter the middle rounds some owners make some crazy picks, even taking their 2nd QB before they need to.Depending upon the size of the league ($-wise), if I was drafting and noticed another owner trying to manipulate the draft in their favor I would probably do one of two things:1. Skip my pick as well, hopefully F'ing them up. Am hoping the commish would interject and force something to happen.2. Wait a few rounds and steal their handcuffs 
Z-men, why don't you bring some of you skills to one of the leagues around here and demonstrate your stuff. Maybe the MBSL's that will be starting up in the next couple of weeks...all drafting, no management/trades. Heck, if you win, I'll buy your book next year. I certainly wouldn't purchase it based on what you've brought to the table thus far.Personally I see the toughest leagues materializing from these boards. Not that the WCOFF doesn't have some talent, but anyone serious about fantasy football solely for the $ would realize that the cut the organizers take is obscene. The only reason I could justify entering a contest like that would be for the noterity and/or the party. Someday I may enter just for the experience, but I'd never enter for the return on investment.
here was my question, z.Ummm...ok, I'll simplifyNow I know exactly what you mean majorizin when you said I got enough trouble figuring out what jwvdcw is always on about. Funny stuff. -z-Z-Men, I've actually read your book(a bootleg copy that I read before the actual book came out actually). I enjoyed the first read so much that I sandpapered the edges down and read it a second time....I have many thoughts, but I'll start with asking you a simple series of questions:
Would you advocate drafting without paying heed to your innermost timetable when it?o you count seconds in your head or do you rely upon an official "timekeeper"?
jurb26
Footballguy
I hate to jump in the witch hunt here, but I would think a self proclaimed professional would be capable of finding a way to manage his time efficiently enough to fit in one more league.Already tied up w/ NFFC, WCOFF main event, WCOFF satellite league, FantasyFootballMasters, and Pro Forecast magazine expert league. Great competition, good company, lots of money to be won.-z-
Last edited by a moderator:
umop apisdn
Footballguy
So we should ignore this line:
from the first page of this thread then?But really. For me to have any hope of understanding your strategy, you need to explain why you would consider 3 different players to be all equal in absolute value. This is the thing I for one can't get over. There were enough differences in those 3 WR's going into that year that I can't imagine how you ranked them all the same. Maybe THAT is what you need to try to explain. How did you rank them so they were all exactly the same?
I think that is the key to explaining to us how your strategy bought you anything. What factors allowed them to all be ranked the same? By passing on the WR's until someone made the decision for you, what do you gain? Instead of being able to have your pick of 3, you had your pick of 2 (or one if two had been taken) how does that give you any MORE options or better information? The ONLY way that your strategy works is if you TRULY have multiple players ranked out exactly the same and cannot differentiate them (even by bye weeks, player issues, team offensive strategy, team strength of schedule, individual player matchups, etc.). I HAVE NEVER had this situation occur and maybe that is my stumbling block in realizing the effective potential of this strategy.
Additionally I also still don't get how your strategy got you Garcia other then from dumb luck. If you had passed until right before team 2 picked and taken Garcia, then I would understand your methodology more, but the whole point (I thought) was to get Garcia (who you were afraid team 2 would take) and a WR. By waiting until after team 2 picked you gave them the power to steal Garcia from you which gained you nothing over just taking your pick on your turn and selecting one of your WR's and then HOPING that Garcia fell.
From where I sit, by doing what you did you allowed yourself to have luck give you Garcia not once, but twice and had your options from your WR choices limited. Granted, you say now that you ranked the 3 WR's above Garcia, but in terms of your strategy giving you him I don't see it. I could maybe be convinced that your strategy took the pressure off of having to decide which of the 3 WR's to take by giving the decision to another owner, but I still come back to the "what good does that do you?" question. Letting another owner (or multiple other owners) dictate your draft doesn't seem like an effective strategy.
Maybe I'm just stupid...
Z-Men
Footballguy
Four points:1) Answering the question: In the middle-to-late rounds I utilize a system called Stockpile Theory. This sytem targets potential sleepers and suggests drafting them in certain rounds. Sometimes it'll suggest no one (if no sleepers are lurking around). Other times it will spit out multiple players like a Dilophosaurus in Jurassic Park, resulting in 2 or more players to choose from in the same round. When this happens, and since this system doesn't utilize absolute valuing of the players, I like to treat all such players as having approximately equal value.
2) This begs the question: Wouldn't it be better to actually analyze those players more, whether it be observing historical stats, team schedule, preseason performance, college stats, height/weight, et cetera, so you can ultimately rank them in a certain order?
This could be a whole debate in and of itself.
I think it's in most people's nature that they must rank players in a certain order, even if they truly feel it's a "toss up" among a group of players. But I say "why force rankings?" if none of the players in the group sticks out like a sore thumb. As analytical as I am in many areas, in this particular case I try to avoid paralysis by analysis and accept that "hey, these players are approximately all the same value to me."
3) I should also point out that I wouldn't dare group players in buckets of equal value in the early rounds. It's much easier for me (and you) -- and much more advantageous -- to rank players in a definitive order the earlier in the draft, especially the top ten overall. But, as we look at overall rankings in, say, the 71-80 range, it starts to get very difficult to rank players in a certain order and we should be more inclined to begin grouping players together in tiers of "equal value."
Again, this idea of valuing players equally is probably a difficult process to accept for most people since it's human nature to rank every single player, from high rankings to low rankings, in a defined order, especially with so much information to analyze. So, if you must rank every player in definitive order then you wouldn't be able to delay your pick as I have, even if that means the slight possibility of increasing your chances to get one of the players in the "equal bucket" and another player (like Garcia).
4) Of course, if I have no reason to wait on drafting a players (for instance, let's say I didn't care to get Garcia in the example given in this thread) then I would simply pick one of the three "equal" WRs. I'll analzye bye weeks, historical stats, flip a coin, pick out of a hat, do whatever I have to do in order to pick one of those players. It doesn't make sense to give up on my pick and let the next team get their pick of the litter.
-z-
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear
Footballguy
The reason is that you should be ranking players while you're doing your draft preparation, not in a two-minute period during the draft when you have five seconds on the clock to decide between them. I do not think in 2003 it was at all difficult to make distinctions between Chris Chambers (a promising third-year #1 WR on a mediocre passing team), Reggie Wayne (a promising third-year #2 WR on a prolific passing team), and Joey Galloway (a once-hot veteran WR, playing as #2 WR on a crappy passing team). Arguments can be made for any of the three being the best, but I don't think any argument can be made for their equality. By forcing yourself into a position where you had to decide between them while on a fast clock, you had to choose without the benefit of analysis, and in fact wound up choosing the worst of the three.
Sounds to me like your just using average draft positon to determine a group of playersthat will be there in the late rounds. ????These players are not going to be starters on your fantasy team. Or they will be part of some commitee (qbbc) in garcias case.So thus they are equal. before the draft. But as the draft progresses the each presents value in different ways. If your team needs upside, Wayne is the choice.. = IND #1 passing teamIf your team needs a number one option. = Chambersif you want a dependable.. i am streching galloway.. but he did have a good year in 2002.. kinda. and glen just signed i think ?Garcia is always undervalued at qb. so he will probably be one of the later qbs taken.So he makes the 8th round tier so to speak.I do this kinda... As a simple example. Its June.Sea late schedule appears easy SF @ Ten IND @ GB.so I have Hasslebeck, Engram, Jurevicius, all on my late round radar. Of course Hasslebeck is a qb but he is around 12 on the ranking list. and its June.But if so to say i already have Manning, Culpepper. Farve.. to my team his value is equal to the other wrs. Depending on where my team might need help in the playoffs..or even if i make the playoffs in a head to head contest.
Rooster
Footballguy
If your goal all along was to get a WR, then all your strategy did was reduce that choice from 3 equal WRs to 2 equal WRs. By waiting, you did not increase your chances to get Jeff Garcia, the only thing waiting did was eliminate your chance to get Chris Chambers. Jeff Garcia would've been gone had Team 2 ranked him higher, he also would've been gone if he were ranked as the next best available by a team that chose a backup QB. Your waiting did not change their rankings. You got a WR and QB because other teams valued the remaining QBs differently not because you chose to give up your pick. Personally, I think having a choice between 3 equal WRs is better than choosing between 2 WRs.
That scenario has no strategy to it. If you just picked Galloway in the first place the exact same scenario would have happened.There is no skill involved there, jus plain luck as to who team 2 had ranked as a QB.Lets see I have 4 players all ranked the same but I am picking at the #2 spot. A good strategy is to wait until 3 of the four are picked and then make my selection. So in other words let other teams draft for you and hope the guy that falls to you has a better year.BRILLIANT!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Do I agree with this reasoning, no. But mathematically, he's correct. If he takes a player at his first pick, one of the other three players need to survive 12 more selections. By stalling, he reduces the amount of picks needed to get that 2nd player from his list. Which techinically, increases his shots of getting two players. However, the fact he got two players is mostly luck.
BuckeyeArt
Footballguy
The act of not making a pick has no mathematical effect on whether he gets more than one of the players. He is not claiming that his stalling is affecting another team's decision.
It does have an effect mathematically when you view it from the perspective of each successive pick. The closer together his picks become, the more likely he will be able to aquire two of the four players he is after. This only works if the teams he allows to pick ahead of him are not targetting the same players. I still don't like the methodology. It still reaks of indecision to me. I think this scenario played out simply because the other owners had valued the players differently. The real question to me is how well did this actually translate into the performance of his team? Is it possible his valuation of the players was flawed to begin with? I have not gone back to look at the stats.
Stockpile theory specifically supports the following two concepts: 1) it’s better to draft a potential sleeper over a proven veteran and 2) it’s okay to draft as many potential sleepers as you possibly can. Hence I valued all three the same and took Galloway.
-Z-
BuckeyeArt
Footballguy
If the positon of his 2nd pick doesn't change and the act of not making a first pick does not effect the decision of the other teams, then the math is not changed. After each successive pick, his odds of getting 2 players does improve but it does not affect the overall odds of getting 2 players.
BuckeyeArt
Footballguy
-Z- = -z- ?
I don't follow. This seems like a contradictory statement. With each successive pick, if all four of his targetted players remain on the board, his odds increase. Like I said, I think this really came down to the fact that the other owners simply did not value the players the same way he did and therefore the players were still there. I think this says more about his player valuations thatn it does the strategy.
BuckeyeArt
Footballguy
Basically, the odds after each pick improve (if they are all still there) but it doesn't change the initial odds. In other words, his overall odds of getting 2 players doesn't improve.
I can see some slight benefit to passing. If he valued the WR's the same but more as a whole and felt he needed the QB for his team and was confident the next few teams weren't drafting a QB....waiting a few picks to see if any of the WRs come off the board would make sense. If they didn't, then he jumps in and snags Garcia, if 1 or 2 of the WRs go, then he selects a WR. However, in this case, since he didn't execute the strategy and just rolled the dice, I don't any advance strategy effectively being used.
Kit Fisto
Footballguy
I don't think I've ever read a bigger back-patting thread than this one in my life.As the dudes in the leagues I'm in and I always say... fantasy football is 50% skill, 50% luck. So I'm really happy for you Z-men, it's super that you have crazy draft strategies. So do I. Wow.
But the fact that (example) Owner X drafts LaDanian Tomlinson at 1.1, and Owner Y drafts McGahee at 1.6 and McGahee outperforms LT2 this year only makes him LUCKY!, not all-knowing and wise. Julius Jones getting tripped up at the 1 yard line happens. Ed Reed falling down and Chad Johnson scoring a 75-yd TD happens. You can't control that shizzle, no matter how much of a horn-tooting, big-shot you might think you are.
I can't believe this thread haas lasted 7 pages...
CalBear
Footballguy
His odds do not increase at all. In fact, I would argue that his odds of getting the players he wants actually decrease when he waits.Let's look at a simpler case to make it clear. Let's say you're drafting in the 1.11 slot in a 12-team league. You really like Jamal Lewis and Tiki Barber, and you want to get them both. In the normal case, you select one of them and hope that the guy at the turn doesn't take the other; the probability that Barber is still there at 2.02 is the inverse of the probability that the 1.12/2.01 drafter (Team B) takes Barber.
So what if you decide to wait on your pick. Now Team B can take either Lewis or Barber. If he takes either one, you lose. So your probability of getting both is now the inverse of the probability that Team B takes either Barber or Lewis. It is trivial that this probability cannot be lower than the probability that Team B takes Barber, and furthermore, it can be shown that your probability of getting both is actually lower if you use this tactic.
Suppose Team B's draft board looks like this:
Lewis
Kevin Jones
Dillon
Barber
In this scenario, if you take Lewis with the 1.11 pick, Barber will be there with the 2.02 pick. But if you pass your pick, Team B will take Lewis with 1.12; you just screwed yourself, for no potential benefit.
This result is generalizable; you never improve the probability that one of a group of players will fall to your next pick by passing your pick. You actually reduce the probability, because you give your opponents the chance to select a player who may be higher on their draft boards, that you should have taken with your own pick.
On The Rocks
Footballguy
sorry..i didn't read the entire thread, but to answer the question of the original post, the league i am in...(yes...that is "league".....singular)we do not have a time limit. sure there are those same guys every year that might take 10 minutes to decide between a rookie third string RB and a back up QB, but the Draft is the most fun part of Fantasy Football. So why be in such a rush to get it over? Sit back, enjoy it. And have fun making jabs at the loser that takes forever to make his picks.
I think you might have missed the qualifying statement I made in my post. I said this assumes the four players you are targetting are still there. This is an important distiction. I do not support or endorse the method he used. I think it is foolish. I was simply arguing that if you have four players tergetted, and those players remain available as the other teams make their picks, you are more likely to be able to get two of those four as the picks progress. This is true only while the four players remain unpicked. As soon as one of the players gets taken, the odds decrease.I don't believe your example applies, simply because we are not talking about the probability of a specific player, but instead are talking about the probability of all four players together.
To be honest, it's really not important enought o me to continue the discussion. The bottom line is I don't believe this theory has much merit. I think this is just an attempt to use the fortuitous results to justify the theory. Not the other way around.
CommuterMan
Footballguy
Sorry, your response did not come within the allowed time limit... neither was it in keeping with the general attack dialoge aimed at Z-Men. You will be given a compensatory response at the end of this topic. Until then please be sure that any future reponses are directed to how "lame" a strategy to forego your pick in a round is.Thanks for playing....
Sorry, your response did not come within the allowed time limit... neither was it in keeping with the general attack dialoge aimed at Z-Men. You will be given a compensatory response at the end of this topic. Until then please be sure that any future reponses are directed to how "lame" a strategy to forego your pick in a round is.
Thanks for playing....
-OZ-
Footballguy
There is only one time when I can see passing on the pick making ANY sense.When you're looking at a combination that you don't want if you can't get both parts in it.For instance, if you really like having a QB/WR combo, and can get either CJ and Palmer or Holt and Bulger (let's say a 2 QB start league, or for whatever reason you'd take a QB this high). or maybe the Dunn/Duckett combination. I am assuming trading down is out of the question.
CalBear
Footballguy
Your qualifying statement is meaningless. Obviously, if the team after you (Team B in my example) decides not to take one of your players, the odds that your players make it through goes up from what it was before Team B picked. But whether you passed your pick or not doesn't affect whether Team B would take one of your players--unless you would have picked the one player that Team B would have taken, in which case passing your pick decreases your odds of winning. At the point that you have a decision to make--choose a player, or pass my pick?--the only thing you can do is worsen your chances by passing.
Last edited by a moderator:
I have a hard enough time writing a thesis.
Sigh...Calbear, I do not intend to debate this any further. You can discount my qualifying statement all you like, but it was relevant to my specific argument. I know it's obvious and that's exactly the point I was trying to make. Someone stated that passing the pick did not increase his chances of success. I mearly argued that it does as long as the targetted players remain on the board, which is what happened here, to a point.
Like I said, I thought the entire "theory" z-men was touting was flawed and I believe he did nothing to prove it had any merit. I believe he simply used a fortuitous (in his opinion) result to try to justify a flawed theory and proclaim himself a genious.
Bottom line, I agree with the basic premise that passing on the pick was not the right thing to do. What he did may have worked out the way he wanted, but it had nothing to do with genious or his theory and everything to do with luck. Frankly I think his player valuations were suspect to begin with and this may have also played a roll in his theory's success.
Z-Men
Footballguy
Brew, you are exactly right. Let me add this: My plan was to take Garcia right before TEam Two if none of my WRs had been drafted OR I was planning on taking the third WR if two of them were drafted by that point.What confused me was that just one WR was drafted. When it was my turn to pick before Team Two I just couldn't decide what to do. My first choice was to take a WR, since I valued them more than Garcia. But since two WRs were still available I just let my five seconds pass to see who Team Two was going to take. If they took Garcia then that would end my strategizing and I'd take one of the WRs. But they took McNair, and that changed my whole situation around. Now I knew there was a better-than-average chance Garcia would fall to me (since all the teams now drafted their starting QBs) so I snagged up a WR immediately thereafter. -z-
redsrule2500
Footballguy
What's the best place to join (free)?
M
MelvinTScupper
Guest
You're a professional for God's sake, how can you stoop so low as to ask us amateurs?
How else did you expect him to sell his book? I know I for one was enthralled with this entire thread. I was on the edge of my seat waiting for the genious to unfold before me.
Maybe we should put a poll up to see how many people were so moved by the powerful theories put forth here, that they were going to run out and buy this book. 
onionsack
Footballguy
What the...??
Time limit per pick, according to your league rules
For days I've been watching this humdrum thread title attract page after page of interest; watched it grow as one watches a small zit on the forehead slowly and stubbornly balloon into a gigantic whitehead, until it can no longer be ignored.
So today I decided to pop the sucker.
And what glorious pus there is to be found in here! The FFA generally yields one or two of these classic threads every day but this is a rare find indeed in the Shark Pool! Brilliant! Z-men, you're equal parts boob and blowhard, but by God I'll be disappointed if you put away your shovel and stop trying to dig your way out of this hole!
Time limit per pick, according to your league rules
For days I've been watching this humdrum thread title attract page after page of interest; watched it grow as one watches a small zit on the forehead slowly and stubbornly balloon into a gigantic whitehead, until it can no longer be ignored.
So today I decided to pop the sucker.
And what glorious pus there is to be found in here! The FFA generally yields one or two of these classic threads every day but this is a rare find indeed in the Shark Pool! Brilliant! Z-men, you're equal parts boob and blowhard, but by God I'll be disappointed if you put away your shovel and stop trying to dig your way out of this hole!
