Originally posted by cavebird
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Is this veto-able?
Collapse
X
-
If DMT didn't exist we would have to invent it. There has to be a weirdest thing. Once we have the concept weird, there has to be a weirdest thing. And DMT is simply it.
- Terence McKenna
Bullshit is everywhere. - George Carlin (& Jon Stewart)
How old would you be if you didn't know how old you are? - Satchel Paige
-
Originally posted by Ken View PostThis statement looks incorrect to me.
If you look at NFBC drafts held in the last month (gives us a big sample size while still using recent data) we have 381 drafts to look at. In those drafts Correa went on average at pick 50.54 and Puig went at 58.74.
In the 38 main event drafts they averaged pick 52.42 and 52.74.
For our purposes that is basically even ADP.
So suggesting that one of them is significantly better perceived value based on the ADP data is not good analysis of the data IMO.
We seem to have something of a consensus that the trade is clearly uneven but not veto worthy. A couple of people think is only slightly tilted and one said a veto was not excessive.
JLast edited by onejayhawk; 04-12-2019, 01:57 PM.Ad Astra per Aspera
Oh. In that case, never mind. - Wonderboy
GITH fails logic 101. - bryanbutler
Bah...OJH caught me. - Pogues
I don't know if you guys are being willfully ignorant, but... - Judge Jude
Comment
-
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostI just checked. NFBC, Draft Champions, 1 March to 1 April its 49.85 to 62.92. That's enough of a difference to call significant.
I posted some clear indication that they are very similar in ADP in the macro sense across the larger data set of 381 drafts, and I included a note about the main event, which is generally a more respected data source as another data point.
How does narrowing it down to the 71 drafts specifically in draft champions, and across an older data set suggest better data? Why go back the extra 10 days? Why limit your data to Draft Champions? If you are going to cite a source as a counter, and it has less data points and an older sample that may no longer be as relevant, you need to at least back that up with WHY your data source is a better source.
Aside from the bad data analysis, less than 1 round of difference in ADP in the 4-5th round range is not significant enough to consider as an appreciably different asset class in fantasy. You're getting players from the same tier even at both the spots you mentioned (50/63). At just 13 picks different in that range we're talking about personal preference, not significantly different valuations.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ken View PostI posted some clear indication that they are very similar in ADP in the macro sense across the larger data set of 381 drafts, and I included a note about the main event, which is generally a more respected data source as another data point.
How does narrowing it down to the 71 drafts specifically in draft champions, and across an older data set suggest better data? Why go back the extra 10 days? Why limit your data to Draft Champions? If you are going to cite a source as a counter, and it has less data points and an older sample that may no longer be as relevant, you need to at least back that up with WHY your data source is a better source.
Aside from the bad data analysis, less than 1 round of difference in ADP in the 4-5th round range is not significant enough to consider as an appreciably different asset class in fantasy. You're getting players from the same tier even at both the spots you mentioned (50/63). At just 13 picks different in that range we're talking about personal preference, not significantly different valuations.
Originally posted by Sour Masher View PostYeah, to reiterate a point 1jay himself has noted in the past--the different of 13 spots at the top of a draft is vast. The different 50-60 picks in is not, and in fact the difference is small enough as to be a matter of team needs and personal preferences.
JAd Astra per Aspera
Oh. In that case, never mind. - Wonderboy
GITH fails logic 101. - bryanbutler
Bah...OJH caught me. - Pogues
I don't know if you guys are being willfully ignorant, but... - Judge Jude
Comment
-
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostIt's the setting Paul Sporer uses for his articles. I can speculate on his reasons but only speculate.
Agreed that this not like the difference between #7 and #20 or even #17 and #30. However, it is still a difference of more than 25% of the picks made. It's like a difference between #16 and #21.
J---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostIt's the setting Paul Sporer uses for his articles. I can speculate on his reasons but only speculate.
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostIt's like a difference between #16 and #21.
I think you are analyzing ADP completely wrong - there's not a statistically significant perceived difference in values in players that are that close together. Fantasy players are looked at in tiers.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ken View PostI disagree.---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostIt's the setting Paul Sporer uses for his articles. I can speculate on his reasons but only speculate.
J"You know what's wrong with America? If I lovingly tongue a woman's nipple in a movie, it gets an "NC-17" rating, if I chop it off with a machete, it's an "R". That's what's wrong with America, man...."--Dennis Hopper
"One should judge a man mainly from his depravities. Virtues can be faked. Depravities are real." -- Klaus Kinski
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ken View PostLets not cite sources as rebuttals unless we know why we are citing them and can back it up. I think that's a pretty good rule in general on any topic actually.
Right, which are also within error bars and basically personal preference too. If you pick a random NFBC draft and look at the players picked at 16 and 21, and then pick other drafts to analyze, there's a decent chance that the player picked at 21 in your sample draft was picked above the one that was picked at 16 in your sample draft.
I think you are analyzing ADP completely wrong - there's not a statistically significant perceived difference in values in players that are that close together. Fantasy players are looked at in tiers.
You keep saying, "that close together" when they are not very close together. It is exactly, "statistically significant" in the rigorous meaning of that phrase. In your terms, they are on different tiers.
JAd Astra per Aspera
Oh. In that case, never mind. - Wonderboy
GITH fails logic 101. - bryanbutler
Bah...OJH caught me. - Pogues
I don't know if you guys are being willfully ignorant, but... - Judge Jude
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ken View PostI posted some clear indication that they are very similar in ADP in the macro sense across the larger data set of 381 drafts, and I included a note about the main event, which is generally a more respected data source as another data point.
How does narrowing it down to the 71 drafts specifically in draft champions, and across an older data set suggest better data? Why go back the extra 10 days? Why limit your data to Draft Champions? If you are going to cite a source as a counter, and it has less data points and an older sample that may no longer be as relevant, you need to at least back that up with WHY your data source is a better source.
Aside from the bad data analysis, less than 1 round of difference in ADP in the 4-5th round range is not significant enough to consider as an appreciably different asset class in fantasy. You're getting players from the same tier even at both the spots you mentioned (50/63). At just 13 picks different in that range we're talking about personal preference, not significantly different valuations.
Onejay, brother, bubbla, there is no case here for veto. If you open that door than you might as well vote on every trade and that will not be fun.
I did not weigh in on what side I like better because it is a moo point (Joey Tribbiani). I do have a side that I prefer but that is nothing new. I can pick a side I like best in 98% of the trades that happen in my leagues and about the same for all that are listed in here. It has nothing to do with veto.
Comment
-
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostThat's not a rebuttal. You asked me why I use that setting. That's why.
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostYou keep saying, "that close together" when they are not very close together.
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostIt is exactly, "statistically significant" in the rigorous meaning of that phrase.
Originally posted by onejayhawk View PostIn your terms, they are on different tiers.
Comment
-
Not that anyone would know this, but several years back OJ and one other league member vetoed a deal in a baskeball dynasty league. I believe that it was Giannis for AD...AD was the obvious better player for that season, but he was virtually unkeepable. The league ended up folding from that veto, so when OJ mentions veto, the hairs on the back of my neck go up.
No matter, this deal is in no way vetoable..."Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."
- Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)
"Your shitty future continues to offend me."
-Warren Ellis
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hornsby View PostNot that anyone would know this, but several years back OJ and one other league member vetoed a deal in a baskeball dynasty league. I believe that it was Giannis for AD...AD was the obvious better player for that season, but he was virtually unkeepable. The league ended up folding from that veto, so when OJ mentions veto, the hairs on the back of my neck go up.
No matter, this deal is in no way vetoable...
JAd Astra per Aspera
Oh. In that case, never mind. - Wonderboy
GITH fails logic 101. - bryanbutler
Bah...OJH caught me. - Pogues
I don't know if you guys are being willfully ignorant, but... - Judge Jude
Comment
Comment