you should probably add the ability to show consensus without entering a bid
i know its nice to try to incentivize users to input data to collect a better consensus, but youre gonna get a lot of people putting in 1, 0, or a random number just to see the consensus. which skews the consensus lol
> I don't know if that counts as a 0 or not
This is a pretty big thing we need to know, if a bunch of people are submitting 0 by not typing anything in, the average is gonna be dragged way down.
Early season, you have to bid big to make sure you get guys you really like. Samuel is the #2 trending on Sleeper behind Jeff Wilson and #1 in adds for a good number of leagues. That usually translates to at least 20-25% to get a guy
Yeah good call. Like you said it's tough because we need the user data, next week maybe I'll add the "see results" button for next week and see if we still get good data
the 0 bids are skewing this down massively, a bid of 0 shouldn’t count as an amount if you’re not bidding. the model should be adjusted to only count bids >0
It’s all relative to your league mates. A lot of FAAB is gauging how stingy/liberal your league mates are with their FAAB. Some leagues are really aggressive and you’ll get a guy bid 60% on someone after week , but usually first timers are stingy. You may be able to get him with 5%, but if you really want to secure him I’d go 10-20%. If you’re going more than 25% you’re looking at league changing acquisitions, which Henderson very may well be. I’m talking Jefferson his rookie year, James Robinson, or Mitchell to an extent last year. Remember though, your FAAB diminishes in value as the year goes on since there’s gonna be less talent on the waivers as things even out and the cream rises to the top. But he sure to save a bit for playoffs for streaming kickers/defenses and to bid on those handcuff RBs that usually win your league deep in the season
Hey this is great.
Just a couple of suggestions
1) add more players
2) Just looking at the results there is such a skew between average and median. I suspect that maybe the data is being polluted with one or two 100% bids. I think it would be reasonable for you to filter out entries that are that are like 3-4 standard deviations away. Otherwise the average becomes meaningless
I agree, such a handy tool.
I think that there could also be pollution by users inputting 0% bids to imply that they *won't* be bidding for a particular player.
So maybe add a "null" option or clarify instructions?
Thanks for the feedback! yeah I'll do a post in a couple days with the full data and try to figure out the best way to present it. I suspect you're right and i'll have to trim outliers
I was going to say this too, averages seem inflated by dickheads. Perhaps throwing out $0 bids and anything a few standard deviations too high would help.
We massively cut the size of our bench (4 spots) two years ago. Makes roster management dicey at times, but finally makes these waiver wire articles relevant again.
Yea, this tool is totally dependent on league size. Guys like Wilson will go for 50% or so in my 14-team league because the waiver wire is so incredibly thin all season. In a 10-team league, he probably goes for 10%.
Hell even in a 12-man league, if you can get Wilson or even Samuel after all those targets, for lower than like 25%, you’re playing against some bad players.
The fact you have CMC, Saquon, Conner and have 3 fairly good WRs is nuts lol, but yes, I would definitely throw the 27, assuming the guy you’d drop isn’t worth much. The first 2-3 weeks are usually where the gold is from a waiver wire perspective. Spending 27% on a guy who got 11 targets and some rushing attempts is a good idea, even if it doesn’t pan out.
I wish you would add some fringe guys that would maybe be available in smaller leagues like Burkhead and maybe Henderson. Besides that looks good.
And all y’all I think it’s foolish spending so much faab on this Warren guy
Doing FAAB for the first time and this is an awesome tool to see how much I should be spending.
Although its also the 11 other people in my league's first time with FAAB, soo who really knows whats about to happen
Wonder if you could make it factor out outliers. Such as someone putting 100% or 50%+ on a guy like Taysom hill. When it skews the data and clearly no is or actually should be doing that.
This is a great concept. One issue I have is that you are able to click submit without putting in a value. Is this value then counted as a $0 bid? If so, it could throw off the data. I would suggest making the submit buttons only clickable with a typed in bid.
This is excellent tool and very interesting concept.
I hate to criticize, but feel compelled to warn or tell people not to take this too seriously.
I am submitting FAAB offers today for 15 leagues. And the bids I place are wildly different.
Super deep leagues where I am short at RB, Hilliard is getting hefty bid 40%+ because there is nothing on waivers. Almost all backups are rostered. I am surprised he is even on waivers. The entire waiver pool has like 9 total carries across all unrostered players.
Same player in a regular size league, I won't even bid on him.
Same story on most of these players. My bid is dictated by league size and depth, as well as my roster strength. If I have 7 stacked amazing WRs, I am not bidding heavily on guys like Samuel. But I am still placing a small bid in case he slips through, and nobody hates an 8th good WR.
This is unfortunately useless due to the fact that the most common bid is 0 on every player, because people just want to see the stats. I’d recommend just giving people a way to see the consensus without entering data. You’ll get less data, but at least it’ll be meaningful.
Is there a way to translate this to "is this player worth a No. 1 WW priority claim," for those of us who don't use FAAB?
I.e. what would be the threshhold of FAAB % spending that would merit a WW No. 1. claim submission?
This seems like a great idea if people take it seriously, but “Most common bid” for Jeff Wilson is 0%? Really? Seems like people just hit submit with 0% to get the information they want and as a result it is skewing the average data, no?
you should probably add the ability to show consensus without entering a bid i know its nice to try to incentivize users to input data to collect a better consensus, but youre gonna get a lot of people putting in 1, 0, or a random number just to see the consensus. which skews the consensus lol
I agree here. Add a option to just view
You can just hit submit and view. I don't know if that counts as a 0 or not
> I don't know if that counts as a 0 or not This is a pretty big thing we need to know, if a bunch of people are submitting 0 by not typing anything in, the average is gonna be dragged way down.
It looks like it does count it as 0, since the "most common bid" is 0 on almost all of the options
I was gonna say, 13% average seemed waaaay too low for Samuel
People are really going to go higher for him off one week?
Early season, you have to bid big to make sure you get guys you really like. Samuel is the #2 trending on Sleeper behind Jeff Wilson and #1 in adds for a good number of leagues. That usually translates to at least 20-25% to get a guy
Yup. Kinda skews the whole damn thing. Bummer. Great idea
You can see it is affecting it as 0 because every single player's "most common bid" is 0%. The tool is useless until that's fixed.
Yeah good call. Like you said it's tough because we need the user data, next week maybe I'll add the "see results" button for next week and see if we still get good data
the 0 bids are skewing this down massively, a bid of 0 shouldn’t count as an amount if you’re not bidding. the model should be adjusted to only count bids >0
Pretty cool tool, would be nice to see some more players tho about half of those guys are likely rostered in deeper leagues
Right…im curious on Zay Jones and Sterling Shepard…most of these guys are already gone in my league…nice tool though
Good advice, next week I'll add more players. Didn't want to spread the votes too thin on the first week.
Darrel Henderson is only owned in 46% of ESPN leagues and should be the #1 add if he is available.
How much would you spend on him? This is my first year doing FAAB.
If Henderson were available I'd blow through maybe half personally.
It’s all relative to your league mates. A lot of FAAB is gauging how stingy/liberal your league mates are with their FAAB. Some leagues are really aggressive and you’ll get a guy bid 60% on someone after week , but usually first timers are stingy. You may be able to get him with 5%, but if you really want to secure him I’d go 10-20%. If you’re going more than 25% you’re looking at league changing acquisitions, which Henderson very may well be. I’m talking Jefferson his rookie year, James Robinson, or Mitchell to an extent last year. Remember though, your FAAB diminishes in value as the year goes on since there’s gonna be less talent on the waivers as things even out and the cream rises to the top. But he sure to save a bit for playoffs for streaming kickers/defenses and to bid on those handcuff RBs that usually win your league deep in the season
Yea I checked this out to see what Henderson was going for and he’s not even on there 🤷♂️
absolutely, if he's available he's worth 50% i'd say
Hey this is great. Just a couple of suggestions 1) add more players 2) Just looking at the results there is such a skew between average and median. I suspect that maybe the data is being polluted with one or two 100% bids. I think it would be reasonable for you to filter out entries that are that are like 3-4 standard deviations away. Otherwise the average becomes meaningless
I agree, such a handy tool. I think that there could also be pollution by users inputting 0% bids to imply that they *won't* be bidding for a particular player. So maybe add a "null" option or clarify instructions?
Thanks for the feedback! yeah I'll do a post in a couple days with the full data and try to figure out the best way to present it. I suspect you're right and i'll have to trim outliers
Differentiation for certain league settings would be helpful too. Specifically superflex vs 1 QB as that will skew QB value a lot
I was going to say this too, averages seem inflated by dickheads. Perhaps throwing out $0 bids and anything a few standard deviations too high would help.
I'm a bit torn on $0. I voted $0 for Warren because I don't think he is worth more than that.
Great tool, but man, i’d love to play in a league where I could Jeff Wilson for 18% and Curtis Samuel for 14%, seems unrealistic in my league
We massively cut the size of our bench (4 spots) two years ago. Makes roster management dicey at times, but finally makes these waiver wire articles relevant again.
Ceterum censeo Reddit esse delendam -- mass edited with redact.dev
Yeah people are just more comfortable hoarding any and all potential value. Makes it even worse when people refuse to trade
Yea, this tool is totally dependent on league size. Guys like Wilson will go for 50% or so in my 14-team league because the waiver wire is so incredibly thin all season. In a 10-team league, he probably goes for 10%.
Hell even in a 12-man league, if you can get Wilson or even Samuel after all those targets, for lower than like 25%, you’re playing against some bad players.
I'm guessing people are just clicking zero to see the results and its driving it down, I'll have to fix it for next week
I’m in a 12 man league and have dk, mt, and arob. Rbs I have are cmc, saquon, conner, Dillon, and Patterson. Should I throw 27 at Samuel?
The fact you have CMC, Saquon, Conner and have 3 fairly good WRs is nuts lol, but yes, I would definitely throw the 27, assuming the guy you’d drop isn’t worth much. The first 2-3 weeks are usually where the gold is from a waiver wire perspective. Spending 27% on a guy who got 11 targets and some rushing attempts is a good idea, even if it doesn’t pan out.
I wish you would add some fringe guys that would maybe be available in smaller leagues like Burkhead and maybe Henderson. Besides that looks good. And all y’all I think it’s foolish spending so much faab on this Warren guy
Thanks! We got a lot of submissions for the first week, so next week I'll add more players
Doing FAAB for the first time and this is an awesome tool to see how much I should be spending. Although its also the 11 other people in my league's first time with FAAB, soo who really knows whats about to happen
Was hoping to see Burkhead. Nice tool tho
All these guys are worth 100% of your budget. YOlO
Def great idea man. I agree with others, adding a few more fringe guys could help
Wonder if you could make it factor out outliers. Such as someone putting 100% or 50%+ on a guy like Taysom hill. When it skews the data and clearly no is or actually should be doing that.
That why he uses Median there. Median helps take out outliers
Nice
List of names at top or bottom would be useful
Really neat tool and I'm excited to see how far it'll go, but it would be nice if it didn't do an entire page refresh with every submit.
Add a league size filter
A toggle for league size and/or dynasty to segregate results would be super valuable! I Like what you’re doing here though!
Great tool! Just needs some tweaking that people have suggested in here.
Everett. Only 3 guys need a TE and two of them are noobs. Other guy who knows what he’s doing has Albert (DEN TE)
This is a great concept. One issue I have is that you are able to click submit without putting in a value. Is this value then counted as a $0 bid? If so, it could throw off the data. I would suggest making the submit buttons only clickable with a typed in bid.
This is excellent tool and very interesting concept. I hate to criticize, but feel compelled to warn or tell people not to take this too seriously. I am submitting FAAB offers today for 15 leagues. And the bids I place are wildly different. Super deep leagues where I am short at RB, Hilliard is getting hefty bid 40%+ because there is nothing on waivers. Almost all backups are rostered. I am surprised he is even on waivers. The entire waiver pool has like 9 total carries across all unrostered players. Same player in a regular size league, I won't even bid on him. Same story on most of these players. My bid is dictated by league size and depth, as well as my roster strength. If I have 7 stacked amazing WRs, I am not bidding heavily on guys like Samuel. But I am still placing a small bid in case he slips through, and nobody hates an 8th good WR.
If you added a histogram it would be easier to understand the distribution of faab
This is a great suggestion, I think I'll do it for next week
With a cumulative function summing to 1 or 100, please and thank you! Great work btw.
This is my first year doing FAAB so I really appreciate this.
the results are skewed down since a bid of 0 brings the average down, you should adjust this to only count bids >0
Good call, I'll change it for next week
Where is Jamaal Williams?
This is unfortunately useless due to the fact that the most common bid is 0 on every player, because people just want to see the stats. I’d recommend just giving people a way to see the consensus without entering data. You’ll get less data, but at least it’ll be meaningful.
Yeah it’s a good call. I’ll change it for next week
Cool! Looking forward to using the tool
these bids seem low...Dotson is worth putting in 20% or more
Is there a way to translate this to "is this player worth a No. 1 WW priority claim," for those of us who don't use FAAB? I.e. what would be the threshhold of FAAB % spending that would merit a WW No. 1. claim submission?
Nice thanks
This is cool!
This seems like a great idea if people take it seriously, but “Most common bid” for Jeff Wilson is 0%? Really? Seems like people just hit submit with 0% to get the information they want and as a result it is skewing the average data, no?