Anti Fantasy Semifinals: Y228 v TheKilo

[YanksHater213]

And it's funny when someone said "I don't know how to build a 3-4 defense" when I clearly built the best one in the league.

 

The Pats have been playing one forever, and I don't remember the last time I missed a game. So I'd like to think I'm just as qualified, if not more qualified on that type of defense.

[yankees228]

Where did I "insult voters intelligence"' date=' though? I'd like some examples.[/quote']

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/593764-post75.html

http://www.talksox.com/forum/594173-post81.html

 

As I acknowledged before, it's not as straightforward as what I said, but there's a very clear implication in those posts. The only reason I brought it up with that I thought you were being a bit hypocritical.

[italstallianion]

And it's funny when someone said "I don't know how to build a 3-4 defense" when I clearly built the best one in the league.

 

The Pats have been playing one forever, and I don't remember the last time I missed a game. So I'd like to think I'm just as qualified, if not more qualified on that type of defense.

 

 

YH, I put (though YH could) saying that you could build a 3-4 defense, and that part of my criticism didn't apply to you. You, Y228, and Jbay might be the only ones to do the 3-4 correctly. Kilo, Ytrb, Coco, Boston22407 and others all messed it up.

 

That said, I wouldn't go as far as to say that you had the best one in the league, but that's another debate entirely.

[YanksHater213]

I can see his beef though, it's because of the way people vote. This is a team building exercise, not a pick the more talented team exercise.

[yankees228]

I can see his beef though' date=' it's because of the way people vote. This is a team building exercise, not a pick the more talented team exercise.[/quote']

 

Right, I see his beef as well. I don't have any issue with what TK said. The only reason I brought it up was because he took issue with me saying similar things.

[TheKilo]

I agree, this whole thing is stupid and it escalated quickly - however, it's clear that winning his thing is very important to some people. It's really not worth the hassle to get worked up over something like this. But at the same time, I found the tone rather distasteful coming from one of the more respected posters around here.

 

As I said, losing to Y228 doesn't bother me because he has a great team and I had his pegged to win the whole thing. He clearly knows what he's talking about and his rationale for why his teams should win are the best here (and in this case, probably better than mine).

 

I'm over this, Y228 - not upset - you made a mistake, it happens. I think the reason it got out of control is it is out of character for you.

[TheKilo]

Right' date=' I see his beef as well. I don't have any issue with what TK said. The only reason I brought it up was because he took issue with me saying similar things.[/quote']

 

So, being surprised about my power ranking is the same as saying there's no justification for voting for a team - interesting. Didn't know that could influence a vote.

[yankees228]

I agree, this whole thing is stupid and it escalated quickly - however, it's clear that winning his thing is very important to some people. It's really not worth the hassle to get worked up over something like this. But at the same time, I found the tone rather distasteful coming from one of the more respected posters around here.

 

As I said, losing to Y228 doesn't bother me because he has a great team and I had his pegged to win the whole thing. He clearly knows what he's talking about and his rationale for why his teams should win are the best here (and in this case, probably better than mine).

 

I'm over this, Y228 - not upset - you made a mistake, it happens. I think the reason it got out of control is it is out of character for you.

 

Fair enough, completely agreed. I was out of line. No question about it. But I don't want this thing to end with you conceding. I'd like to win, but, more importantly, I want the winner to be determined legitimately, and there's no reason for you to bow out.

[yankees228]

So' date=' being surprised about my power ranking is the same as saying there's no justification for voting for a team - interesting. Didn't know that could influence a vote.[/quote']

 

They're different, but they're both questioning the intelligence of the voters. That's a big issue you had with me, and I found it to be a bit hypocritical because you did the same thing.

[italstallianion]

I doubt it's exactly the same. I think that Y228 was simply saying that he's not the only one to get invested into these things and question voters in the event that things don't manifest themselves the same way that we imagined them to. I don't think he was saying those examples are equal, although they do show similar traits. I mean most of us have done it. We'd all admit that sometimes the quality of the voting sucks. That's why so many people no longer vote because we've constantly ripped on the poor quality of their voting, and now only 4-5 people vote at most.

[TheKilo]

That wasn't really the issue though. The issue was your comment, in a tied matchup, could really influence the deciding vote. If you gave that opinion in your original analysis (which you did) I wouldn't have an issue with it (which I didn't). I find it funny that ital "suggests" there could have been foul play on my part on the last vote but then is OK with what you said.

 

All in all, chalk it up to a misunderstanding, but you can see how I could view that tactic as petty. It'd be like Andrew Luck's fans leaking an erroneous story about Cam Newton a few weeks before the Heisman vote.

[italstallianion]

Despite all of this, I would say that in the course of 3 redrafts, I think that there was only one outcome that was bogus and the result of crappy voting. All of the other matchups went reasonably according to how they should, so even though we'd all question the voting now and then, it's rarely decided the actual outcome of the contest. At this point, with the final 4 teams remaining, I think that we're all close enough that whoever loses wouldn't technically get screwed.

 

I also agree that this conflict was stupid. I had lingering resentment for people voting against my team in the Coco matchup, (although I'm not bothered by it in the WhiskeyBreath matchup) and this thread wasn't the time and place to vent it. I'm responsible just as much as anyone for the arguments that transpired in the thread, and while I did mean what I said, I apologise for unnecessarily venting here.

[TheKilo]

I doubt it's exactly the same. I think that Y228 was simply saying that he's not the only one to get invested into these things and question voters in the event that things don't manifest themselves the same way that we imagined them to. I don't think he was saying those examples are equal' date=' although they do show similar traits. I mean most of us have done it. We'd all admit that sometimes the quality of the voting sucks. That's why so many people no longer vote because we've constantly ripped on the poor quality of their voting, and now only 4-5 people vote at most.[/quote']

 

 

That's pretty weak. Are you suggesting the rankings be the be all and end all? I had you 5th, you wouldn't be this far without an advantageous power ranking.

[yankees228]

That wasn't really the issue though. The issue was your comment, in a tied matchup, could really influence the deciding vote. If you gave that opinion in your original analysis (which you did) I wouldn't have an issue with it (which I didn't). I find it funny that ital "suggests" there could have been foul play on my part on the last vote but then is OK with what you said.

 

All in all, chalk it up to a misunderstanding, but you can see how I could view that tactic as petty. It'd be like Andrew Luck's fans leaking an erroneous story about Cam Newton a few weeks before the Heisman vote.

 

I see your point, but what I said was not an attempt to influence voting. If anything, calling out the voters would come with a better chance of them voting against me than for me. I was simply voicing my frustration to ital, which I should not have done, but it was nothing more than that.

 

But the final analogy doesn't hold any merit, because my main gripe is valid, not erroneous.

[italstallianion]

And Kilo, I don't actually think that you and YH conspired against me to take my team down early. While I wouldn't have been surprised if that was the case (because it would explain the vote and make it appear reasonable) I didn't accuse you both of foul play. And I don't have a problem with what Y228 said (although I don't think he should have said unjustified in a close matchup) because I don't think the remaining voters actually read that stuff and make their decisions based on it. I see the last voter (if there even is one) simply looking at the rosters, making a gut decision and using a one-liner to justify it.

 

To Y228's point, the votes that were for your team were quick one liners, while the votes for his team were more thought out. I would say that if Y228 deliberately thought this out to sway the voters, then I would agree with you that it's petty and cheap, but I don't think that Y228 would do such a thing, so I'm not hypocritical for defending him.

[italstallianion]

That's pretty weak. Are you suggesting the rankings be the be all and end all? I had you 5th' date=' you wouldn't be this far without an advantageous power ranking.[/quote']

 

 

No, the rankings aren't be all and end all, but I would trust the rankings (which had everyone's view) over a matchup in which about a third of the people voted.

 

I'm not using the rankings to say that I had the best team. I do happen to think that I had the best team, but I think that any one of the 4 of us (you, WB, Y228, and myself) could say that they had the best team. There isn't a way to prove without a doubt that one team here really is the best team. It's impossible.

 

But I think that having the #9 seed beat the #1 seed in the power rankings defeats the purpose of the power rankings to begin with. And in this particular case, I legitamitely think that voting for Coco's team in the matchup was retarded. I don't take that back because I mean it. I really do.

 

And I'm not saying that the higher power ranking should always win. I've voted for a lot of underdogs, but they've usually been 9's over 8's, or 3's over 2's, or 2's over 1's etc. I'll be the first to say that the higher power ranking doesn't necessarily mean a better team. But in the course of the 3 redrafts I've seen, I've only seen one matchup where someone truly got shafted. And what I mean by that is there was an outcome that occurred that I didn't think was close and the better team lost due to a few one-liner votes, which is why Ytrb emphasised that people take more time in voting in the NBA redraft.

 

And for the record, I had you 4th.

[TheKilo]

I doubt it's exactly the same. I think that Y228 was simply saying that he's not the only one to get invested into these things and question voters in the event that things don't manifest themselves the same way that we imagined them to. I don't think he was saying those examples are equal' date=' although they do show similar traits. I mean most of us have done it. We'd all admit that sometimes the quality of the voting sucks. That's why so many people no longer vote because we've constantly ripped on the poor quality of their voting, and now only 4-5 people vote at most.[/quote']

 

 

That's pretty weak. Are you suggesting the rankings be the be all and end all? I had you 5th, you wouldn't be this far without an advantageous power ranking.

[yankees228]

This has become redundant. Lets just find one more person to settle both matchups and move on. Everyone agree?

[italstallianion]

Fine, although I can very well see it resurfacing later at some point.

[yankees228]

Fine' date=' although I can very well see it resurfacing later at some point.[/quote']

 

See this argument resurfacing?

[italstallianion]

See this argument resurfacing?

 

 

Not the exact argument, in other words, not specifically pertaining to your "no justification" comment. More along the lines of the general debated quality of voting and the correlation between power rankings and results in the matchups.

[TheKilo]

I'm fine with moving on.

[yankees228]

Not the exact argument' date=' in other words, not specifically pertaining to your "no justification" comment. More along the lines of the general debated quality of voting and the correlation between power rankings and results in the matchups.[/quote']

 

Oh I gotcha. Well, I'm not sure if that's something that can possibly be addressed. People are going to see things there own way, and while we'll often disagree with each other, I don't think a better solution exists. When it comes to this argument, I think what TK is missing is that I have no problem with YH and WB voting for his team. But the thing is, for the same reason that a justification is required with the vote, the votes hardly seem legitimate if the voter is unable to explain their selection. For me, that's what was frustrating.

[yankees228]

I'm fine with moving on.

 

So am I. I think Divinity will settle these match-ups, then we can move onto the final, and be done with this. I screwed up, and I feel bad about it, because this was a very enjoyable exercise.

[TheKilo]

Dude, don't feel bad. You're a good guy and everyone knows it. We all say things we regret.

 

Divinity can decide the matchups if he's on.

[TheKilo]

Oh I gotcha. Well' date=' I'm not sure if that's something that can possibly be addressed. People are going to see things there own way, and while we'll often disagree with each other, I don't think a better solution exists. When it comes to this argument, I think what TK is missing is that I have no problem with YH and WB voting for his team. But the thing is, for the same reason that a justification is required with the vote, the votes hardly seem legitimate if the voter is unable to explain their selection. For me, that's what was frustrating.[/quote']

 

 

 

Honest to goodness - last post on this topic. If they used some variation of my explanation, would that have been acceptable?

[italstallianion]

Honest to goodness - last post on this topic. If they used some variation of my explanation' date=' would that have been acceptable?[/quote']

 

 

I know you weren't asking me, but I think so. I think it was more of the voters not saying enough rather than what they said specifically. The fact that they said so little led Y228 to believe that it was for Brady or that they didn't notice your mispositioned front 7. I think that if the people that voted for you echoed what you said, while he would disagree with it, I think he'd have been ok with it.

[yankees228]

Honest to goodness - last post on this topic. If they used some variation of my explanation' date=' would that have been acceptable?[/quote']

 

I'm of the opinion that, in your explanation, you didn't adequately address how your front seven would be successful playing that scheme. But yeah, as long as there was something, even if I found it disagreeable, I wouldn't take umbrage with it (although I would discuss it, because I enjoy talking football, and maybe I could learn a few things about utilizing personnel outside of their normal scheme).

[TheKilo]

Fair enough.

[italstallianion]

So it's all good in the hood now?