Fastlane Fantasy Football (2017-18!)

[James Fake]

@Richie Rich - I bid high for Tarik as well. I agree with you; he's a special talent but great talents have to have other pieces in place to break-out.

In his case, I think his situation puts him in a great spot to break-out as a RB1 (team, touches, etc. especially with that WR core getting injured up.)

I think your gamble will pay off.. as Howard slowly loses out over the next few weeks.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Richie Rich]

@Richie Rich - I bid high for Tarik as well. I agree with you; he's a special talent but his situation puts him in a great spot to break-out as a RB1 (team, touches, etc. especially with that WR core getting injured up.)

I think your gamble will pay off.. as Howard slowly loses out over the next few weeks.

I saw you got Buck Allen (nice pickup BTW), I was trying to get him as well, but I didn't want to spread out my budget between the two, as I had to pick one over the other, and I was also trying to get Alex Smith, as my glaring weakness is at QB. I thought the price you got him for was solid, considering that he's going to be a big part of that offense. Picking up Allen will pay dividends for you for sure, with Woodhead out, he's definitely a check down option for Flacco who isn't afraid of throwing the ball. He's another one who could be a game changer, if not help get you to the playoffs. I was going to scale my bid back a bit for Cohen, but I missed out on Ajayi last year and I thought, nope, not this time. If someone really wants him, they are going to have to sacrifice their entire budget to beat me out for him. I would rather pay big for one guy who could carry me to the playoffs, rather than nickel and dime every week for guys whose contribution will be minimal to non-existent, and end back on the waiver wire.

 

[Veloce Grey]

I'm a bit torn on Tarik....

In my other league I got Hurricaned last week with Ajayi and Rodgers and legally screwed with McFadden, leaving me looking for anyone to start at RB alongside Bell. So I picked up this guy for entertainment value more than anything. If I'd picked up any other available RB I'd have lost, but Tarik happened to get me the win by 4 points. He's fun to watch too, and the fact he was handing the ball off to Howard for his td suggests they've put a decent amount of thought into how to use him.

The problem is now I have to face him this week in our league. Maybe they could give the little guy a week off...

 

[MJ DeMarco]

Hey guys I'm looking to change the WAIVER RULES in this league from "Game time - Tuesday" to "Sunday - Tuesday".

As of now, any FREE AGENT can be picked up right before game time.

The new setting will put all FREE AGENTS on Waivers on Sunday, minutes before the first game.

This setting prevents the sneaky "working the wire" before game times, usually involving a Kicker and other speculative adds.

Based on last week, looks like myself and @Veloce Grey were the only players doing it.

I would have changed this setting pre-draft had I known about it.

Now I cannot change it unless ya'll agree to it.

I vote YES on this.

I need 6 other people (a quorum) to vote YES in order to change it. If you want to keep things AS IS, let me know as well. Frankly, I enjoy Fantasy Football, but this setting makes management much more cumbersome and like work, vs entertainment.

If you all decide to keep AS-IS, that's no problem either. As commish, I can't go changing rules or scoring settings without notifying the players of proposed changes.

POST YOUR VOTE in this thread --- I ADDED A POLL.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Richie Rich]

Hey guys I'm looking to change the WAIVER RULES in this league from "Game time - Tuesday" to "Sunday - Tuesday".

As of now, any FREE AGENT can be picked up right before game time.

The new setting will put all FREE AGENTS on Waivers on Sunday, minutes before the first game.

This setting prevents the sneaky "working the wire" before game times, usually involving a Kicker and other speculative adds.

Based on last week, looks like myself and @Veloce Grey were the only players doing it.

I would have changed this setting pre-draft had I known about it.

Now I cannot change it unless ya'll agree to it.

I vote YES on this.

I need 6 other people (a quorum) to vote YES in order to change it. If you want to keep things AS IS, let me know as well. Frankly, I enjoy Fantasy Football, but this setting makes management much more cumbersome and like work, vs entertainment.

If you all decide to keep AS-IS, that's no problem either. As commish, I can't go changing rules or scoring settings without notifying the players of proposed changes.

POST YOUR VOTE in this thread --- I ADDED A POLL.

I vote YES on this as well. I never knew this could be done (scooping Free Agents at the last minute), as I've always set my lineups usually a few days before, sometimes the night before, but the never the day of. I don't like tinkering at the last minute, bad mojo that comes back to bite me in the butt, as I changed my lineup once at the last minute, and it was a disaster. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I can see it's use if there is a gametime decision on a player's choice of playing or not, but if you are paying attention and keeping up with your players and their statuses, then it shouldn't matter.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

I vote YES on this as well.

Vote in the poll so it is recorded.

 

[Veloce Grey]

Yeah I'm fine with it either way but understand your logic and support your changes. It can get confusing and a bit complicated for people who are busy around gametime. /voted

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Dylan in Africa]

I am voting NO.. Mainly because I'm not a fan of changing settings after the draft.

As paying owners, it is our responsibility to look over the settings and understand their nuances before agreeing to play. It may seem like a small change, and I'll admit, it's something foreign to me (I didn't even notice it until I saw Huge Carrot made a pickup), but the setting has affected some of my moves over the past week and shifted the landscape of my team. I imagine it maybe has done the same for others as well.

I respect your ultimate decision, but I hope some of you guys--and especially @MJ DeMarco--understand where I'm coming from with this.

 

[baemes]

I'm fine with the current settings. How about a weekly waiver pickup limit at like 6 tho?

 

[MJ DeMarco]

As paying owners, it is our responsibility to look over the settings and understand their nuances before agreeing to play.

Good point. Your NO vote might be enough to squash the whole thing.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Veloce Grey]

Good point. Your NO vote might be enough to squash the whole thing.

I actually feel kind of bad about this as I know being league admin can be a difficult role trying to balance a range of opinions.

The reality is what you're referring to is mostly being done by you and me, leading to us being at the top of the "moves" column for three years now, apart from I think Vig making a run at that title last year. It sort of started as an amusing arms race to see who could rent the rights to that breakout RB or high value backup like Gillislee last year, but as you say has gotten to be kind of ridiculous and is defeating the point of playing.

So rather than leave you in an awkward management spot we could just have a gentleman's agreement not to go cycling through the RBs as the games go on, which of course still leaves room for late free agent pickups if anyone needs a starter due to a surprise late game inactive.

Sound good?

 

[ZCP]

Assuming this prevents a late replacement for someone ruled out of the game, so I voted no

 

[KC Dash]

I voted yes, but honestly it doesn't make much difference to me either way. Whatever is chosen will be fine with me, as I see good/bad points to each option.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[BrooklynHustle]

Don't really care, as I will adapt to whatever the rules are and this is not high impact for me

Voted "No" since we are post-draft & week 1, but no strong feelings here

 

[MJ DeMarco]

WTF I went on the waiver wire to look for Jay Cutler and he's gone?!? I thought ya'll were saving him for me?

BTW, we will keep the rules AS IS. The "NOS" made a good argument for not changing things.

 

[bigred]

Hey guys, I have a bit of an issue. Myself and Dylan finalized a trade that needs to be voted on and will close on the 22nd. I traded Bell/Pryor for his DT/Gurley/Riddick.

The issue is that Gurley plays tomorrow night, in the middle of the trade window. If Dylan benches him, which he has already stated he will, I will only get 2/3 of the players for this week. He gets Bell/Pryor this Sunday. I take full responsibility for not knowing or researching the rules before making the trade. As you can see, I am in a bit of a pickle.

I have already tried to speak to Dylan about postponing the trade until next week. Which was met with an extortion for the Broncos D (not cool at all).

I see two other options:

1. If nobody has any issue with the trade or pushing it through early, MJ pushes the trade through.
2. I live with the trade and move on

Any Opinions?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[BrooklynHustle]

Hey guys, I have a bit of an issue. Myself and Dylan finalized a trade that needs to be voted on and will close on the 22nd. I traded Bell/Pryor for his DT/Gurley/Riddick.

The issue is that Gurley plays tomorrow night, in the middle of the trade window. If Dylan benches him, which he has already stated he will, I will only get 2/3 of the players for this week. He gets Bell/Pryor this Sunday. I take full responsibility for not knowing or researching the rules before making the trade. As you can see, I am in a bit of a pickle.

I have already tried to speak to Dylan about postponing the trade until next week. Which was met with an extortion for the Broncos D (not cool at all).

I see two other options:

1. If nobody has any issue with the trade or pushing it through early, MJ pushes the trade through.
2. I live with the trade and move on

Any Opinions?

Trade looks mighty off to me, but if the league is cool with it then so be it...

 

[MJ DeMarco]

I have already tried to speak to Dylan about postponing the trade until next week. Which was met with an extortion for the Broncos D (not cool at all).

This alone is worth a trade rejection. Dick move.

I have no problem pushing the trade through if others are OK with it, although I agree with the above; it seems you're giving up a lot.

 

[bigred]

I don't think the trade is as far off as yahoo does. I voted against it though, he really angled the whole situation and the whole angle with the Broncos D pissed me off .

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Dylan in Africa]

I would like to clarify a few points here and apologize for any confusion.
#1) I accepted the trade expecting to have Bell and Pryor available this week.

#2) I expected that everyone was aware of the league rules, but I am fine with pushing the trade through, letting the system run its course, or whatever else happens.

#3) From my understanding, if I leave Gurley in my starting luneup, I will accumulate his points this week and the trade won't pass until after the weekend. Gurley is currently in my starting lineup, and if I need to play him to postpone the trade, then that's fine by me. I'd also be OK with pushing the trade through, so we can have all of the players in Week 3 available as well.

#4) As far as "Broncos D extortion"... It was intended to be friendly banter. We had been joking about the Broncos D back and forth throughout trade negotiations, and I thought that was all understood.

All in all, if all league members are OK with the rules being circumvented to push the trade through after the 24 hrs and before this week, then I'm OK with that. Otherwise, I'll play Gurley tomorrow and that's OK as well. Hope that cleared up any confusion. This is fantasy football and meant to be for fun.. I hope we can keep it that way. Signing off for the night over in Africa. Peace.

 

[bigred]

#4) As far as "Broncos D extortion"... It was all friendly banter. We had been joking about the Broncos D back and forth throughout trade negotiations, and I thought that was all understood.

When I asked if we could postpone until next week, he specifically stated that we could work something out. I sarcastically stated something about giving him the Broncos D to not push the trade through until Tuesday. To which he proceeded to say that I wouldn't want to go 0-3.

I wouldn't call him out if I didn't believe it was an angle.

I voted against the trade. I am ok with whatever the group decides.

 

[ZCP]

so you voted against a trade you made?
and it seems lopsided?
did you propose the trade?

if you proposed it, then dylan accepted, then push it through as he expected to have them this week.
if you are now trying to move it a week to keep them for this week and then trade, and that is not what dylan agreed to, then veto the trade.

otherwise, i could care less and let the system do what it normally does.....

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Dylan in Africa]

When I asked if we could postpone until next week, he specifically stated that we could work something out. I sarcastically stated something about giving him the Broncos D to not push the trade through until Tuesday. To which he proceeded to say that I wouldn't want to go 0-3.

I wouldn't call him out if I didn't believe it was an angle.

I voted against the trade. I am ok with whatever the group decides.

I apologize if you felt it was an angle. As I stated, I assumed everyone in the league was aware of the rules and the way trades operated. I'm not able to push trades through. I can only choose my starting lineup, but I am fine with playing Gurley this week. I was (and still am) honestly willing to work something out. Gurley is in my starting lineup. So is DT. Never actually expected the Broncos D (even though I was trying to pry them away in trade negotiations), and I apologize if you felt that way. If MJ is willing to push the trade through early, and all others are OK with that, then I am also OK with that decision. I am also OK with sparing you the extra trouble this week by playing Gurley and letting the trade pass after the weekend (as opposed to on Saturday if I were to bench Gurley/DT/Riddick and receive Bell/Pryor).

However, I'm definitely not a fan of vetoing trades unless they are ridiculously lopsided (ex. Bell for Riddick) and cheating is obviously involved. I believe all other trades should be fair game. As MJ talks about in his books, it is important to take RESPONSIBILITY for our actions. For that reason, I would never vote against my own trade. And I would never vote against someone else's trade unless I suspected cheating.

Here is the chat transcript I mentioned above.. certainly didn't expect such a quick and pronounced reaction:

edit: chat transcript

 

[Dylan in Africa]

so you voted against a trade you made?
and it seems lopsided?
did you propose the trade?

if you proposed it, then dylan accepted, then push it through as he expected to have them this week.
if you are now trying to move it a week to keep them for this week and then trade, and that is not what dylan agreed to, then veto the trade.

otherwise, i could care less and let the system do what it normally does.....

He proposed. I accepted. To cut down on the drama, I'm cool with doing whatever will keep things under control. As stated above, I will play Gurley tomorrow night (if necessary) to keep him happy. The trade does not need to be pushed through for me to have any of the players this week, and technically that is what was agreed upon (letting the system run its course). If I leave Gurley on the bench, I will have Bell and Pryor available in Week 3. However, it would help him to push the trade through early and get Gurley into his starting lineup. In any case, no need to veto.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

@Dylan in Africa @bigred -- u both OK that I push the trade TODAY assuming if such a function is available in commish tools?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[bigred]

Ya, I'm good with that.

 

[Dylan in Africa]

@Dylan in Africa @bigred -- u both OK that I push the trade TODAY assuming if such a function is available in commish tools?

Not a problem, boss. I'm OK with it as long as EVERYONE in the league is OK with it. It's not just affecting us, but also our opponents. In a money league like this, I'm not a huge fan of circumventing the league rules and pre-set system unless all are on board.

Getting late here though. Off to bed... apologies for the disturbance.

 

[BrooklynHustle]

@Dylan in Africa @bigred -- u both OK that I push the trade TODAY assuming if such a function is available in commish tools?

To be clear, my vote to veto is because I see the trade as way lopsided, and to Dylan's point that affects all competitors, not just those who pushed the button

That said, if a majority of managers see this as a fair trade or are just against vetoes, that is fine as well

The fact that I've received many ridiculously lopsided offers from the same person makes me think this is by design. But hey, he has an effective process

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Veloce Grey]

To be clear, my vote to veto is because I see the trade as way lopsided, and to Dylan's point that affects all competitors, not just those who pushed the button

That said, if a majority of managers see this as a fair trade or are just against vetoes, that is fine as well

The fact that I've received many ridiculously lopsided offers from the same person makes me think this is by design. But hey, he has an effective process

You think you've got problems, he keeps sending me Zach Ertz related trades as he's unaware Ertz is the cookie to my Cookie Monster. It's like if Elmo showed up and starting offering to trade Cookie Monster some sandwiches for his cookies.

 

[MJ DeMarco]

Seems there are 2 issues:

1) There is no way I can push the trade. At least I haven't found it.
2) Other managers VETOing the trade. I think it is lopsided, but not so lopsided that it warrants a VETO. Gurley could be this year's Bell and Bell's slow start could be indicative of the year.

I want to remind each other that this is supposed to be fun, not drama-filled.