never rat on your friends, and always keep your mouth shut

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

sounds like i would get my ass demolished if i was still a student in hyde park. when i think about all the walking around at midnight the 5466 apartment did on a regular basis, i'm still astounded that no one got mugged. or maybe someone did, but just never fessed up to it.

someone might want to sit down with first years at the university of chicago and have the same talk i have every day: what to do when someone is bothering you. it's nice that the university is doing their best to do a good job about this kind of stuff now, but university-wide meetings and emails over shit people scrawl on whiteboards is probably only fuel to the fire. it's attention seeking, designed to provoke a response, and that's exactly what they've got...

This has nothing to do with baseball (or, the terrible lack in Indie Culture)

I just want to know who is going to write the equivalent post for indie rock. Whet? Andy?

informal gathering

so is there an actual plan to meet at the cove/jimmy's/pub on thursday to hash this stuff out? Give everyone a chance to make their case.

and after extensive research (i.e. google harolds hyde park and search the maroon) i have not been able to find any substantive proof that harolds is closing. Now i know the 53rd street Co-Op is closing but not Harolds. I also found out that some people in Hitchock might not like Jews. Hopefully this story gets as big as the ghetto party that wasn't.

seems like we are in a cooldown period now. maybe the state of the union speech tonight will excite us again. that or the new shield episode. who else thought that jack's rant about cutting the chief of staff on last nights 24 was one of the best of the entire show?

and i'm the only one who hopes john paul stevens dies in the next two years right? just wanted to make sure.

Sunday, January 29, 2006

King Harold has Fallen

I heard a nasty rumor that Harold's Chicken Shack is closed due to health violations (too easy to make a pun here, so I'll just avoid it entirely). First the fire at Ribs and Bibs, then the opening of a squeeky clean, dining hall decor Checkerboard club, and of course the Starbucks near Jimmys... Now Harold's is closed? There is only one possible explanation; white people are getting ready to invade hyde park.

So, someone's suggestion that we meet up over a tub of deep fried grub is a little harder, but of course there is always jimmys. We should meet sometime, and get this stat thing taken care of. Everyone can discuss in person why they want what they want, make a case for it, etc. Us unabashed alcoholics will get smashed, then the more sober ones can take advantage of us, (ahem, I mean, let us sign off at their statistical manifesto) and we'll call it a night. We can even have a direct satelite feed to the consulate in new york, and allow them to give their input, ransom demands, etc. Besides, it would be good to start putting a face to some of these odd names. Saud? Who the fuck is that dude?

FYI Dixie Kitchen is owned by Canadians. You know, like the really really white guys from the north with red beedy eyes? They are like a sleeper cell, waiting for the assult to begin, then they'll convert it to a Cracker Barrel. Calypso Cafe? A much needed Banana Republic.

Viva la revolucion

Saud "Evo's Evol Twin" Morales

Friday, January 27, 2006

some henry clay style shit

i think we have two camps here. some of us have tired of the stat debate and just want something set in order to start thinking about the draft. others want to try to come up with some new stat combinations and want to see how that would play out over a full season. like czap said, i think the problem we're running into here is the attachment to a 5X5 system. neither side is going to be happy if we go with four traditional stats and putouts on offense. i'm not saying that these non-traditional stat categories aren't interesting or useful to think about. rather, i think trying to crossbreed traditional and non-traditional stats can work; it just probably can't work in a 5X5 format. i think many of us think it's just too risky to try new stat categories that might flop in a league that has a six month long season. maybe we could do a 6X6 like last year (or even a 7X7, but i think the more categories, the harder it is to have any cohesive strategy down the stretch run). we could do six offensive categories like H, R, TB, HR, K (or GIDP or whatever), SB. pitching could be W, SV, K, TB (or L or whatever), WHIP, ERA. these are just ideas, but i think in order to make everyone happier and to make the league more interesting statistically, we might need to lose the elegant symmetry and go for a broader system.

p.s., two qbs still sucks though.

Another proposal

I think we might benefit from assembling with beer, Harold's, and any other medicines to talk about these issues. Not to make anything binding, since the East Coasters would be left out, but to try and come to some common understandings (the main factions are out here anyway) and be able to judge tone instead of reading hatred out of bland text.

Also, if people feel strongly enough about particular stat categories, why not make it truly democratic, or at least totalitarian exercised democratically, and go with a 10 category format where everyone just picks a stat. We'd have a quick draft to establish the pick order, sandwich pick gets the last batting and the first pitching stat. That would actually be sort of fun, because we seem to be spread evenly between stat conservatives, state libertines, and odd, stat fetishists to make it worthwhile and balanced. Think of it as the Iraq model. And while you might feel horribly, horribly wronged when you are forced to deal with RBI because of me, you would have the sweet revenge of knowing how I was kept up past 3AM, away from working on my diss, trying to find someone with the best "put outs made after stroking a double on grass/smarmy Joe Buck comment" ratio stat. If you really wanted to have fun, people could trade player draft picks for their stat pick...that way those who cared more about rosters and those who cared more about stats would find a market in each other and it would all balance out. The complex permutations ought to keep people engaged for the next several years of keeperdom as well.
Again, I'm being serious and so if any new polls emerge on stat format, I want this included as an option.

Random note: I don't mind team dependency and think it adds something that we should not excise. I like having to take into consideration who a guy has around him and I like that new sleepers get created each year as a result of this.

And since this post has exhibited not quite enough randomness for my taste, as far as negative stats go, why not strikeouts for hitters? I'd rather have a Nomar, who makes a lot of line drive outs, than Sosa (the old, "good" Sammy).

Finally, when we do have future votes we ought to think about whether we want to unreflectively reproduce our cultural norms of "majority vote, winner take all" for league structure elections or do we want something else (as Mo was saying). The founders, after all, were quite concerned about minority rights/representation. Perhaps it could be done AP-poll style, then just add up the points (again, notice how the 10x10 format eliminates the headache of votes, and creates an enjoyable and exciting new draft possibility).


Let's take this bitch to the masses

I was so appreciative of Pete's nader-hate response (I should add that I think Nader is an idiot and not truly a left-thinking man) that I had to enshrine it on the facebook. Have to love the U of C.

Also, isn't there some way we can make a show out of this? Like maybe Ben and I can use the Channel 19 public access studios in Chicago, frame the issues, then "read mail" and "take calls" from the "outside participants." There has to be a market for this. I'm serious.

let's stay civil, please

Update: actually, now that i read ben's post, some more thoughts: OK, obviously we're not going to reinvent baseball. but the thing is, and moacir correct me if i'm guessing your reasons wrong, the reason i halt to ratify Team Omar’s drive for classic 5x5 is because classic 5x5 isn’t as *fun* as modified stats. And I don’t mean, it’s “not fun” in the sense that it isn’t sabermetric or progressive or indicative of stat nerd genius. I mean it’s not fun in that Rs and RBIs and Ws and S are weird stats to pick. Because they partially invalidate your attempts to predict them because they’re so team dependent.

Moacir’s tenacious about due process because he wants to keep the league competitively engaging. Classic 5x5 has an element of half-assedness to it, it makes fbaseball a bit less fun than it could be. i will say, for the 900th time, that I can deal with classic 5x5, but I’d like to point out that everyone who says that we should just do classic 5x5 because this is supposed to be fun is betraying themselves in a very minor way. And I wish you all would just chillax on the rhetoric.

by the way, carter, is this the kind of thing you were thinking of:

Power (HR, SLG, OPS, etc.)
Speed (SB... SB/CS ratio.... whatever)
Consistency (AVG, OBP, K/BB)

Quantity (IP, -TB, K, ER)
Special (Saves... something for relievers..)
Quality (K/9, ERA, WHIP)

In Defense of Reality

Moacir, I think I speak for many when I say this: Stop complaining like a little girl when you don't get your way. We are getting tired of it.

I think a lot of this comes down to many of us not wanting a league predicated on stats that don't make any sense. I agree that the vote may have been a little premature, but it was designed to gauge people's assumptions and feelings, not for a hard and fast resolution. So stop spitting your hate, it's getting old. You realize that you are becoming the villain now, right? I didn't think you could strip that away from Omar, but you're almost there. No wonder Whet doesn't read this any more.

Second, not that we are going to do it for sure, but are you honestly saying you'd be completely pissed off with a standard 5x5? There's a reason that it's become such a standard. Trying to have pitchers with "OUTS" (think about it. In a innings capped league, all the outs are gonna be the same at the end of the season) and other nonsense stats is also going to harm the league as well. Only your way people will feel better about themselves because they will think that they reinvented baseball.

Basically, I just want a set of stats that we can all reasonably agree on, not the ones that you think best determine the fundamentals of baseball. I could get down with a Carter-style skeleton framework or anything that seems to sooth people's minds. Still, if people can't learn to compromise than what's the point?

I liked it much more when people were actually talking about the merrits of different stats rather than complaining that the system is unjust.

OK, Seriously

I don't want to be shrill, but this voting business is getting more problematic the more I think about it. We're given multiple choices per poll, but only allowed to choose one. As a result, a false consensus emerges.

Case in fucking point: Pitching stats. Currently, the results are 4-3-1. Let's assume everyone who has voted will. Well, then that one with 4 should win. But I cast that 1 vote (duh). And, well, I prefer the middle option waaaaay more than I prefer the first option. But I prefer the third most. So now my least-desirable option is going to win (without even a majority) because I voted for what I liked, instead of what's "electable"? If I had voted for my second-fave choice, we'd have a 4-4 tie. We have social scientists here... how is this situation just?

I know Omar said that the poll is unbinding, but, well, guess what--its presence has drowned any discussion of stats. No one has had anything new to say about specific stats to track besides my crack about Ortíz and Carter's call for a skeleton of statistical framework.

Now some people have explicitly stated that they're sick of this discussion, or bored, or whatever. I'm not. If you are bored, then let's empanel a commission that can hash it out, and you can ignore those blog posts and just accept what the commission comes up with, since the way this voting is going is an exercise in injustice.

Thursday, January 26, 2006

keeping the stats

probably an open question, and i don't think anyone is going to begrudge any minor tinkering. though if pete rammed through a 'no saves' position, the guy who traded for brad lidge might be a little peeved about the whole situation...

Election Fraud

I'm not gonna call fraud, but I will say the polls below this post are troublingly worded. But I guess we're all smart enough to see past that. I think each permutation should have been listed, and I don't see why we're rushing to a vote. What's with the GOP-style inevitability meme railroading debate? I'll be really upset if the final stats represent the unimaginative set that is in the lead now, which, imo, will lead to an undynamic season and a league easily swappable with any random ass public league, except that nick punto might get drafted.

But I do have a serious question here: We haven't talked about permanence in the league. Is this gonna be a seemingly classic 5x5 for good? I dunno how excited I am about that, to be honest. Or is there some kind of assumed mechanism for changing things in the future, especially once/if yahoo opens up their stats a bit more? Anyway, I gotta go watch the OC with one hand on the "remote."

please vote and tell those that don't check often to vote as well

i guess these are technically non-binding but i think we need to start the actual voting process. hitting had more variants and while there were variants for pitching, it was much tighter in the classic 5x5 stats. i included a refusal vote to see how off my stat choices were (if at all). i know everyone wants to use the stats they like most (myself included) but at some point we need to make a consensus decision.

Which hitting stats are you in favor of?
OBP,R,HR,SB,RBI (top 5 from the tally)
AVG,R,HR,SB,RBI (classic)
I respectly choose to obstain from voting for the aforementioned choices


Free polls from

Which pitching stats are you in favor of?
W,WHIP,K,ERA,SV (classic 5x5 and top from tally)
WHIP,K,ERA,SV,TB (ben/andy variant)
I respectly choose to obstain from voting for the aforementioned choices


Free polls from

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

My prefs

I've got some sort of hardon for only "counting" stats.


Off: BB, R, K, TB, AVG (if we count walks, we don't need OBP; AVG is better there)

Def: K, Outs, TB, ER (not ERA), WHIP

2 rate stats, 2 neg stats, little duplication. Me encanta.

[Update:] I guess there is some duplication: K (for pitchers) is a subset of Outs. I like tracking outs, though. Maybe Ks are a particularly useful form of out? But not really. I dunno what to suggest. [Update2:] Perhaps this: Outs, TB, BB, H, ERA ? Or substitute in Ks for Outs.

[Update3:] This is in response to Ramó's hate. We didn't list preferences in order to stage a vote, as such, but rather to see where everyone is. As Pete has pointed out, simply taking the top five preferences might lead to something incomprehensible. I waited so that I could see what people liked, and see what the reasons were. Don't be like the GOP and cast an air of "inevitability" over 5x5, though I may have helped that by not being wordier in my defense of these stats. Simply put, I think these stats limit the external contributions of other players--as a complete package--more than other suggestions. I limited rate stats since I think I agree that because all stats are, effectively, ultimately rate stats, we don't need to add any more division. And, finally, by not having saves or steals, I think I've sussed out orthogonal stats, which no one likes. Why track SB instead of, say, E?

omar's response - first of all, taking the top 5 is NOT incomprehensible. Alot of people, in the end, wanted something similar to the classic 5x5. Like i said, I know that you want what you wrote, and I want what i wrote but in the end thats meaningless. We need to pick a winner so I tried to list the choices that I culled from reading everyone's preferences. If you dont like it you can choose as such. If a vote of no-confidence on my choices is called then so be it. But instead of just talking about what I want i decided to see what everyone wants.

Pete's response to omar's response to moacir's updates (ha ha)
well, technically, you decidd to see which of your editorializations everyone wants. i realize there's almost no way to pick the stats without someone actually getting what they want. what i want to avoid is getting what individual people specifically do NOT want. what i meant about "incomprehensible" is that the way we tallied up teh preferences only depicts individual stats as acceptable, not collections of 5 stats. this is already getting ornately silly/complicated. I voted above, which should help.

omar's response to pete's response... well you know
i agree but it has to start somewhere. now that we have everyones preference we need to move forward. and thats also why i included the option to note choose either (but still vote so we know if everyone voted). if it turns out my choices were bad then someone else come up with a better way. but at some point we need to get 'er done (i hate myself now).

the future is the same as the past


Revised running tally, missing the opinions of moacir and whet, total of 80 votes.

Thus far, an 8 is a perfect score, for those not paying attention

SB 8 votes
R 8
Obp 6
HR 5
TB 3
BB 1

K 8 votes
SV 7
Wins 6
Outs 1
TB allowed 1
IP 1
L 1
Games 1

I would like...

I'm definitely in favor of a 5x5 league. Reasons for its beauty have already been stated.

Moacir, unless otherwise decided I think I'm still the comish of this league. I think that voting for stats, at least at this time, is a good idea. I'd rather not exercise my veto power just yet.

As far as stats go, I've made a promise to myself not to get all fired up about this part of the discussion. Here's my preferences:

OBP, SB, HR, R, SLG (or TB).
I agree with Cardarelli that counting stats are much more fun to watch and deal with than percentage stats.

WHIP, ERA, K, SV and W
Having losses seems stupid and is just as closely tied to the team's performance as the pitcher. I'd also be fine with replacing W with TB, if people are pumped about not having wins at all.

Whet, could you please just vote on something?

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

losing interest

After trying to read everyone's posts, I realize that I care much more about questions involving roster construction than stats. Anyway, I do not like negative stats. But, if people really want to have them, we need a negative stat for both hitters and pitchers, to avoid completely unbalancing their respective values. I still like defense, but agree that the available stats are worthless.

Also, I like counting stats much more than %.

I have a weak preference for the following...
Hittings: TB, R, RBI, SB, BB
Pitching: W, SV, K, Outs Recorded, Pitching Appearances


i wouldn't mind something like:
hitting- obp, r, tb, sb, hr
pitching- w, k, sv, era, whip

i'm thinking that tb might be better than slugging since it's more fun to monitor categories when percentages aren't involved. also, i still sort of like total bases for pitchers, but i don't know what category i would replace in order to include it. i guess i'm not against the idea of a 6X6 league though i do like the vitruvian beauty of a ten team, ten category league.

being dutch is a thing?

did anyone check out the potential roster of the netherlands in the World Baseball Classic? apparently being dutch-american is a thing now. i honestly thought all the dutch people in America came over in the 170o's. these guys will be representing the netherlands in the WBC: shea hillenbrand, mark mulder, kirk saarloos, diedrich knickerbocker, danny haren.

total scum

my preferences, by p. tyrone beatty:
Hitting: OBP, TB, SB, Runs, RBI
Pitching: Losses, Ks, Innings Pitched, WHIP, ERA. Yeah, i say forget relievers. f--- their inflated value.

i agree with Saud partially about WHIP. WHIP is an inelegant, clunky stat, that's not intuitive. it's not a fun thing to root for, but it's the only pitching stat that really makes sense. how else can you measure how good a guy is. although i guess WHIP doesn't account for the kinds of hits you give up. i could get behind killing WHIP, but we need a replacement for it.


I'm keeping a running tab of everyone's prefs in a spreadsheet. So far, it's not very exciting. I'm gonna hold off on my own actual prefs (the comment in response to ALM was ill-considered) until there's more of a consensus. In the meantime, I can say this:

We love us some runs, stolen bases, era, whip, saves, and ks.

My Prefs




ERA, W, K, SV, WHIP....and the stat everyone forgot, Losses (-), if its a no decision the pitcher of course gets neither. Actually, I am not all that really into WHIP, like if we want hitting to dominate (as I would like it to), that might be the one to drop. Oh, yeah, how many SP/RP slots do we get?

You can either have OBP or W, but not both because they are heavily correlated and measure the same thing. HR and R are also correlated, but of course hold a different value; otherwise, a player like ichiro is more valuable than bonds, which might've been true in the 1920's, its no longer true in our day of juicin' and creatinin'

Oh yeah, and trust me, SLG sux big time. You won't feel it so much with your marquee players, but the bottom and lower mid of your IF will suffer. What I means to say is that it rewards the guy who occasionally gets a double, over the guy who more consistently gets to first, and by a wide margin: if you want to talk the math, I'll be more than happy

My pref

everyone post your pref.

i think everyone should post their preference so we can create some sort of matrix to come up with a consensus.

andy, you are right, standard 5x5 doesnt have walks and thats why i posted this before but will do it again.


- the only difference between mine and mike's is HR for SLG. I like HR's, there i said it.

you wake up before 630? brutal.


i can understand the simplicity argument for standard 5x5 (the let's stop bitching argument), but what i can't get my head around is the number of people on the blog who are sticklers for incorporating walks (morcy's critique of TB down below) but still don't seem to mind standard 5x5. standard 5x5 means we're back to the dark ages of walks never counting. and though it seems like we're all over the place here, once we recognize that no one's going to sign off on IP as a negative stat for pitchers (WHAT?) as a stat, we're really only talking about R, RBI, W here. if we can reach some consensus there, we're in pretty good shape.

i really need to stop posting on the blog before work. shouldn't i be doing this AT work?


Yes, I am an anti-intellectual bitch. I don't care if the opposition is in shambles; let's hear it for standard 5x5. I kind of like Andy's proposal, but don't want HRs and SLG. I also want RBIs. If we have Rs, I want RBIs. I dreamed I found a piece of lightning-split timber, which I shaped and polished with my own hands, called "Thunderbigpoppa," and I presented this to David Ortiz in the hopes he would win the triple crown and shatter every single-season batting record on the books. Instead, he fucked me with it. Interestingly enough, this wasn't a nightmare. I love RBIs.

I don't like TB for pitchers.

Now, if we are going to get rid of the standard 5x5 and start fucking with the system, then let me give some thoughts on relievers. I don't like wins either, but if you have saves, I don't see how you can rail against wins. If people hate the single category stolen base man, why the love for the 1 inning save man? What about the poor, undervalued setup man? Perhaps my hatred of relief pitchers is blinding me here but I don't see why we should worry about keeping a stat just so x-category of player has some worth. Let's make it an all-starters league and dump relievers all together. After all, someone could do well in ERA, WHIP, and Saves, along with a few vultured wins and give a starter heavy-team a run in the pitching catgeories. Yet how annoying to lose to an abstraction; as if any team in RL (and I presume some sort of realism is what people are striving for with the various new-stat proposals) would go far with two horses, a journeyman, and a bunch of relievers.

My stats: standard shit. If we have yet another vote, and somehow everyone wants to use diff. stats then:

Monday, January 23, 2006

a proposal, not so different from standard 5x5


slg, obp, sb, hr, runs


era, whip, k, saves, total bases allowed [inning cap 1250 like usual]

re: assists and putouts. are you even serious here, carter? i mean, i'm not really looking forward to the day when "yes! three soriano putouts!" escapse from my mouth. esp. not if these are the stats we are going to keep using indefinitely?

total bases: they have this really sweet stat that tracks total bases per plate appearance. it's called slugging. hence why we should use it for pitching statistics.

the stats yahoo lets you choose

im sticking with 5x5 until the ship sinks. using these avaliable stats, if you can create a reasonable alternative i can be persuaded.

lets just try and have each aspect counted once instead of the same thing being counted multiple times (BA and hits). i know there is a difference so don't just go on about how they are not the exact same thing.

Paradise Regained

I have a sneaking suspicion that classic 5x5 is going to win out just for lack of a solidified opposition. instead of just running, we need to get our reasons straight for not wanting to be statavistic (my word). that said, i'd like to consolidate the mixed roto advocates, even the partisan "even more nihilistic" voting bloc (moacir). what do we like, stat-wise? why, etc?

now, before this degenerates into the standard free for all in the comments and people start getting angry/intolerant (i look forward to the intolerance), let me say this: at the end of the day, all we're doing is deciding which numbers to use for this. it's not personal, it's not political, just numbers. that said, whether or not to be sabermetric/progressive is both personal and political and i will cry for days if we use wins. i won't be happy, but i will survive. unhappily. actually who gives a shit, it's just numbers. it might be enjoyable if we did something non-standard, just for the additional thought that will go into drafting, but at the same time, it's not like 5x5 isn't subtle enough. i just hate market inefficiencies/the free market itself because i am neofeudalist

Friday, January 20, 2006

omar's question

so everyone on the comments section said moacir's 'you keep the guy wherever he was drafted, no its, no buts' is great, but we already voted. it solves omar's problem, and it's what i wanted all along. so that's 4 of us, for sure - can we vote on that one again? other than mike carter, no one seems to have any strong feelings the other way...
here it is, cho.

Should all drafted players count at the round they were drafted at in a given year, in free agency, trades, injuries, &c?


Free polls from

Omar's question

I apologize for deleting all that stuff about waivers. I was getting seriously frustrated with circular debate. For once and for all, here is what Omar wanted to say, in his words:
i draft John Smith (no more pat burrell) with my 4th round pick
he sucks and i drop him after a month
he is on the trash heap for MONTHS (not a day or 10 seconds)
i pick him up in september
i want to keep him (as a 27th round pick)

under the simple system, since he was on my team to start the year i
would lose a 4th round pick, not a 27th round pick.

thats double jeopardy. we are treating making bad picks like crimes
so i am going to keep the lexicon going. i got punished once (not
getting a good player in the 4th round) so why am i getting punished
AGAIN the next year.

Everybody who feels like answering, answer, but keep it in the comments section so people can still see the poll and vote (only six people have voted, as of last check. i know me, moacir, omar, carter and i'm assuming saud and andy voted... whet, czap, ben, cardarelli?)

Thursday, January 19, 2006


manhattan, same scale, next to other cities. imagine if chicago didn't go west of the dan ryan, and you have manhattan. avenue blocks don't look that wide anymore...

Please Vote

Stats Straw Poll: Which of these do you prefer? This is NON-BINDING
Classic 5x5 (HR, RBI, BAVG, R, SB, WIN, SAV, ERA, WHIP, K)
5x5 with traditional hitting stats but mixed pitching stats
5x5 with traditional pitching stats but mixed hitting stats
Totally mixed 5x5 (what we usually have done)
Different roto style (6x6, NxN...)
Head to head
Cumulative Points

Free polls from

I took the liberty of ending the flame war that we started. Please express your preference in this poll, so that we have some idea of where to get started. I apologize for deleting your posts, but that shit was TOTALLY pointless.

rounding second base

i was thinking of chaning the template out of spite because harbor sort of sucks but then i got sidetracked by adsense. this page is being read by thousands and i think we should get some ads in this biatch and maybe recoup our fees.

i posted this below in reply to andy's reply to my question but i'll post it here for all those that don't have all day to re-read all the posts

omar: "everyone else gets a benefit that i don't"

andy: because they didn't take pat burrel in the 4th round, they took someone better. they are rewarded for their good decision. you, conversely, are penalized for your poor decision.

omar: that doesn't answer the question. it just says im stupid, which i was for drafting burrell. but it doesn't change the fact that he was dropped and thus becomes (by rule) a free agent pickup. im asking how we are going to go about verifying this. if you can get over the fact that some people (my god!) make bad draft picks (see andy martin circa 2005 top 3 picks) we can come to a good answer.

i cant think of anything else that we haven't addressed that is of huge importance so does anyone have suggestions for polls on stats? what should be included in the questions and answers.

who else doesn't like the new espn design?

Clam Broil!

Goddamn this template makes me miss home... And baseball...

Mostly what I want to say is that today is a beautiful day, and that has nothing to do with the sex survey I filled out.

So here is what we decided:

  • (up to) 5 keepers.
  • If you keep a player you drafted or traded for the previous year, you forfeit the round in which he was drafted the previous year.
  • If you keep a player you signed during the previous year or picked up off waivers, you forfeit the last round in the draft.
  • For the second and subsequent years of keeping a player, you forfeit your top pick.
  • Our rosters will be 27 players.
  • We will have 2 DL slots (so low!).
  • Saud likes the Cheddarwurst.
  • I miss SouthCoast.
  • Social Science will destroy the next round of negotiations: stats.
  • This post is here mostly so I can take credit for the hot new look of the site.
  • [We will submit our keepers in secret and all will be announced at the same time by pulling from a hat right before the first pick of the draft is made, but after the drafting order is established. We decided this, right?]

Wednesday, January 18, 2006


A different kind of fantasy sports, but please do your part for social science and the student sex mag.

Mo, they could probably use some more graduate experience so would you pass it on to any folks in your program who might be interested? Thanks.



Saud, I think the primary concerns are commitment over time and commitment to being physically present at the draft. Maybe these are, actually, two sides of the same coin, namely, "commitment." I think any final apprehensions may be covered by "yes, Chicago is my home base for the forseeable future, as I'm getting a damned PhD from this devil-spawning institution."

We also play football.

I'm not gonna address the waivers question anymore. Apparently there was an abortion of a vote, and people made some dumb decisions. I still maintain it makes sense for a player to carry the round in which he was drafted for the whole season for all managers. But my genius idea got swiftboated by the social scientists.


As Mo put to my attention, I did not directly address the concerns of loyalty to this league. To say I am loyal to something I do not yet belong to is absurd, but if you want a promise that I will remain in this league until death do us part, I am willing to do this if indeed this is a competitive league where people set their line-ups in a consistent manner, seek out rising no-bodys fresh from the farms, the occasional controversial trade, and some good spirited (or not) trash talking, etc.

Of course, I am going to need my lawyer go over any paperwork, but otherwise I am perfectly willing to make a blood oath or pinky swear as you guys see fit. What do you yanks call that handshake where someone spits into his palm? That, I might not be willing to do, unless we're really close to a sink...

So, what is the consensus? Do you need to put this to a vote?

And do you guys play other fantasy sports?

If my opinion even matters at this point; I think waivers is silly in baseball because the season is so long, but not having waivers will make people hesitant to make add/drops on a whim (thus limiting creativity, or taking away the kiddy wheels). Another idea if you guys are uncertain about waivers being mis-used, you can limit the number of add/drops, and you can even make it a relatively high one (say 50), but this will prevent players who 'lock-in' players via waivers. Otherwise, screw it, not having waivers makes things more volatile, but I think it seriously punishes newbies.

the CheddarWurst

waiver wire by convention

but fine, i guess more accurately its free agent pool. a true waiver wire is when a player gets dropped and then cannot be picked up right away. depending on the time he has to spend on the 'wire', he is picked up a day, two days later by the waiver wire order. if you look at the football league, you will see we had a waiver wire order as well. that way if mike drops mark prior its not a free for all. if i have the 5th spot on the waiver wire order but andy has the 1st, he gets first dibs on prior. but once you use your waiver wire spot, you get dropped to the bottom. that means if you blow your load on prior, you wont be able to pick up kerry wood who will certainly get injured within weeks of the season starting. but we dont have a waiver wire, so thats moot. (ok andy, i can't spell. we got it. make sure you teach the middle school kids that you don't need to spell to get into a good college.)

*omar: what do you call a point that is purely academic, or that cannot be settled and isn't worth discussing further? -alm

and pete what i was referring to was an adrian beltre type situation. im not sure if ben dropped him but let me explain. he is drafted in the 3rd round. He flirts with the mendoza line in april and may and ben ends up dropping him because he never should have drafted him in the first place. He sits for about two months then in August decides to stop sucking and starts to hit .350 or whatever. Ben decides to pick him up again just as a flyer. Why should Ben get penalized with a third round pick if he wants to keep him next year when any other team could have picked him up for a low pick just because he drafted him at the start of the season?

why penalize ben in this scenario: because ben was wrong in drafting adrian beltre. frankly, this is why you don't cut people. you bench them, but you don't cut them. you trade them, but don't cut them, unless they're truly worthless, or you think so anyway. now that we have a slightly longer bench, 2 DL slots as well, i don't think you should ever cut your third round pick unless he dies or is so bad (jamie moyer) that you can't even trade him for someone else's disappointment. the moral of the story, anyway, and the answer people seem reluctant to accept is, it would be ben's fault for drafting a guy who sucks early in the draft. why give him a free ride and let him get beltre back cheaper since he was the (hypothetical) butthead who drafted adrian beltre in the third round after adrian beltre's "i need a contract" year.

but who would take on, not only a bad player (moyer/beltre) but also take on his draft spot. i could understand trading beltre for someone like iguchi but only if you didn't have to take on his draft spot. what is the recourse then for drafting a bad player? like when i took pat burrel in the 4th round three years ago, that was a terrible move. but if i could have kept him as a 27th round player i would have but never as a 4th rounder. and nobody would have traded for him as a 4th rounder. but then if i would have dropped him someone else could get him as a 27th rounder. i just don't understand why everyone else gets a benefit that i dont. i might not be making this argument if you lost a 10th round pick instead of the 27th round pick but as such we are in this situation. i also love the irony of pete saying "quite frankly, this is why you don't cut people". i only had 11 moves all year and you had 100+ and i'm trying to help your ... kind ... out.

can we get a more moderate viewpoint here? i think pete and i are the extremes in terms of moves making.

omar: "everyone else gets a benefit that i don't" ans: because they didn't take pat burrel in the 4th round, they took someone better. they are rewarded for their good decision. you, conversely, are penalized for your poor decision.

"trading beltre for someone like iguchi" ans: you would still make the trade, but the person trading for beltre probably would not be planning on exercising his option to keep him. remember, it's not as if beltre explodes if you don't elect to keep him; he just re-enters the pool and you could attempt to draft him again in a more reasonable round. -alm

andy - that doesn't answer the question. it just says im stupid, which i was for drafting burrell. but it doesn't change the fact that he was dropped and thus becomes (by rule) a free agent pickup. im asking how we are going to go about verifying this. if you can get over the fact that some people (my god!) make bad draft picks (see andy martin circa 2005 top 3 picks) we can come to a good answer.

Speak to me like I'm a child

I apologize if I'm the only one, but what exactly is the difference between a waiver wire and just free agents? I though I understood before but I guess I'm wrong.


A waiver wire is this: Say you cut a player. That player doesn't immediately become a free agent, he goes to "waivers," where he stays for several days. if you decide you want this guy, you put in a waiver claim for him. of course, if the guy is desirable, several teams may claim him. the way you decide this, is to have a waiver order, which is usually in reverse chronological order based on the last time you made a waiver claim, or reverse order of standings to help bad teams get good. waiver wires are dumb and unnecessary. especially now that there is a disincentive to recklessly add and drop people. -- pete

another hypothetical

what if i draft a player in the 10th round, then drop him because he sucks, and then he gets good again in august and i pick him up? he should be a waiver wire pickup but how would i verify this? do we need to start keeping logs of the free-agent pool? i think we should, only so that ben has a 50mb excel file at the end of the season that crashes the crerar lab when he tries to print it. and im assuming ben is the commish again? are you running unopposed? or is this just a chicago mayoral election with straw men running against you?

postscript from Pete
I made everyone an administrator, so you can edit posts and add links and do other things as well as turn the blog pink from time to time.

next item: THERE IS NO WAIVER WIRE. STOP TALKING ABOUT IT. also, less crazily, if a player was drafted by you, the only way you can keep him is at the round you drafted him at. there's no special allowance for a guy you decided to drop then re-pick up (let's be honest, we're obviously not talking about high draft picks here). that's corny. i expect better from you omar.

next on docket: stats.

end of postscript

what this book presupposes is

Which (andy's post below) is why quantum-leap mike carter will think twice about cutting mark prior instead of tying up a DL slot. basically, a dead mark prior is worth keeping so that you stop anyone else form gettiong a free, living mark prior for a low round dradft pick. stratego is the name of the game. i have to go my malt-o-meal is getting cold

[why are you posting drunk? See comments on previous post. --m]
{I thought we weren;t supposed to use comments. also, i wasn't drunk, just had sleep in my eyes. and why are we still batting around crazed hypothetical situations for rules we already voted on and settled. --p}
«now I feel ripped off, since I didn't understand what I was voting on --m»

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

waiver wire/picks revert

i posted something about this a few days ago, but after the frenzy of voting it seems worth bringing up again: no waiver wire is only going to work if dropped players are valued where they were drafted for keepers.

it's going to go down like this: mike carter drafts a healthy mark prior in the third round. prior blows out his elbow at the all star break, out for the rest of the season. seeing little sense in tying up his DL slot for the privilege of keeping him and chancing next year's 3rd round pick, he drops him, czap snatches him up, throws him in the dl slot, and next year 'gives up' his 27th round pick to lock in a now-healthy mark prior, forefeiting his shot at drafting the talented mr. wily mo pena. folks are going to be PISSED, is all i'm saying.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag..."

A repost of Saud's non-limerick

Those who know me know that I take sports very seriously. They also know I take fantasy sports very seriously too. (NFL Films presenter voice: on) When he landed on these shores in the year 1999, part of the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, Saud did not know the difference between a home-run and a touchdown. Since then, after playing stick-ball in the immigrant neighborhoods of Chicago's south side, breathing the smoke-stenched air of jimmys huddled over a cold one (miller lite) and basking in the magical glow which we can only abbreviate to ESPN. An astute learner, he began to differentiate the subtleties of the game, slowly building his sports-fan acumen to become the deranged maniac he is now. Relationships have been strained, much buffalo wings sauce has been slathered, and beer spilt, but if there is a sports event worth the millions being paid its athletes going on, there is a safe chance a certain Saud Al-Zaid is viewing it on the other side of that screen.

Ok, enough with the fancy talk. I've been in the same fantasy league since 2001, we play all the usuals (NFL, MLB, NBA) . I recently caught a cheater in our league, and for the obvious ethical reasons had to recuse myself. It was a painful. painful experience. I grew up on some level with those guys, but I can't stand a cheater, and I certainly can't stand someone who lies even when he is caught cheating. The other peeps on my league wanted to "look the other way", but how can you trust someone after that special bond between player and league has been broken? As long as everyone here is a straight shooter, all I gots to say, lets play ball.

Saud "Beast from da Middle East" Al-Zaid

p.s. And seriously man, have you had the cheddarwursts in Comiskey? Its a freaking delicacy, I tell you what.

Jokes, Omar, and Hatred

Ben wrote:

+Can he take a joke about himself better than Omar? We already have one guy always on the hyper defensive (which in itself is hilarious) but I don't know if I can handle two.

Are you saying that, in order for Saud to join the league, he's gotta get hazed? I don't get this, or particularly agree with it. I can vouch that Saud is laid-back, dilligent, and is probably into going to cholie's and getting a frosty at the falcon after the draft.

City Of Presidents

"DEDHAM, Mass. --A prosecutor said Tuesday that a dominatrix waited too long to call for help as a client died of a heart attack during a bondage session, then dismembered and disposed of the body rather than report the death....Barbara Asher, who went by the name Mistress Lauren M, has pleaded innocent to charges of manslaughter and dismemberment in the death of Michael Lord. The retired telephone company worker from North Hampton, N.H., died in July 2000 while strapped to a rack in Asher's Quincy condominium, according to police....Asher and Ferrer took Lord down from the rack and tied to revive him, but by then it was too late....The next day, Nelson said, Ferrer dismembered the body of the 280-pound Lord with a hacksaw and they divided his remains into eight trash bags. The day after that, they drove to Augusta, Maine, where they dumped the remains behind a restaurant, the prosecutor said. His remains have never been found."

Good to see everything is still going well back home.

maybe we can close out the keepers discussion today

so settled business - by virtue of majority vote

no waiver wire
2 dl spots
27 roster spots

and a pluarity of people believe the world is very (not extremely) evil as a result of the bears loss.

and i just checked and the last person voted and the number of keepers is .... 5!

anyone know anything else we have to vote on that aren't stats?

Deep Sea Diving

What I want to know about this Saud kid is:

+Is he going to commit to being in this league for years to come? No point in finding a 10th in a keeper league if he's not gonna be around next year (and for years to come).
+Is he going to commit to being AT THE DRAFT every year? Andy and Carter are already planning to fly to Chicago for the draft, so he needs to understand the importance of being there (here).
+Will he care about the season all the way through? (See the Martin Samuels Experiment, circa autumn 2005)
+Can he take a joke about himself better than Omar? We already have one guy always on the hyper defensive (which in itself is hilarious) but I don't know if I can handle two.

Saud, if you're reading this, I don't mean to be a dick (or turn this into a job interview), I'm just testing the waters here. Obviously we all care about this way too much and I just want to make sure that you do too.

Postscript from pete:
Saud, as was mentioned, is in a phd program at chicago, so um, i don't think we need to get a prenup or anything. omar takes jokes!

Monday, January 16, 2006

i didnt complain

i just dont have any blogging skills. bloggar failed me and i couldnt figure out how to correct it. please get rid of this pink color. its hard enough to look like im actually working at work but when pink comes up im certainly not working. maybe fuscia. that looks like work is getting done.

and please vote for all the polls, not just some of them. ideally its setup so that you cant vote multiple times but thats not something im going to count on. the only settled piece of business is no waiver wire. 5 no votes is a majority. one more vote for 2 dl spots and thats done too. and someone's lying here, we don't have two people named ben. this is serious folks.

the world is indeed evil. and 24 is awesome. i should have allowed for multiple answers for that one.

Tolbert is that you

leaving aside the fact that my head almost exploded when people complained about the readability of the site design (it's a X(#*WU$#@DJ9#SIning blogger template! we didn't go to the pratt institute or MIT! we don't commission web designs for a fantasy baseball rules blog) anyway, what i was going to say, is that omar's polls are now a bit more legible, but i think everyone already voted. i took the last 1.5 days off from sports and the internet (and liquor) after the double dogdirt sundae of saturday and sunday NFL games. here's to hoping that fantasy baseball doesn't fall victim to bob dupuy's velvet fist or whatever, as per omar's news tip. also, someone fork saud's e-mail address so he can be put on the blog (which means, i also punch the Saud ticket for 06.)

the poll is screwy

i have just spent the last 30 minutes trying to turn the text white but its not going to happen but there are still votes there to be made.

also fantasy stats are going to court

so clearly we are doing something important.

we're turning into monsters

How many keepers should we have? - runoff
i'm going to be obstinate and vote for neither

Free polls from

one point about the waiver wire issue, with the two previous votes about what happens to waiver wire/free agent pickups (25th pick) and that injured players become waiver wire players, the waiver wire is going to play a much bigger part than it has in the past. there are pros and cons about having a waiver wire. a pro is that it doesnt penalize people who don't check the team for a player that pete/omar/mike(s) drop at 4am and is subsequently picked up at 4:15 am by moacir. a con is that it puts undue burdens and creates another level of confusion (to be honest i can't explain the con as well as the pro so i'll just copy mike's) " I've always felt that it lets other people be even more lazy and wait for an email that says "someone is about to make a clever move, which you didn't think of but now have time to analyze and realize might help you so maybe you should log on and block it' " im not sure you can get an email saying that someone has been dropped but i get the point none the less.

Should we have a waiver wire
Yes - 1 day
Yes - 2 days
Yes - 3+ days

Free polls from

How many DL spots should we have?

Free polls from

How Many Roster Spots should we have?

Free polls from

How evil is the world as a result of the Bears losing to the Panthers?
My name is ben and im a packer fan
24 is awesome

Free polls from

cautious optimism

i would just like to point out one thing, if saud joins that will result in a 100% increase in the arab population of this fantasy league. we will be able to create a voting block and start appropriating funds to invade other fantasy leagues, complete with threats of suicide bombings. and tell saud as long as he doesnt spend half the draft looking for a cheese bratwurst like he did during the alcs game at comiskey, its all good.

and seeing as how there are 9 votes for which i can assume are 9 different people, the results are in. Three of the four resulted in majorities. We will have majority vote on all unforseen rules. Waiver wire pickups will be given the worst avaliable draft pick during subsequent drafts (5-4) and injured players will be treated as the aforementioned waiver wire pickups.

im going to post a few more questions as well as the runoff between 3 and 5 keepers (3-3) to see how many keepers we will have.

Sunday, January 15, 2006


Saud Al-Zaid wants in. He's been looking at the blog, he likes how we think. He graduated from uofc some 2 years ago, and is now doing a phd here. he's reliable and likely to stay in chicago for a while. :) He's also mad as hell and not gonna take it anymore.

Saturday, January 14, 2006


The main reason I'm not posting/participating is the fucking white-on-black scheme, which is giving me a brain tumor. Seriously, no one does that except for the dude who hates whales and kid art. I vote black on gray like in the one nine nine nine.

Labor rules

So I can't even begin to slog through the amount of text that's been posted. I think it's obvious that while a lot of us cut our teeth at the Maroon, we were all columnists of some sort. While I can appreciate getting geeked out on particular passions (once upon a time, we added a 6th country to the Axis and Allies game board by consolidating all of the neutral countries and redrawing some existing borders, then created 6 new technologies, 4 new units by taking some pieces from Fortress America, and made it every man for himself. We ended up playing a single game for 3 months and replicating what turned out to be the worldview of John Mearsheimer) I don't have the mental energy to devote to making things as real as possible. So I'm glad auctions, contracts, and the like have been tabled. I have cast my votes. I'd like to see 4 keeprs (enabling me to retain two pitchers, an infielder, and an outfielde, for instance). I'd rather not have keepers tied into the draft. If I drafted wisely, or worked the free agent pool effectively, I want to be rewarded, keep my three best, then replenish my team and not have to waste a pick retaining someone.

I do understand the arguments for tying them into the draft, so if folks want it, I have no problem. I'm just playing the lazy card. Similarly, I don't want a waiver wire. I've always felt that it lets other people be even more lazy and wait for an email that says "someone is about to make a clever move, which you didn't think of but now have time to analyze and realize might help you so maybe you should log on and block it". As for injured players, if you drop him, you take the risk. One of the advantages of a keeper league is that you can stash someone like Barry Bonds on the DL, and still keep him for the following season. If we are going to tie FA pick ups to the draft, then I support erasing their old draft value and having them count at the bottom of the pile.

I play fantasy baseball because a) it's a nice mental distraction; b) the postings often make me laugh; c) it's a good way to keep in touch with people I value keeping in touch with; d) I need to deny anyone from Voices winning a fantasy crown; e) I like to eat Harold's in the MacLab. Please keep it simple for now.

Friday, January 13, 2006

White boys

CAN rap. I'm going to the negatively titled documentary in about 10 minutes. Afterwards, I will catch up on the blog posts, advance last minute bitchuments, and vote.

I would also like to point out that while I have been too busy to fully engage this forum, I was not too busy to sign up for fantasy golf.


I could be wrong about this, but I get the feeling that Whet and Czap aren't really involved with this blog. Are you saying that this war of words hasn't been griping enough for you?


if you have not done so already. we have 7 votes for most categories so we are missing 2.

Thursday, January 12, 2006

I like where this is headed

I can almost guarantee a David Stern style mustache on draft day. Who's gonna wear a bright yellow suit and give me a awkward 3 point handshake? As your unelected despot, I can promise you everything and give you almost nothing.

Also, can we work Rob Dibble style ass tattoos into this league somehow? Anyone who loses three years in a row has to get their team name tattooed for all time?

glad someone else has little faith in us all

andy, i was thinking the exact same thing but wrote it off as my twisted mind. we need to atleast have a 1 day waiver wire if not 2 days. That was part of my reason for adding "special rule" for injured players. Even with the waiver wire, then its just a matter of who has the top waiver spot to pick up an injured player and then hold him for ransom. I have already had that happen in other keeper leagues (without all these other rules) so thats why i was hoping to have this stuff talked about before we move on to stats. Can anyone guess who hasn't voted yet so we can find out what the majority has decided on?

happy someone voted on the rotating president. i was thinking of voting for it but decided that it was pretty stupid. its a stupid decision for the EU as well.

i think we should write it on paper and the comish can read them from the podium and we can insert those people in the excel file in their draft spots.

i'm the asshole who voted for EU rotating presidency..

but i'm fine with majority rule.

the question about what to do with injured guys is an interesting one. i would submit that injured guys should be subject to the same rules as everyone else UNLESS we have a true waiver wire with at least 1 day on waivers. otherwise it's ripe for tomfoolery. example:

i draft gagne in the 3rd round, and he gets hurt. he's out for the season and set to report to training camp the next year. i clearly have little interest in holding onto him, and under 'normal' fbaseball rules i'd drop him no consequences. but if DRAFTED dropped players are treated like other free agents, a perverse set of incentives is set up: he's worth nothing to me (on my team, he's locked as a 3rd rounder) but he's EXTREMELY valuable to anyone else, since he's going to be healthy next year and all you'd have to give up is your [tbd, 15th-25th round pick]. all sorts of somewhat suspect shit can come out of this - i 'drop' him to mike carter who snatches him up, or somehow 'trade' him back to myself by dropping him, having someone else pick him up, and then trading to get him back, trying to do an end run around the rules by 'wiping' the player of his high compensation pick value. this is a problem. solution: the compensation round for all drafted players is based on the draft, no matter whether we cut them or not.

moacir raises a really interesting point re: keepers. the drama of the latter suggestion is kind of appealing; i like the idea of seeing if a guy will slip below where you intended to keep him but defending your turf with a keeper pick and snatching someone elses pick away. mostly i like the idea of trumping someones claim on a player. for draft drama purposes.

Votes, etc.

OK, I've been dragged into the consensus. I like the plan, too, as it penalises, after a fashion, keeping players for more than a year, which is part of the appeal of contracts. I voted for 7+ keepers (I'm entrenched), majority rule on questions, injured players are like normal waiver pickups (this goes for regularly cut players, also), and last remaining pick should go for waiver keepers.

Omar, I think, raises a good point about timing of keepers. Say I like my LF, who is the second best in the game, and I assume #1 is being kept by my nemesis in the league. Then, he announces that he's not keeping the LF. Why should I hang on to mine, then, if I have, say, first pick in the draft?

I'm kicking around two suggestions: we all submit our keepers blindly. Slips in a hat. And they're revealed "at once." Or, we don't announce them until someone else drafts that person, and we say, "excuse me; he's *kept*." That would be good drama, but it'll be obvious once we deal with giving up 1st round picks, etc., so the slips in a hat is best.
i stole carter's idea so that maybe we can get this voted on. i agree that the carter/beatty resolution seems adequate but would like to work out the kinks before we move on to stats (which will have tons of votes i forsee). for the last one, injured player, i assume it will be a player that you might actually keep (i.e. a good player) and not what happens if willie harris gets injured.

Assuming the Carter/Beatty resolution gets through committee, how many keepers should we have?
7+ (unlimited)


Free polls from

For all unforseen issues after the draft, who decides?
majority vote
coin flip / dart board
special rotating rules master (similar to EU president)


Free polls from

What draft spot should a waiver wire pickup be assigned in subsequent drafts?
worst avaliable (arguably 25th or so)


Free polls from

what should happen to injured players dropped and then picked up by another player?
retain draft spot from previous year
treated just like other waiver wire pickups
special rule


Free polls from

in re omar

the plan, as stated pretty clearly already, is as follows,
the way keepers are going to work
you are allowed to keep up to X players from the previous season. (X is to be determined). For the first retained year, a player costs you the pick at which he was drafted the previous year. if the player in question was a waiver pickup the previous year, he costs you your (to be determined -- either a set late-round pick or your worst available pick). if the player was drafted in a given year but you picked him up as a free agent, he can be retained (once) as a free agent. if you acquired a player by trade who was drafted by your trading partner, you can retain that player only at the round in which he was drafted originally, for the first year.

after one retainment by one team, a player thereafter costs that team's best remaining pick to keep, up to X players. if a player is not retained, he regains his eligibility to be kept at his draft value for one year for all GMs at the end of the season. this means a GM could conceivably not draft in the first X rounds, although you are free to retain anywhere from 0 to X players.

you are free to choose to retain no players and thereby lose no picks.

carter/beaty plan

as far as i can tell it never seemed to be combined to me so if either of the bill's endorsers could explain it, i would be very appreciative. and we still never came to a decision as to whether or not to have a cap. and when do you have to declare your keeper, because thats one issue i have with this plan. its not so much an issue but an intricacy. If ben leaves Vlad open as a 1st rounder and say posts his keepers on the blog i might second guess my decision to hold my first rounder (lets say, Helton) so i can get his first rounder and then it becomes and issue of who blinks last. I guess if we just do it at the draft you are at the mercy of the hat with numbers in it to decide draft order and see if you can snatch a first rounder away by leaving your (presumably worse) first rounder unprotected.

and any explanation as to where waiver pickups would be valued could also be helpful. and how to deal with guys who are injured during the year, dropped and then picked up by another player. if something happens like with rolen or gagne this year, are they no longer 2nd,3rd,4th round players and instead waiver pickups (currently 10th round) or do you still have to give up the draft spot that they were drafted in the year prior.

and when/if we decide on this plan, who makes the final ruling on issues that we haven't thought of. is there a competitve council setup or is it just commish decision?

resolved, sort of

i don't know what consitutes a mandate, but it seems to me that myself, ben, andy and two mikes are in favor of the beatty-carter plan as described below. so obviously i'd like to hear from the others but i am hopeful to close the books on keepers and then resolve the stat question (i'm willing to back off earlier, more radical positions on stats but i am still anti-home run, at least in ideals). also, ben, i made you an admin on the blog since you are commissioner pro tem/permanently.

number of keeper spots:
4 or 5 are my preferences. we should vote.

round for waiver-guys:
well, in reality, if a guy went totally undrafted, seems to me a GM should only have to give up your lowest remaining pick to retain him the first year, but then of course it becomes the highest remaining pick ever after. i'd like everyone to note that the keeper rule should strongly curtail the number of flippant roster moves (i might still pick up and drop jorge piedra 10 times a year, but i'm sure as hell not going to cut jorge posada in may again)

waiver wire?

people seem sold on pete/carter's idea. i'm in. what seems like a fair value for undrafted/waiver wire guys? 10th rd? 15th rd?

>Remind me again why attaching keepers to a specific
> place in the draft is important?

it adds an element of strategy to the draft rather than just trying to keep up with the joneses. if keepers are outside the actual draft, you're wedded to keeping your 3 absolute best players, because that's what everyone else is going to be doing and you don't want to be way behind before you even started drafting. ben, take your team. say you're not sold on an aging vlad - you think his numbers are on the way down and you're concerned about his back. is he still a top 3 rounder? clearly. keepers outside the draft, you're keeping him no matter what (you don't want someone to keep pedro, peavy and tejada and then snatch up vlad in the 4th round). tie keepers into the draft, and you can elect to pass on vlad, keep liriano and sacrifice your 18th round pick and draft someone else using one of your early picks.

simply put, there's strategy if it's tied to the picks. if it's not, it's basically just a calculation of "who do i think the top 3 guys on my team are/were?" and that's who you're stuck with from now till eternity.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

the distinguished gentlemen from ohio

ok. i said i was going to keep an open mind, and i have. i am now wholeheartedly in support of the beatty bill. i might be completely wrong on draft day, but i really like how i imagine this system will play out. i think it will be fun to be rewarded for a strong late-round pick. it will make the end of the draft more dramatic (in fact, the last rounds might be the most important for the future of one's team). by making second-year keepers costly, it will sort of act like a contract but without all the mess. it won't be too difficult to keep track of, and it seems like a worthy compromise for all of the ideas floated around.

Vote Beatty/Carter in 06

Okay. I'm sold on the idea that we should tie keepers to draft position. Thank you for the clarification. Now, how many keepers?

keepers are the weakest branch of government

Re:Ben's question whether tying keepers to specific rounds is useful.
Answer: Yes.
Legal Principals: (a) Reward fantasy player for efficient draft by allowing said drafter to keep the cheap player at that price for at least an additional year; and (b) interesting trade possibilities, since I can trade someone with a high round value for someone with a lower round value in order to rebuild my team for the future (e.g. trade A-Rod, who would presumably cost a round 1 pick to keep, for two young bucks who would cost, for example, rounds 14 and 22).

Problems with this system:
a) how long can i keep the player at the cheap draft pick rate? The best idea so far in my view is one year, with subsequent resignings costing highest remaining draft pick.
b) overall complexity... this is not that bad... the commish will have to keep a good record of the draft, but that can simply be posted on the blog...

Why is this better than each keeper costing highest remaining draft pick? In my view, the most important difference is the strategic off-season trading possibilities... a team close to contention can trade young, cheap players for a highly valued player - just like real life.

It is also better than the 3rd party rankings because that system is fundamentally flawed. It does not really reward an efficient draft, because you have to pay for the keeper based on his production (e.g. i draft the 4th most valuable player in the 23rd round, i still have to pay a first round pick to keep him - the same result as the simple keeper=highest remaining pick system). In fact, since most players will only keep their best players, the 3rd party ranking system will usually lead to the same result as the simple (Omar) system, but with needless complications. The only difference will occur when Andy wants to keep some scrub.

quick responses

here is why i want to tie keepers to losing a pick, like i said before: what happens when you don't want to keep the maximum? i don't want to be at a competitive disadvantage if one year I want to totally start from scratch, but i will be, because people who keep five will draft at the same time as me.

also, being allowed to keep a 19th round pick is a compromise candidate for the earlier debate about the theoretical liriano thing. if you like liriano b/c he is a twin and also think he is going to be an ace, you can lock him in for another year with your 19th rounder, but when he actually turns into an ace, you're going to have to give up your highest remaining pick. (i should say lowest, really, as 1st is lower than 19th really, but i hope i am understood. i actually really like my system, but obviously what's more important is whether anyone else does.

you are right that i forgot about yahoo's actual rank system. at the same time, i've had some weird encounters with that thing. like how it insisted that brian roberts was still the 23rd best guy in our league, despite him only have like three good months last year. but yeah, i forgot, you're right. although the dimension of thinking about yahoo's stat hiccups would actually be kind of fun, strategically. like realizing how soriano isn't actually good.

There's still a xmas tree in my living room

Andy, there's no need to be a bitch about this. Just because something is cleared up in your mind doesn't mean that it's been decided. Some, including me, were still batting around a preseason ranking system, since a post season ranking wouldn't take into account things that happened over the winter. So get off that high horse for a second and offer a better argument than, "but I want to do it this way."

I do like the idea of announcing who you are keeping the day of the draft. Your keepers are then just "bonus picks" or however you want to think about it. That would add drama and make sure no one is too comfortable going into to draft day.

Remind me again why attaching keepers to a specific place in the draft is important? (I ask for real. I still don't get why people think that's such a good idea).

my team didnt suck shit

i would have no problem drafting the first three,five,7 rounds from my team last year. Unless i get the top 2 picks, i wont be able to get Arod again. Theres no way i'd get Arod AND texiera either. How about getting Konerko, Jeter, Sheffield, Matsui, Buherle, Ichiro, Colon and Halliday in my top 10 picks or players even close? I didn't win but my team was pretty good. My pitching sucked for half the year and it caught up to me. I doubt i will be able to out do myself this year so don't give me shit if you didn't end the year with a good team. And how is 5 players any different than you plan whereas you keep players based on where you draft them? Do you not plan on keeping any players or only 1 player? All I am doing is setting a hard cap instead of a variable one based on stat rankings. If you don't want to keep 5 players then dont. If you keep 2 players then you can 'draft' until either another team has only kept 2 players or you can draft from the general pool. If some team has 10 good player and only keeps 5 then you can start drafting from their pool. While this does get back to that arms race idea, atleast its capped at 5 players (or 4 or even 3, i just think 5 is a nice medium between keeping everyone and only your best player).

On a positive note, i think pete's idea is actually pretty interesting. not sure where the waiver = 10th round idea came from but it gives you the option of keeping players for a while but you have to 'pay' for them with picks. While this idea again brings back the dreaded idea of contracts, what happens when you trade a player. example trading arod after 07 year for ortiz. ortiz was a 2nd round pick (possibly) and arod was a first round pick. who loses which pick in the 08 draft?

Yes, im mad im still at work at 7 and lost is on in a few minutes. fuck this, im leaving. who cares if i showed up at 11.

doesn't anyone read this thing?

sweet christ, i'm going to have the attendance secretary mail some of you highlighters and graphic organizers so that you can keep track of important details in these posts.

>The problems with that seem to be two fold, however.
>1) The yahoo! rankings aren't going to be the same
>as ours since a) they'll use different stats and
>b) they pretend that stats are the only issue
>whereas we all (or, all of us but Omar and maybe
>Whet) want to like the players we have and don't
> think of them like robots. 2) How far in advance
>do these preseason rankings (or, hypothetical
>drafts) take place? Would that give us enough
>time for winter trades?

if we did compensation picks we'd print out the *end of year* rankings from the yahoo league and use those. those rank the value of players in that league (rank not o-rank) and reflect the stats used. also no in-advance problems.

omar, what's the only thing worse than being forced to draft the first 3 rounds from last year's team? drafting the first 5 rounds. you've outdone yourself.

>the yahoo stats are slightly weird and seem
>best suited for a straight 5x5 league

that's o-rank (which follows no logic.) rank uses the stats you are using. or at least i was under the impression it does?

pete's working paper #14 is fine by me. i'm mostly fighting to have keepers tied to a specific draft round in some way. bring me your scott podsedniks and jh. peraltas.

also i think we should announce who we are keeping at the draft. as in, everyone walks up to the board and punches that shit into the relevant round. and that's when you realize what czap's has in the works for everyone. except this year it'll be projected over a neon christ dying on the cross.

Concerning New York

In an effort to sift through the dialogue and bring us up to date:

1. We're gonna have a keeper league.

2. We're gonna have a draft and not an auction for at least the next two years.

Two items really in contention at the moment:
3a) The number of keepers.
3b) How do the keepers effect the following draft.

4. Stats have not been resolved, but that comes next.

My two cents (for the day):
3a) The fewer keepers, the more interesting the draft will become and thus the more interesting the season will be. As Moacir pointed out, we don't have a 40 man roster so no one really is going to be holding on to guys that they think will be good next year and sit them on the bench all year. I don't think that's what any of us was anticipating (and correct me if I'm wrong). The only reason I thought having keepers would be a good idea in the first place was to add another little wrinkle into the season. Winter trades, added strategery, and the ability to hold on to your very favorite players from the year before. I didn't think that we needed to completely turn this thing upside down. Plus, in regards to Pete's comment, the more players we keep the more likely it is that someone will say, "I don't want to keep that many," in which case we don't really have a workable cap. Furthermore, the more players a team is allowed to keep, the more likely it will be that good teams will stay good and bad teams will stay bad (*cough, cough*). Was anyone really completely dissatisfied with the way we have run things that past three years?

3b) Again, I'd be willing to bend on this, but it seems to me that either using a third party system or previous draft order is only going to unnecessarily complicate matters. What happens if you have two 4th rounders? Why are waiver wire dudes automatically 10th rounders? What if you want to keep your 10th rounder? Are the Yahoo!/ESPN/BP rankings to be trusted?

In the end, I'll be fine with whatever system the majority of people want on this one and I'd rather have a system that people are excited about rather than one that people begrudgingly following cause they were tired of thinking about it. As Carter said today, "this league could last until we die." And that, my friends, is what I am working towards here (not the dying part, the longevity part).

Do any of you get the feeling that this is what writing the Federalist Papers must have been like? If founding a nation and deciding a system of government was a completely pointless action, I mean.


My Formal Proposal

Here's one complaint i have with your proposals ben/omar:
what if someone doesn't have 3 or 5 guys they want to keep? do they start the draft at the same time as everyone else with less picks? do they get to draft additionally out of the pool of available guys before the real draft starts? this is my main beef with that simple proposal, really my only objection. if there's essentially a penalty for having such a bad team that you can't find 3 to 5 guys to keep, then the rich will immediately, permanently be richer, right?

i take your point that we would not in fact need a dry erase board. it would be cool though if we could all wear blazers with our team logos on them.

My View on Evolution
ben, you articulated my fear of andy's plan, which is that the yahoo stats are slightly weird and seem best suited for a straight 5x5 league. here's yet another idea: you can keep a guy at the level you drafted him at for one year. anyone who is a multi-year keeper then becomes a first-round pick, essentially. (in the case of multiple first round picks, you lose the highest remaining round, obviously). you can keep people forever, with the stipulation that, of course, every multi-year guy costs you your highest pick left. in the event that you pick up a guy off the waiver wire then want to keep him, he by default counts as a 10th round pick. should you want to keep multiple waiver pickup guys in a given year, you lose your 11th, 12th (n+1) round pick. this seems a sensible compromise on omar/ben/andy's plan. after that first year (and we can argue over whether the 10th round is the right spot), the guy becomes a multi-year keeper just like anyone else, costing the highest remaining pick.

this way, a waiver-move or very-low round pick of a very good guy has some lasting value (rewarding you for your smarts), but eventually loses that value, while you can still retain the services of the guy in question, as a sop to the idea of loyalty to a specific fantasy nation-state on the part of say, boof bonser or yusmeiro petit. this meets the usual test of reasonability, which i define as "could the commissioner keep track of all of this from year to year using one 8.5x11 sheet of paper?" yes he could. print out the draft, print out the finished rosters at the end of the year. set a date by which GMs must announce their keeper (preferably one week before the draft for drama and crazed preparation) . on the end of the year roster, write down the draft round a player was taken, for waiver guys put 10. The only thing I don't think I covered here was: number of keepers. i like a max of 5 as a compromise. but maybe others have opinions as well. I would add that we need to freeze rosters from roughly October until a month before the draft, for sanity's sake, but we can then trade guys at will in the preamble to the draft.

example scenario:
At 2006 draft, Pete takes ~25 guys.
Before 2007 draft, Pete protects Round 2, Round 4, Round 11, two waiver pick-ups for five.
At 2007 draft, I lose picks 2, 4, 10, 11, 12.
Before 2008 draft, Pete protects two multi-year keepers, his 2007 1st and 2nd round picks, and one waiver pick up from 2007 roster.
At 2008 draft, I lose picks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 10.