The FOFC Historical Person Draft Thread (Draft Underway!)

[spleen1015]

Now that we are done...

I was thinking Michael Phelps will likely be a good pick in about 10 years.

[spleen1015]

Did anyone compile all of the picks in an excel spreadsheet by chance?

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Now that we are done...

I was thinking Michael Phelps will likely be a good pick in about 10 years.

10 years? I'd say after this year. There's a good chance he will have 18 career Olympic medals and 15-16 golds by the end of the Beijing Games. That's just amazing.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Did anyone compile all of the picks in an excel spreadsheet by chance?

I did but I missed some of the era's, so I need to go back through and make sure everything is right. Shouldn't take too long though. If you want me to send it to you, PM me your email addy.

[Racer]

I'm surprised no one drafted Christopher Columbus as a cultural icon. He's incredibly controversial (so much that he would probably be a decent fit for evil person), but he had a huge impact on changing the culture and history of the entire Western Hemisphere.

[oliegirl]

I'm shocked that no one took Theodore Seisel/Dr. Seuss as either Scribe or Cultural Icon. I thought for sure he'd go in the scribe category, I think I would have taken him over Rowling or King...

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Don't know if this will work but can we establish a rule that we cannot vote for ourselves? I think doing so is cheesy and classless, and I would be more interested in what those of us here think of the other picks.

Can we establish this rule for the voting phase?

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Racer

12.10 Mary of Nazareth (mother of Jesus) (Classical age) – women

Although little is known about the women, she is perhaps the most famous women in the world. Christians believe she was a virgin when she conceived Jesus of Nazareth.

Great value pick. I had her on my list for the 2nd round as a cultural icon.

[Racer]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Can we establish this rule for the voting phase?

I don't even think we are allowed to vote are we?

[spleen1015]

I think the voting is a ranked based system, if I remember previous drafts right.

[Danny]

Originally Posted by oliegirl

I'm shocked that no one took Theodore Seisel/Dr. Seuss as either Scribe or Cultural Icon. I thought for sure he'd go in the scribe category, I think I would have taken him over Rowling or King...

I debated on this actually

[RendeR]

I was very impressed with the quality of everyone's picks throghought the draft. I felt sure that about rounds 8-9 we would start seeing some really off the wall selections but we never really did. There were a few that IMO would have been far better in other categories or other time frames, but they were still good picks in general.

Excellent job everyone! And thank you al for making my very first FOFC draft a very entertaining time =) Can't wait to see the voting!

[Izulde]

Indeed, I'd say that as a whole, the teams in this draft are much stronger than any other draft I've been in so far and the voters are going to have a really tough choice to make.

[Danny]

Indeed, everyone did a fantastic job

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by Danny

I debated on this actually

What made you not take him? And who did you take as Scribe? (Don't have my sheet open)

[Danny]

Stephen King. I thought King would get me more votes, but I liked both.

[Buccaneer]

AENemaun and I already came up with a scoring scheme to reflect the overall quality of the picks. We are simply putting each pick into three scores: good (2), mediocre (1) and bad (0). We thought it would hard to come up with a more subjective scoring (e.g., 1-10). He has done his scores and as expected, it came out close with only a couple of draft lists that were clunkers.

Good job everyone. Next time we do something like, we probably need to make it harder?

[Danny]

Plus my fiancee wanted me to take Stephen King. I discussed each of my picks with her.

[spleen1015]

I don't know yet if I am going to vote. It is hard to be objective.

[LastWhiteSoxFanStanding]

RenderR is absoultely right...this was a fabulous draft...one of the things that was so great was the depth of the draft selections...that's why I hope that Chief considers a rating system of 12 to 1 so that every selection is seriously considered. Any alternative voting scheme would devalue the choices that would be lumped together. For example, with a 5-3-1 scheme, the nine remaining draft choices for each team are all basically the same and ignored as a group. A 12 to 1 approach gives some weight and consideration for the care that distinguished between, say, draft picks 8 and 9.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by LastWhiteSoxFanStanding

RenderR is absoultely right...this was a fabulous draft...one of the things that was so great was the depth of the draft selections...that's why I hope that Chief considers a rating system of 12 to 1 so that every selection is seriously considered. Any alternative voting scheme would devalue the choices that would be lumped together. For example, with a 5-3-1 scheme, the nine remaining draft choices for each team are all basically the same and ignored as a group. A 12 to 1 approach gives some weight and consideration for the care that distinguished between, say, draft picks 8 and 9.

Hey LWSFS, would you go more into what you mean here? I'm not fully grasping how you would apply ratings to each draft pick.

I am still trying to decide how to do voting.

[Chief Rum]

Speaking of voting, unfortunately, it has been an awful and long day for me. I need to go to bed (doing 2 hrs OT tomorrow). Been having a bad allergic sinus reaction all day, and both jobs pretty much sucked. And I felt like crap.

I just don't have the energy to put in proper energy to this tonight. So I will post a proper voting thread tomorrow night, in which I will include everyone's draft, and the draft in period and category breakdown, hopefully so it is easier for voters to follow.

I will also post my selections (not for voting), just for interest's sake. I was surprised at some names left off the list, although this was a very deep draft.

But anyway, hope you guys will forgive me pushing voting back for a day. I was planning on having it run through the holiday weekend anyway.

Terrific job, everyone, and thanks for participating. Feel free to critique your drafts at will.

More to come tomorrow.

[LastWhiteSoxFanStanding]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Hey LWSFS, would you go more into what you mean here? I'm not fully grasping how you would apply ratings to each draft pick.

I am still trying to decide how to do voting.

What I am suggesting is the following: Each category is ranked from 12 points all the way down to one point. So for instance a voter would give the top military leader 12 points, the second best military leader 11 points all the way down to the worst military leader pick which would get one point. Do this for all the categories then add up the points to see who comes out on top.

The reason I think this is the way to go is because each category is fully valued and each pick is fully valued. I know for me a lot of the fun was not the first couple picks, but the final picks to see if I could find a hidden gem or a sleeper. And I am sure that was teh case for everyone else too. So I would like to see those picks be given equal weight.

As for the system scaring off voters, I don't think that would be the case at all. I know people who have been following this would follow any voting system we gave them because they are interested in who comes out on top.

Finally, I am not sure if drafters should be allowed to vote. I know there has been some discussion on that as well. I leave that in your hands. I trust your judgment.

Whatever you decide on both points, I fully support you and can't wait to see who ends up with the most points!

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by LastWhiteSoxFanStanding

RenderR is absoultely right...this was a fabulous draft...one of the things that was so great was the depth of the draft selections...that's why I hope that Chief considers a rating system of 12 to 1 so that every selection is seriously considered. Any alternative voting scheme would devalue the choices that would be lumped together. For example, with a 5-3-1 scheme, the nine remaining draft choices for each team are all basically the same and ignored as a group. A 12 to 1 approach gives some weight and consideration for the care that distinguished between, say, draft picks 8 and 9.

But most of the voters don't vote that way. We have always let the voters come up with their rankings (typically the top 3) however means they want to, whether subjective or liking/not liking a drafter or just looking at top 3 or looking at all of the picks. In the end, it comes down to 5-3-1 (or something) to determine the winner.

The other point is that I still believe that majority of the picks are no better than another and separate some of them, a voter would only go with biases.

Finally, I think we should allow drafters to vote but not include their own picks.

[RendeR]

Can someone email me their spreadsheet of the entire draft?

RendeR @ Majecc.Net

[LastWhiteSoxFanStanding]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

But most of the voters don't vote that way. We have always let the voters come up with their rankings (typically the top 3) however means they want to, whether subjective or liking/not liking a drafter or just looking at top 3 or looking at all of the picks. In the end, it comes down to 5-3-1 (or something) to determine the winner.

The other point is that I still believe that majority of the picks are no better than another and separate some of them, a voter would only go with biases.

Finally, I think we should allow drafters to vote but not include their own picks.

I understand what you are saying, but I think it would engender more discussion and debate if we had a twelve point ranking system. And isn't that the whole point of this? Like I said before I think it would be pretty neat if somebody's last pick was ranked as high as fourth or fifth on someone's board. If you only count the top 3 that pretty much takes away any idea of a sleeper. J

just my two cents

[RendeR]

I think something that needs to be addressed is the fact that this was a dual category draft.

We not only had to select 12 catrgories of people but we had to place those picks within 12 timeframes.

I think the ranking/voting system needs to take that into account as well.

for example, if we're having them vote 1,2,3 for the best three in each category of person have them do the same for the picks in each timeframe as well.

Michael Jordan may be the #1 sportsman for example, but does that guarentee that he is the #1 choice for the 1980's-1999 time frame? Probably not.

Sorry to throw a wrench into tihngs, but I really believe that must be taken into account when people vote on this.

[Barkeep49]

I think the traditional 5-3-1 is the way to go. Or even just a simple 1st place poll.

[ColtCrazy]

I think the 5-3-1 is the best way to go..would pretty much assure everyone gets a vote...even my lineup!

It'll be hard to choose....there are some excellent lineups. This was a lot of fun, can't wait to see the voting. Should we have each person showcase their draft in that thread?

[Danny]

I have a simple way to fix this. I will decide who wins and will save everyone a lot of work.

[Racer]

Isn't it up to the individual voter on how to vote? Isn't all that matters in the end is the order in which they rank each team? If I were to vote, I think I'd want to vote 1 to 5 with 5 being a great pick, 4 being a good pick, 3 being an average pick, 2 being a below average pick, and 1 being a poor pick.

[Chief Rum]

Your moderator is a moron. He spent too much time catching up with things (WW, baseball league, etc.) and didn't end up with a chance to post the new voting thread with everything he wanted.

I swear, it goes up tomorrow. I won't do anything else until I get it up.

I have decided to go with the simple for voting purposes once the thread goes up. Sorry, LWSFS, I admire the thought you put into your proposition, but I have to believe most voters aren't going to have the time to go that much in depth. I will stress in my voting instructions about the strategic elements of the draft, so that hopefully voters will take that into consideration.

The voting will be the Top Three, 5-3-1 style.

Since I haven't posted the voting thread, here is my list of picks from those who are left. Rip me left and right if you like. I actually really like some of these picks and am surprised they weren't taken.

BTW, I would welcome oliegirl to post a list, too (you don't have to avoid my choices, olie).

My list from those remaining:

Ancient Times: Thutmose III (Military Leader)
Classical Age: St. Paul (Religious Figure)
Middle Ages: Eleanor of Aquitaine (Woman)
Renaissance: Raphael (Artist)
1600's: John Locke (Intellectual)
1700's: Franz Joseph Haydn (Musician)
1800's: Leo Tolstoy (Scribe)
Pre-WWII 20th century: Lenin (Cultural Icon)
WWII-1950's: Emperor Hirohito (Evil Historical Person)
1960's-1970's: John F. Kennedy (Ruler/Diplomatic Leader)
1980's-1990's: Magic Johnson (Sportsman)
2000's-Present Day: Pope John Paul II (Good Historical Person)

Others I wanted to pick/considered picking: Malcolm X, James Brown, Attila the Hun, Thomas Alva Edison, George Gershwin, Bernini, Virgil, the Yellow Emperor, Saddam Hussein, Christopher Columbus, Tomas de Torquemada, John Milton, Thomas Paine

[spleen1015]

I had Pope John Paul II, Magic Johnson, Malcolm X, Thomas Edison, and Attila the Hun on my list.

[Izulde]

I had J.P. II, St. Paul, Virgil and Raphael all on my list.

[oliegirl]

I'll do a list...am I only allowed to take people who weren't taken in the draft, or can I take anybody????

[Danny]

I had a dream that three of the first five voters listed me in first place.

[Racer]

I thought about taking Christopher Columbus, Attila the Hut, and Isabella (who I would have taken earlier if I had gone this route), but decided I wanted to draft Mary so went with Jim Henson, Mary, and Suleiman the Magnificent instead. It's really hard to know what other people are thinking. I actually thought about taking both Columbus and Mary, but decided it would be to much of a reach to take anybody from the 1980s-1990s era as my military leader.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Danny

I had a dream that three of the first five voters listed me in first place.

I had a dream that we would have voters.

[Barkeep49]

Originally Posted by Racer

I thought about taking Christopher Columbus, Attila the Hut, and Isabella (who I would have taken earlier if I had gone this route), but decided I wanted to draft Mary so went with Jim Henson, Mary, and Suleiman the Magnificent instead. It's really hard to know what other people are thinking. I actually thought about taking both Columbus and Mary, but decided it would be to much of a reach to take anybody from the 1980s-1990s era as my military leader.

Suleiman > Schwatzkopf

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by oliegirl

I'll do a list...am I only allowed to take people who weren't taken in the draft, or can I take anybody????

Well, not much of an exercise if you just take anybody. I would just do like I did, taking from those that are left. Our challenge is to come up with a good list even though we didn't get to draft.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Well, not much of an exercise if you just take anybody. I would just do like I did, taking from those that are left. Our challenge is to come up with a good list even though we didn't get to draft.

Oy, this is going to be tough then...I'll work on it tomorrow while I'm laying at the pool