Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Site Navigation

  • News and features
  • Events
  • Membership
  • About Us

< Tingelstad, Abeler under pressure | Main | Override? It could happen >

Is a senator worth more than a rep?

Posted at 12:18 PM on May 13, 2007 by Bob Collins (7 Comments)

Because nobody has ever created a fantasy league for a legislature before, the first season has primarily been a combination of guesswork and hunches, from the standpoint of managerial strategy. A few teams that have done nothing all year -- transaction wise -- have done well; most are near the bottom where, frankly, they deserve to be.

Some teams embraced their own political philosophy. Most of those teams have done poorly. Some just drafted favorite legislators only. Ditto. A few teams have analyzed what's going on in the session -- the entire point of the MFL -- and have done well. The race right now between Bemidji and Sine Die in the Gold League is better than anyone could have hoped for. In the Maroon League, the Indefatigible Bill Carriers, I think it's safe to say, have clinched.

The race for the Turtle Award, however, is a pretty interesting 5-team race.

What I've found most interesting, however, is the make-up of teams in regards to Senate and House. When the season started, nobody wanted senators. But as the season winds down, it's clear that senators will make the difference between winning and losing. Why? Because they score more points. That isn't likely to change here in the last week. Whenever the House meets, it's passing Senate files.

I calculated a comparison between the two. On almost every level, the average senator scores more MFL points than the average House member. The average senator filed 97 bills this year, 14 higher than the average House member. This is particularly interesting because while the House can -- and does -- go absolutely crazy with up to 35 members piling onto a single bill, the Senate allows only 5. Earlier in the year, that was perceived as a handicap. It hasn't worked out that way. (By the way, this refers to "filing a bill" as defined by the MFL. That is, the lawmakers name is on it when it's filed; not after the fact.)

The average senator has accumulated 445 CP (bills passing committee) while the House member has 494; not surprising since there are many more committees in the House. But the bottom line? The average senator has contributed 1,501 points; the average House member has contributed 1,317.

Overall, the average legislator scored 1,379 points. Let's consider that "par" for the session. A glance at the Power Rankings can tell you how each legislator stacks up.

Comments (7)

And the average legislator named Linda scored 2913.5!

Sen Linda Scheid 3136
Rep Linda Slocum 2985
Sen Linda Higgins 2945
Sen Linda Berglin 2588

Posted by linda higgins | May 13, 2007 6:47 PM

Hi, manager of the Maroon League team Quorum of Six here.

I guess I would be one of those people you say "deserve" to be in the bottom of the league, only making one change this season. Yet I'm in 3rd place in the Maroon League. I agree with you that the I-d-f-aBC have the league locked up, and Rah Rah NE MPLS probably will keep second place, but I don't think my being third is an accident. I didn't make many changes because I had a hunch that my drafting strategy would pan out--drafting based on my rough estimate of what the "players" would have earned last year, plus a more subjective measure of what their potential was for this year. That left me with a lot of Senators on my team.

For a while, I was stuck near the bottom of the pack, but lately, my team has skyrocketed to the top as the Senators began to pick up the pace. Perhaps I could have gone the micro-managing route, trying to pick up a few legislators for some quick points and then dropping them the next week, but I wanted to test out my theory. I guess maybe the best route to go is to have a few "studs" who are long-term keepers, and then have a few to switch off each week depending on how the session's going.

Anyway, we'll see how the season ends up, but I think you are wrong to say that you can't have a successful team without switching up the roster each week.

Posted by Pat Smith | May 13, 2007 8:54 PM

I might like to see a kind of "expansion" style draft at "mid" sesssion. That is every team has to protect 1 or 2 players then they all go back into the pool. If someone chooses one you had you get to proctect 2 more players if you wish or get an extra pick in the current round?

Also i think the number of leg on the team should be 8 (or 10 with 2-3 on the bench each week). Lower the number of teams per division (maybe add 2-3 divisions).

I have been to busy to realy monitor a ton, but since i took over the 19th place team I have stayed pretty close to 19th place, hard to move up when the top 40 or so point getters never are on the market, and i don't have anything to offer as a trade. That is why the less teams and more players i suggested above, i think, would give a little more action on the trade/free agent side.

Posted by Brian Hanf | May 14, 2007 10:34 AM

I'd have to say the story of this season for the Carriers was a mix of logic and luck. While our draft list was ordered strictly by who filed the most bills last season, we were lucky enough to get Rep. Abeler. Sen. Tony Lourey was our one flyer, based on his mother's filing record last year and a hunch that he'd do just as well in his rookie season. But iron logic paid off as we spent most of the year with four players in the top 20.

Predictions for next season: Rep. Abeler will be much in demand; with a season's worth of stats under all our belts there will be more to consider than just BF numbers. For instance, anyone looking for an end-of-season boost might well have considered Sen. Mary Olson (as we did), who with a lot of bills but not many points several weeks ago would have added a couple hundred to any team who picked her up.

Go Carriers! Great season, team!

Doug Gray

Posted by Doug Gray | May 14, 2007 11:15 AM

I have made only one or two roster moves all season, and it has worked out pretty well for me thus far.

And while I realize it means a ton of work, I do like the idea of some sort of mid-season shake up to give the folks on the bottom a chance to get back into the game, and give those of us at the top a reason to step off of auto-pilot. But keepers are mandatory. Jim Abeler did not end up on my team by accident. I crunched the numbers like Doug did, and ended up getting a guy I normally wouldn't have thought about in the draft.

Posted by Nate Dybvig | May 14, 2007 11:50 AM

It would be interesting to see how the teams did on the draft, showing how many points those teams would've scored if they stuck with their team.

I know if I play again next year, we'll be called "Team Linda".

For the Redress, we probably flowed too loosely with the transactions... dropping some good players for the easy points. dropping Sen. Scheid in January would come back to bite me, and I also regret dropping Rep. Hilstrom a month or so ago.

I'm wondering if there was anyway to predict how the Repubicans would do this year? We were all talking about Abeler, but I don't recall any discussing of Koerning and Tinglestad

Posted by gml4 | May 14, 2007 11:55 AM

It's good to know that 5 of my 6 Team MILVETS members are 'Above Average.' And that, MFL fans, is good for 6th place.

Ninth inning analysis shows that the January housecleaning of rookies to reverse my initial strategy of selecting freshman legislators did not meet total success. The January dumping of Rep. Kalin (1/20) and Sen. Ropes Erickson (1/27) was premature, as these rookies came back to place 26 and 22 in the power rankings. Keeping them for the duration of the session may have scored enough additional points to secure fifth place instead of sixth.

Yes, the Lindas will likely be the first round draft picks of 2008, as everyone strives to score La La La Lindas.

Posted by Nancy G | May 14, 2007 11:58 PM