[USML Announce] FAAB Fun

Mon Aug 4 11:35:11 EDT 2008

I vote 1 and 1.

-Andy

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Jim Barrett <chicagojab at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 1 and 1...Jim
>
> *"JOHN FRUIT, FAF ADVISORS" <jfruit1 at bloomberg.net>* wrote:
>
> I also vote for 1 and 1....jf
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Richard Robbins
> At: 8/04 10:17:42
>
> Thanks for framing the issues and the vote.
>
> I vote for 1 and 1.
>
> Let's get through this as rapidly as we can and then move on.
>
> As an aside, I am in accord with Jeff's suggestion at the end as well.
>
> -- Rich
>
> _____
>
> From: announce-bounces at usml.net [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net] On
> Behalf
> Of jhwinick at aol.com
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 10:12 AM
> To: announce at usml.net
> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] FAAB Fun
>
>
> Andy,
>
> I suppose you're right at this point that we'll have to set this for a
> vote.
> Mark does not have internet access and I do think this needs to get
> resolved
> asap. As I see it there are numerous choices, but in the absence of anyone
> in the league suggesting otherwise, there appear to be two choices most
> worthy of our consideration:
>
> 1. Allocate the players as if we had provided them manually to Mark Blocker
> and asked him to process them in accordance with the Constitution.
>
> 2. Accept the results of the system as they were announced and leave Bay
> and Griffey for bidding next week.
>
> As I said, there are other possible alternatives, like re-bidding entirely,
> or disallowing Jim and my contingent bids in their entirety, but I am
> guessing that no one feels strongly about either of those two choices to
> insist that they be included in the vote. If no one indicates otherwise
> prior to noon today, I would propose that people vote for either 1 or 2.
>
> If #1 is the winner, we'll also have to decide how to decide salaries. I
> believe this is only relevant for the determination of Nady's salary. I bid
> $56 on Bay, then Nady, then Griffey. Does the $56 define only Bay's salary
> or because it was beaten and then the system would have evaluated my bid in
> a non-contingent fashion against Andy's, is it also used to determine
> Nady's
> salary? Please vote on this proposition, regardless of your vote on the
> first issue:
>
> 1. Nady's salary is established based upon applying the constitution (i.e.
> only non-contingent bids are considered).
>
> 2. Nady's salary is established based upon the algorithm apparently used by
> the system to determine the winning bidder and his salary is measured
> against the team that would have finished second in the bidding as
> determined by CBSSportsline (i.e. my bid of $56).
>
> Also, I think we ought to consider disallowing contingent bids on the
> system
> for the balance of the season until we can figure out how to unwind them if
> this were to happen again. That's just a suggestion,or discussion point and
> not something we need to vote on.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Klein
> To: USML Announcements
> Sent: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 9:51 am
> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] FAAB Fun
>
>
> My view is that if Bay and Griffey were actually in the system and listed
> as
> available for bidding, we should count those bids. Jeff ... I understand
> that you are trying to remain very neutral since you were the only bidder
> on
> Griffey. But you shouldn't have to forfeit a deserved boon -- you get
> Griffey at $5, and he might well be a keeper next year. So ... in my
> opinion, the players should be awarded as I suggested in my previous note:
> Bay to Jim, Tex to Rich, Nady to me, and Griffey to Jeff . As I said
> before, we do need to sort out salary issues, with the basic issue being
> whether an unsuccessful contingent bid increases the salary of a successful
> primary bid.
>
> All that said, I am just trying to help sort things out and will abide by
> any group decision. But we should have *everyone* weigh in quickly, because
> the decisions could have a big impact on the title race. Can we vote on
> whether to allocate the players as I suggest and also vote on the salary
> issue?
>
> -Andy
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Jeff Winick wrote:
>
>
> Andy,
>
> Griffey was my 3rd bid, so if we try to guess as to what the system would
> have done we're still left with the issue of how to set salaries, like, for
> example, Nady If we let the system work, as is, then we would ignore my
> bids for Bay and Griffey and Jim's bid for Bay and voil? you have an easy
> and obvious answer and no question about the interjection of subjectivity
> into the process.
>
>
> Jeff
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:08 AM, Andrew Klein wrote:
>
>
>
> Jeff-
>
> If you are the only player who bid on Griffey, you get him at $5. That's
> how are rules work. I also think that Jim B. should get Bay. He clearly
> made the highest bid. The question (as with Nady) is salary. The only info
> I don't see from earlier correspondence is detail about your bids. Were
> they contingent after Griffey? If so, the problem is easily solved because
> your subsequent bids don't matter. If they were non-contingent, then we
> need to know the amounts and decide how they impact the salary consequences
> of my Nady bid and Jim's Bay bid.
> Again, just my two cents.
>
> One other thing. I suggest that in September, a few of us make "bids" on
> the system to test how it handles certain scenarios. We can undo the
> transactions after the experiments.
>
> -Andy
>
> Jeff Winick wrote:
>
>
> I, too, agree with Andy, but would focus on his point about the system
> having perhaps worked properly.
>
> Despite the fact that it costs me Griffey, I think we ought to consider
> leaving well enough alone and default to the website's results, I.e. Leave
> Bay and Griffey bidding to next week and leave the rest of the results
> alone. To do otherwise requires us to make assumptions about what the
> system
> would have or should have done and that makes me uncomfortable.
>
> Jeff
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 4, 2008, at 6:12 AM, Andrew Klein wrote:
>
>
>
> Sorry, Brad. No luck. I'm back.
>
> I think that FAAB bids should be processed as if the system had worked as
> we
> anticipated. This means that we follow our constitution, except where it
> would require the commissioner to unwind the system's allocation of
> players.
> During the year, we recognized that this would mean that a higher
> contingent
> bid trumps a lower primary bid. If I have sorted out the emails
> correctly, this would result in the following: Jim gets Bay. Rich gets
> Tex. I get Nady. Jeff gets Griffey. (Jeff's message read: "I had bid on
> Griffey, Nady and Bay, not Tex. But my bids for Griffey or Bay weren't
> processed.")
>
> We never reached an agreement on how salary would work in this situation.
> Jeff's position is that salary should be impacted when a primary bid
> competes against contingent bid. My opposite view is that we should follow
> our constitutional rule and not have contingent bids inflate salaries of
> successful primary bids. My reasoning is that the commissioner needs to
> alter salaries anyway -- so this is not something where we allow the
> automated system to save work for Mark B. These are both reasonable
> positions. We should vote on this and then have precedent on the point.
>
> Like Jim, I continue to oppose a complete do-over, which would hurt those
> of
> us who made good (OK, lucky) bidding decisions.
>
> All that said, I'll go along with the league consensus however that turns
> out.
>
> -Andy
>
> PS: On the snafu ... is it possible that the system did not process Bay and
> Griffey because they had not appeared in games by Friday midnight? That
> would make sense. Tex and Nady both appeared earlier in the week. Bay and
> Griffey did not play for their teams -- I think -- until Saturday.
>
>
>
> Brad Jansen wrote:
>
>
> Let me identify something you guys can do: coin toss or cage match. End
> this quickly. And Klein, go back out of town. Now.
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Richard E. Robbins > wrote:
>
> If the system just runs from top to bottom until you run out of
> money then
> we should be able to simulate what happened given a complete set
> of bids and
> a properly functioning CBS site.
>
> I'm not saying that is what we should do -- that's for the rest of
> you to
> decide.
>
> I clearly have a conflict because if I understand what Andy is
> saying I
> think I end up with Tex.
>
> Please understand that I'm not advocating that we do one thing or
> another --
> merely trying to identify things we could do.
>
> -- Rich
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: announce-bounces at usml.net
> [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net
> ] On Behalf
> Of Andrew Klein
> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 4:50 PM
> To: USML Announcements
> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] FAAB Fun
>
> Just back from out of town. Here's my two cents.
>
> I have been doing contingent bidding all year, and the system is
> not that
> complicated. It processes bids in the order you enter them, and
> then stops
> when it cannot do so any longer. This occurs when the player
> chosen for
> waiver is gone (because he was waived through a prior bid -- the
> later bids
> are essentially contingent). Or it would happen if someone ran
> out of FAAB
> money. Salary cap is not part of the system.
> It is up to the player who wins the bids to adjust rosters accordingly
> before Sunday noon. Also, as everyone knows, due to our "eBay"
> system, Mark
> B. manually adjusts salaries of players purchased through FAAB.
>
> I don't know what happened with the Bay bidding. But it sounds
> like Jim B.
> should have won him, but then ran out of money for his other bids.
> I think
> that I am due Nady. The only question to me is his salary -- i.e.
> is it $30 or $50-something based on Jeff's contingent bid. Jeff
> accurately
> described our disagreement on that point, and I am happy to
> elaborate on my
> opinion if that becomes relevant.
>
> In any case, I strongly object to tossing out all bids and
> starting over
> next week.
>
> -Andy
>
> jhwinick at aol.com wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> > Just when it looked like it would be easy....
> >
> > Here's the problem with Jim's bids. It is impossible to discern how
> > the system would treat them. It is clear that you can bid
> > contingently on the same player since the system will disregard all
> > other bids for the same waived player once he has been replaced, but
> > it is not at all clear how the system would handle bids that could
> > theoretically take you well over the salary cap. I've read the
> syst em
> > rules again this morning and the real challenge is determining where
> > the system starts its evaluation of bids. In Jim's case that would
> > have implications for who gets whom, what their resulting salaries
> > will be and what player Jim will waive depending on what player he
> > gets. Jim had the theoretical high bid on two different players.
> > Because the system didn't process the Bay bids, there's no way
> to know
> > whether (or IF) it would have awarded Jim either Bay or Nady. I'm
> > afraid that Jim's bids appear to be exactly the kind of complication
> > th at Mark B was talking about.
> >
> > I obviously have a vested interest, so I'm going to pass the
> torch to
> > someone else. I don't think there's going to be a "good" answer for
> > how to handle this one.
> >
> > I do, however, have one request, that I suppose is largely moot at
> > this point. PLEASE send out your FAAB bids no later than Saturday
> > morning. Although FAAB is almost over and hopefully the system will
> > work going forward, it would really help to have all of this
> > information as soon as possible. Thanks.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard E. Robbins
> > To: 'USML Announcements' >
> > Sent: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 7:14 am
> > Subject: RE: [USML Announce] FAAB Fun
> >
> > Since roster moves haven't become effective, is there a problem with
> > Jeff just emulating what the system should have done with these
> bids?
> >
> > I don't think you should be penalized for not having access to email
> > yesterday just because the web site didn't process things properly.
> >
> > Just my two cents.
> >
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > *From:* announce-bounces at usml.net
>
> >
> > [mailto:announce-bounces at usml.net
>
> ?>]
> > *On Behalf Of *Jim Barrett
> > *Sent:* Sunday, August 03, 2008 6:54 AM
> > *To:* USML Announcements
> > *Subjec t:* Re: [USML Announce] FAAB Fun
> >
> > Sorry guys for the delay but I was travelling yesterday and didn't
> > have access to e-mail. I don't want to mess things up further so am
> > willing to accept Jeff's allocations but this is how I bid:
> >
> > $74 on Bay
> > $69 on Teixiera
> > $50 on Nady
> >
> > My FAAB remaining was $74 (full amt of bid on Bay). I didn't know
> > how/if contingent bidding worked and figured if the system
> didn't want
> > me bidding this way it would stop me. Otherwise it would treat the
> > other two as contingents. I picked different players to drop
> for each
> > (didn't think of using the same). For Bay, I had dropped my
> open slot
> > (for waiving Tabata earlier). For the other two it was Albers and
> > Gabbard. Obviously, I'd prefer that the open spot be used
> rather than
> > eliminating a player from my reserve roster.
> >
> > With all that said, I think technically I should have won Bay but am
> > willing to accept Teixiera if that causes the least amount of
> > angst/trouble.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > */Jeff Winick
> >>/* wrote:
> >
> > Let's try this again. Bay is a Berliner at $52, otherwise the
> > message of this afternon was an accurate statement of the
> bidding
> > outcome.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Aug 2, 2008, at 8:33 PM, Bbuddhas at aol.com
>
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> correction i checked my bid it was and still is $51
> >>
> >> In a message dated 8/2/2008 8:09:26 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> >> jhwinick at aol.com
> > writes:
> >>
> >> If that isnt Buddha yanking my chain after I spent the time
> >> to sort this out, it will unfortunately mean we have to
> sort
> >> out the whole contingency issue. I'll20post something
> further
> >> tonight about our options.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >> On Aug 2, 2008, at 7:50 PM, Bbuddhas at aol.com
>
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> put a $56 bid on Bay
> >>>
> >>> In a message dated 8/2/2008 6:15:19 P.M. Central Daylight
> >>> Time, jhwinick at aol.com
> > writes:
> >>>
> >>> Here's what I know so far:
> >>>
> >>> Andy bid his entire budget on Nady. I spoke with him
> >>> this morning and he had no contingent bids. I
> spoke to
> >>> Brad and he didn't bid. So, pending presently unknown
> >>> bids from either John or Buddha here are where
> things stand:
> >>>
> >>> I had the high bid on Bay at $56. He was my first
> >>> choice, so we can end all of the discussion about
> >>> contingent bids and can treat this bid as
> non-contingent
> >>> and disregard the other two bids that I made to
> replace
> >>> Shelley Duncan. The next highest bid was $47 from
> Rich,
> >>> so he will be awarded to me at $48.
> >>>
> >>> $56 - JHW
> >>> $47 - Rich
> >>> $40 - Doug
> >>> $35 - MBB
> >>>
> >>> The highest bid on Teixeira was by the Calamari
> who bid
> >>> $69. The next highest bidder was Rich at $48, so he
> >>> &nb sp; will be awarded to the Calamari (in fact, he
> already has
> >>> been) for $49.
> >>>
> >>> $69 - Jim
> >>> $48 - Rich
> >>> $17 - MBB
> >>>
> >>> The highest bid on Nady was Andy's at $64. That was
> >>> Andy's entire budget. The next highest bidders were
> >>> Rick and Doug at $29, so Nady will be awarded to the
> >>> Klein Nine (in fact, he already has been) for $30.
> >>>
> >>> $64 - Andy
> >>> $29 - Doug
> >>> $29 - Rick
> >>> $20 - MBB
> >>>
> >>> There don't appear to have been any bids on
> Griffey, so
> >>> he will be available next week.
> >>>
> >>> Please let me know if you see a mistake. And John and
> >>> Buddha, please let me know asap if you placed bids
> this
> >>> week.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Jeff
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Doug Shabelman
> >>> >>
> >>> To: announce at usml.net
> >
> >>> Sent: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 5:46 pm
> >>> Subject: Re: [USML Announce] FAAB Fun
> >>>
> >>> Andy's in a car and not by a computer. I am out in
> >>> &n bsp; beautiful Grant Park at Lollapolooza where the next
> >>> President is rumored to be introducing Wilco this
> evening.
> >>>
> >>> I believe I bid 40 on Bay, 29 on Nady but cannot
> confirm
> >>> 100%. Someone can call Andy at 3174426981 but
> let's not
> >>> make it Rich- I'd like to have a fighting chance....
> >>>
> >>> DS
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: announce-bounces at usml.net
>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> To: 'USML Announcements'
> >>> >>
> >>> Sent: Sat Aug 02 17:42:54 2008
> >>> Subject: [USML Announce] FAAB Fun
> >>>
> >>> Let's try and get this FAAB stuff wrapped up.
> >>>
> >>> In order for Jeff to handle processing we need to know
> >>> what everyone bid.
> >>>
> >>> So far, Jeff has information from me, Mark B and
> his own
> >>> bids.
> >>>
> >>> It appears that Andy and Jim placed bids, but we
> need to
> >>> know the specifics.
> >>>
> >>> Please guys -- chime in with your bids or confirm that
> =0 A >>> you didn't bid.
> >>>
> >>> We need to get this wrapped up promptly.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> -- Rich
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> announce mailing list announce at usml.net
> >
> >>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends
> >>> and gadgets that make the grade on AOL Shopping
> >>>
> .
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> =2 0 announce mailing list
> >>> announce at usml.net
> >
> >>> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your
> >>> budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos
> >>>
>
> 017>.
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> announce mailing list
>
> === message truncated ===_______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> announce mailing list
> announce at usml.net
> http://lists.usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lyra.siteprotect.com/pipermail/announce/attachments/20080804/f7c149f1/attachment-0001.htm