The BABL Manipulation, part 2

So, we ran into an issue with the BABS Baseball (BABL) exhibition, described here. Briefly, one of the owners, Matt, figured out that he could nearly guarantee success in two categories (IP, K) if he completely eschewed one (Sv+Hld). I asked the BABL owners four questions:

1. Is this a flaw in the construction of the BABL game format?
2. Is Matt “gaming” the system?
3. Is Matt just lucky now and the stats could still normalize over the balance of the season?
4. And if Matt’s tactic has given him a real advantage, is there anything the rest of us can do to put ourselves in position to win this year?

In their responses, the owners were none too kind to Matt’s surprise strategic advantage, and even resorted to threatening bodily harm. But Matt had his day in court. He responded:

“Friends,

I find myself feeling a great many things this weekend. Winning is fun! But when you’re winning, you become the bad guy, and being the bad guy is terrifying. I’m proud to have a moment in the spotlight, to have my moves analyzed by my truly thoughtful and intelligent competitors from across the country and Ron, someone I’ve been learning from and looking up to since I was a teenager. And I’m humbled, because I know first hand all of this can disappear in a matter of days.

With that in mind, in addition to answering Ron’s reflection questions, I’m going to use my moment in the spotlight to share my perspective on this wonderful game, an explanation (and perhaps a defense) of some of the tactics I’ve employed this year, and some personal background that will tie it all together. Because what fun is being the villain if you don’t get a chance to monologue?

But before all that, I want to say thank you to everyone for the talent, dedication, and civility that you invest every week in this league. Finding those three traits in every darn person in a league of ten is far more rare than it should be. No matter what the players on team Matt achieve, I know I will be a thousand times more grateful for the people I played with when I look back on 2018.  Thank You.

First thing’s first, Ron’s questions:

1. I believe there are inefficiencies inherent in every game and every league, including BABL. Flawed is a more subjective word that I personally don’t believe fits the BABL rules.
2. I am not “gaming” the system. I am capitalizing on several inefficiencies that are collectively paying off for me in a major way at this moment. I view gaming the system as a simplistic yet infallible tactic. I can assure you my strategy is neither.
3. I think Dan hit it on the nose: I think it will take a number in the low 60s to win. I like my path to that number better than anyone, but admit that I’m probably playing over my head a few points even in a static world with no injuries or roster moves.
4. Nice try, I’ll never tell!

Because it is so satisfying to identify and roster assets more valuable than we pay to acquire them and doing so requires less effort, we neglect two extremely important aspects of the game in our draft prep and execution:

• Team Composition and Synergy with the League Rules
• Competitive Market Strategy.

BABS may have been a straight-A statistics major, but it’s time for her to go to Business School.

There comes a point where your competition is too good to focus solely on projections and drafting for value. Everyone has access to great pre-draft content, and understands the basics of speculative drafting.

Playing fantasy as a high school student, showing up to the draft with the Baseball Forecaster and some pre-draft work was slaughter- the next biggest investment of time or money was your buddy who picked up a copy of The Sporting News preseason magazine for $5 on his bike ride to the draft. The information in the Forecaster is so important, it helps us stay ahead of our ever-more sophisticated competition. But in a league like ours where everyone is working on the cutting edge of prognostication, how large of an advantage can you hope to gain, even if you do it better than any of your peers?

I’ve been “breaking” fantasy league formats since college. Every rule, no matter how trivial it may seem, is an opportunity to exploit an inefficiency, including the SP/RP Proposal (it was one of my first). Pick your poison wisely. Then strike first.

My first year of college, I inherited a last-place team midway through year 5 of a dynasty league. I quickly learned that in this league, three strong owners would prey on the less dedicated players, resulting in three super teams. When all the talent is that concentrated, your only option is to identify and capitalize on the inefficiencies in the rules. Starting with my first full season, I won every year, and each year, a rule change would be discussed to close the loophole I had exposed. After the third year, those discussions changed to “Should we close the loophole only to open another?” For better or worse, this process is the game for me now.

Ron suggests I’ve eschewed a category, you say I’ve punted, but Michael Porter would say I’ve “elected not to enter the market at this time.” Whatever you call it, whether you choose to capitalize on an inefficiency or not, have a plan to reach 64 (or whatever your target number to win your league is) that Porter would be proud of.

Hope is not a strategy. Our draft plans not only need to make conscious choices on who to draft when, but the precise level that we will compete with the rest of the market (league) in a particular category. When we notice a disrupter during or after the draft, we need to be able to adapt our plans, and that means having a rough answer to Brian’s thought experiment “if we all used the same strategy at the draft, what would happen?” and every scenario in between.

It’s not simple. It’s far from over. I can’t wait to see what you do, and learn from it.

Last year, I was fortunate enough to play with Ron in a similar 50-man, no free agent 5×5 league on Fantrax. I ran a similar strategy in that league, and had similar results at this point in the year. The freefall began just before the All Star break, and by the time August hit, I had so many players injured that I couldn’t field a complete team. During this, I watched Ron ascend from last to first in the span of few weeks. It was a sight to behold. In the end, neither of us cracked the top three slots (Ron finished 4th with me right behind).  So much will happen between now and October, and when your time in the spotlight comes, I hope you enjoy it just as much as I have.

If any of your goons so much as hurt one hair on Daniel Mengden’s Mustache (pictured), so help me…”

Okay, I’m back. I thought it was worth reprinting Matt’s response, in nearly its entirety. However, I do question his sincerity when he addresses us as “friends.”

I am experiencing a bit of déjà vu with this entire situation. The original incarnation of Rotisserie Baseball was a 4×4 game back in the 1980s. The four pitching categories did not include strikeouts, providing fantasy owners with a similar inefficiency to exploit. Some owners realized that they could draft a staff of nine relievers and gain a strong advantage not only in saves but also ERA and WHIP. Wins were tossed and the savings spent on bats. The resulting advantage drove the need for a minimum innings rule, and later, the move to a 5×5 game that included strikeouts (which diminished the need for an innings minimum).

The suggestions offered to mitigate this “loophole” are all interesting, but I’d like to make any rules change as natural and organic as possible without infringing on the simplicity of the format. It will be a thought project for the off-season.

In the interim, we’ll all be keeping Matt in our crosshairs. (For me, I’ve got a bunch of ground to make up before I can even see Matt with a telescope.)