Sunday

PL 3120 Sea (29)+(33) 112 3232
JG 2894 Sea (29)+(33) 106 3000
LD 2856 Sea (29)+(33) 112 2968
DB 2659 Sea (29)+(33) 107 2766
UU 2663 LA (-7) 18 2681
BD 2494 Sea (29)+(33) 107 2601
OA 2455 Tex (6) 48 2503
HH 2437 NYY (-3) 26 2463
SC 2337 Oak (-7)+(-5) 12 2349
JJ 0347 Sea (29)+(33) 94 0441

How the HELL does that happen, where we have different rosters, but 3 of us end up with 106+ (two eventually at 112) and 2 end up with 98+ (now 107)?? I shouldn't complain with 106, but goddamn, why couldn't the meat in the sandwich fly alone for once?? :p

Dammit, the bread slices both have Corey Patterson in the late game, and now I'm 6 back...

Hey DS - I hope this doesn't make me a bad person but when I saw you took a PS from a double header and lost points again for the third time this week, I had to laugh - sorry.

But here is something to ponder - think of how much time you spent each day this week selecting your lineup - say 10 minutes a day with 6 games so far, for a total of 1 hour. So with that hour spent, compare that to the time UU spent chosing his lineup - which was ZERO as in NO minutes - and he has picked up over 75 points on you this week. Kind of makes you sick to your stomach doesn't it. Maybe this is a case of sometimes less is more? OH SHIT - I just realized I took the same PS as you in a DH today - damn.
[/b][/quote]Well, I got nothing to say. I don't blame you for laughing- my pitching staff picks this week have been nothing short of laughable. As for your comparison to UU, well that's just data mining dude. Sure, it's been a bad week but I don't see you comparing the efficiency of time when people have good weeks. Therefore, your trash talk is, in actuality, statistically insignificant! All in due time, my man, all in due time!

Quick question:

How the hell do u no if their is a doube-header. Unless its the Pirates I never no about them. Then I get pissed off when everybody else picks the DH game and talks about them. Does it tell ya somewhere when ur picking ur pitching staff? Or does it take extra research which I will not do

PS-Javy Lopez is a machine

You got to do the extra research, the pages where you make your picks won't tell you.

Dude - just click on the "MLB Scoreboard" link at the end of the day. You'll see if any games have been postponed... No "research" required :rolleyes:

yeah but they dont always schedule the double header the very next day.

Of course not - you don't trash talk when the other person is doing well - what is the fun of that? No, you trash talk when someone is doing poorly or you are doing well. Since I do average at best I need to rely on when others do poorly.

You can still go to the "MLB Scoreboard" and check the next day's games... don't you check anything but the player select page?? :p

PS I don't think there have been any scheduled D-H'ers yet (as opposed to next-day make-up dates). But they are coming, June through September. I don't even know when they all are -- yet -- but I'm surely gonna look'em up and keep track!

JGeoff - I have both good news and bad news for you. The good news is that the final totals from the A's - Phil's DH is not all posted, so you have more than 106. The bad news is that PL and Buffy still have more, one has 116 I believe. They had all the numbers posted earlier and then went back and have been slowly reapplying since than. For example you can look at E. Brynes and you know he had more than 4 ABs in the DH.

Thanks, BDD - Yeah, they had problems yesterday, and guess it's still quirkly... I'll surely check'em all again when I post the final scores, after the NYY game...

We'll see though. Just remember, it says he has 4 ABs, but you gotta remember each BB is an at-bat as well, which makes it 6. But I will check'em again later...

I hope I don't lose too much ground!

You can still go to the "MLB Scoreboard" and check the next day's games... don't you check anything but the player select page?? :p

PS I don't think there have been any scheduled D-H'ers yet (as opposed to next-day make-up dates). But they are coming, June through September. I don't even know when they all are -- yet -- but I'm surely gonna look'em up and keep track! [/b][/quote]Aight "G"

ALL keep a close eye out

Monday

PL 3242 Ana (8 Angels, 1 bye)
JG 3004 Ana (9 Angels)
LD 2972 Ana (7 Angels, 2 Phillies)
DB 2766 Ana (5 Angels, 2 Phillies, 2 byes)
UU 2681 LA (1 Philly, 8 byes)
BD 2608 Ana (3 Angels, 2 Phillies, 4 byes)
OA 2503 Ana (9 Angels)
HH 2462 (00) 00 2462
SC 2349 Ana (3 Angels, 3 Phillies, 3 byes)
JJ 0445 (00) 00 0445 <--??!

So I guess you'll be cheering hard for DaVannon today.

Buffy- you let go of Corey?

I know, you are trying to catch plaw- need all the points you can get!

I myself let go of Pujols.

I guess my conservative nature is showing by the fact I elected to hold onto 3 of my "regulars" (to protect their market value ratings).

I suspect I could've gotten more points today if I'd picked all new players but I'd rather keep the 3 (Benito Santiago, Manny Ramirez and Nomar Garciaparra) at their lower, locked in rates (I'm saving almost 4.0 in the value field).

Then again, what the f*ck do I know? I'm sitting in last place.

I had a couple "regulars" all season, but 5 weeks to go, I figured I'd try it the "pro" way and see how it works (so I'll know for Season 2)

BTW - When the second half starts, our rosters will be empty, too. It's starting totally over, so you can't hold on to Corey at the price you got'im anyway :p

Everyone took Anaheim. I was tempted to go with the upset. One game, Philly can shut them out, ya never know... we'll see...

I had a couple "regulars" all season, but 5 weeks to go, I figured I'd try it the "pro" way and see how it works (so I'll know for Season 2)
[/b][/quote]I've been following the leaderboard regularly since almost the beginning (you didn't think I got this good by figuring it all out myself, did you?)

I was, after all, misled by JG's comment on page 1 of this thread; something to the effect of "I tend to pick a player and keep him all season unless he gets injured". Of sourse, as he goes on to say later "I never finished in the top 10%"

Anyway, it is extremely rare when of the leaders has an open roster spot. They seem to pick an entirely different team every day. Based on the fact that they consistently rack up close to 400 points or better every week, I gotta conclude that they know what they're doing.

Besides, what good is keeping 5 or 6 players and saving all that cap room? If you have that many players locked in, there's a limit to how much of your "savings" you can spend.

Correct me if I'm wrong here JG: You've always played this game in one of the "open" groups, and because you didn't know anyone that you were playing against, you never really got the competitive juices flowing, and you didn't devote the time required to do well. This is shaping up as your best year ever for this game, right? Must be the level of competition. I mean, I'd hate to lose to a rookie, and even worse, to a woman.

I've said before I *know* how the great players do it, it just doesn't necessarily make as much sense to me. I had a player for $2.3m for a while, who was doing well for me. Another at $2.9m who ended up going up past $4m if I wanted him back. While a non-player is a definite zero in points, there's no guarantee that someone you pick up will provide any points either. I'd "assume" my non-player would go "0-4" and be happy saving the money so I could afford some $7m players. Let alone being able to afford an $8m PS.

But, as I said, that's not how the top players do it. So I'm taking the last 5 weeks and being aggressive to see how it works out. My inspiration was today's game, thinking there was no way Buffy would give up Patterson. Sigh. She did! I can't believe it. Ahh well... now she'll have to pay to get him back!

You're probably right about the competition being a motivator. It means more playing against people you know, altho I have no problem competing against strangers

My previous BCC percentile rankings:

2002B - 90%
2002A - 38% (I started many weeks late)
2001 - Didn't play for some reason
2000B - 89%
2000A - 84%

(Uber results don't show 1997-1999, so I don't know...)

I played Diamond Daily last year, it was free, unlike this year. And finished that at 90% as well.

In football, which I know less about, I really kicked major ass, finishing 99.8% in Pigskin Pick'em, 94% in College Pick'em, and 99.9% in College Bowl Pick'em. Total dumb luck, I tell ya!

2002 was pretty good for me in these games. I have a bad habit of starting games late, though, cuz I don't check to see what's new as often as I should. I've just started some car racing games, late, of course.

Is that Nascar or Indy? And what could you possible compete on. Whether someon takes 4 tires, 2 tires or a gas and go?

Is that Nascar or Indy? And what could you possible compete on. Whether someon takes 4 tires, 2 tires or a gas and go? [/b][/quote]Both

You pick 5 racers, who you think will do the best in the next particular race.

In the Pocono 500 stock car race, I picked the drivers who came in #1 (thanks, Tony Stewart), #5, #10, #16, #19. I got over 100 pts more than average, but since I missed the first two weeks, I'm only at 2.2%

The current ESPN games are here if anyone has any interest. Most are free, some aren't.

I've read the rules, and they make no sense to me. You just pick 5 racers, and you get points for how they finish. The scoring system is equal to the actual Winston Cup points. Don't know the challenge in this game.

The challenge is, you can only spend so much money on the drivers. If it wasn't challenging, everyone would win, right? :p

So JG, you're gonna "experiment" the last 5 weeks. Does that mean your conceding? :p

Seriously, folks, to carry the discussion one step further...

I have 1368 "transactions" for the season. True, some of those represent tinkering with my roster and adding and deleting players the same day numerous times as I trey to stay within the cap. But that indicates that I'm spending a lot of time on this stupid thing.

So here's my point:

I'd bet that the number of transactions per entrant in our group almost exactly will reflect the standings. The more transactions, the higher your position.

Nope. It means I'm gonna make a run for First Place

Of course, that means I gotta stay lucky with my PS choices; and you gotta crash a few times. Like they say for the NY Lottery, hey, you never know...

As for number of transactions, I think quality over quantity is a factor as well :p And so is dumb luck, probably most important. I can't seem to see a total for mine unless I wanna add'em up by page... but I know it's way less than 1368

Monday :rolleyes:

PL 3242 Ana (14) 20 3262
JG 3004 Ana (14) 20 3024
LD 2972 Ana (14) 26 2998
DB 2766 Ana (14) 16 2782
UU 2681 (00) (00) 2681
BD 2608 Ana (14) 24 2632
OA 2503 Ana (14) 20 2523
HH 2462 (00) 00 2462
SC 2349 Ana (14) 23 2372
JJ 0445 (00) 00 0445

Something like "posting for numbers", I guess

You didn't think this would escape my attention would you? While I COULD be horribly offended, I wouldn't think you would sink so low as to call me a "rookie"

As far as strategy goes, I can't say that I hang on to players for very long. I am indeed all woman and therefore fickle and in constant need of change in my players. I only hung on to my main two because they did so well for me all the time. I tend to look at players daily and size them up against what they are up against. I mean even a .400 heavy hitter can go 0-fer. Then he is no good to me.

Like JG, I have dabbled in fantasy sports (MLB & NFL) for years. This is just my first time at ESPN with a bunch of STRANGErs. I actually like it better this way...I don't have to see your mugs at the water cooler every day to trash talk. I can ignore you when I'm thru listening to your drivel.

So tonight is gonna be a yawnfest. Yeah, JG, shoulda gone for Philly just to make it more interesting for us all. Somebody's gotta crash and burn for entertainment around here.

Tomorrow? Clean slate. A new week basically. And if Pork Chop and I have 2 or more players the same, I will.....

I apologize for this poorly written sentence.
I'm the rookie. You're the woman.