FOF 7.2 Update

[Aston]

Can you post the messages in detail? Probably false positives.

[Dutch]

I am in favor of 39. Sometimes we put a lot of work into the big picture of drafting and it seems silly to have an arbitrary cutoff (i.e. QB strength 10 (good) vs 9 (kiss of death)) to ruin your draftee.

I have no idea how things will change now that it's updated.

[Guest]

I hope when you go to 39 that the combines don't just become essentially random. haha

What was the tell anyway?

[Guest]

There was discussion over at USFL because we are heading to the draft. Ben poked in and said this:

At 50 or higher, if someone understands which constraints to use (not all of them are outlined in MalcPow's thread, my thread, or Draft Analyzer), they can very effectively draft from a list of about 90 players per draft, rather than 850. And usually 40-50 of those 90 end up being 50+ players, so we're talking close to a 50% "hit" rate if just randomly picking them out of a hat. It's a very efficient way to draft. If no one in the league is outdrafting everyone else significantly, it probably just means that no one has figured out all of the unposted constraints and how to create a much smaller draft list from them. The key to Jim's explanation was "to make it more difficult for experienced players to easily identify good players"

Jim's definition of "experienced" there isn't just "guys who have been playing a few years." It's more "guys who had just about solved the draft in its current state." i have a few of them in my leagues, and as a result, all of those leagues are moving to 39.

[Guest]

USFL decided to stay at 50% because it was said no one had cracked the draft there. Not sure if that is necessarily the case because if anyone had cracked the draft, it would have been the people protesting the most. But I digress.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the crack people are in this league. You guys all kill at drafting.

[Guest]

There was discussion over at USFL because we are heading to the draft. Ben poked in and said this:

At 50 or higher, if someone understands which constraints to use (not all of them are outlined in MalcPow's thread, my thread, or Draft Analyzer), they can very effectively draft from a list of about 90 players per draft, rather than 850. And usually 40-50 of those 90 end up being 50+ players, so we're talking close to a 50% "hit" rate if just randomly picking them out of a hat. It's a very efficient way to draft. If no one in the league is outdrafting everyone else significantly, it probably just means that no one has figured out all of the unposted constraints and how to create a much smaller draft list from them. The key to Jim's explanation was "to make it more difficult for experienced players to easily identify good players"

Jim's definition of "experienced" there isn't just "guys who have been playing a few years." It's more "guys who had just about solved the draft in its current state." i have a few of them in my leagues, and as a result, all of those leagues are moving to 39.

Ahh, so the crazy good data miners/parsers are killing the draft. That makes sense.

Well, as long as the draft doesn't become random I'm all for bumping it down to at least 50/49.

[Matt]

39.

Anytime you can game a game and have the opportunity to fix it...you do.

[Aston]

There are unposted numbers? Huh.

Anyway, 39 sounds good to me.

[Delandis]

FOF 7.2 Update

39.

Anytime you can game a game and have the opportunity to fix it...you do.

This.

Even if owners aren't "cracking" the draft here (which I personally disagree with after looking at recent drafts) dropping the tells and adding draft ambiguity in the league is always a step in the right direction, imo.

[Guest]

There are unposted numbers? Huh.

You don't have them? So you just use the force, then?

[Aston]

AFAIK, everything comes from the MalcPow thread. About the hard boundaries, anyway.

I didn't even know you had a thread!

[Delandis]

FOF 7.2 Update

This was very reason I left the OSFL the first go around. It was frustrating to know that everyone could look just look at combines and pick star after star.

Not. Fun.

[Guest]

I guess I never really understood the drafting stuff if it was just MalcPow. haha

I'd use that as kind of "guidelines" but I never seemed to be able to deduce that certain guys would have to have a certain rating floor based on it. It seemed like there'd always be some combine that could indicate a wide range of possible ratings.

[Guest]

I didn't even know you had a thread!

I got nothin'. You are the draft master, not me.

[Guest]

I think 39 will be good for the league.