No Quitters Fantasy NFL Football League (Season 10) |OT|

UberTag · Oct 18, 2018

It's almost fitting that the Broncos put up the best defensive effort of the fantasy season in a matchup against NYR . Dude can't catch a break this year.

Also, I think Minx might just show off and end the Commish's unbeaten season without even needing to field a quarterback. (Will still log a passing TD for the week thanks to Emma Sanders.)

UberTag · Oct 19, 2018

In the "more good news for Minx / more bad news for Crazymoogle" department, Carlos Hyde got dealt to the Jags today... which means LOTS more work for Nick Chubb and LOTS less for T.J. Yeldon.

The quest for back-to-back championships continues to be in cruise control and will remain so until folks start making Minx eat his own words. He's been backing up all of that talk.

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

UberTag said:
In the "more good news for Minx / more bad news for Crazymoogle" department, Carlos Hyde got dealt to the Jags today... which means LOTS more work for Nick Chubb and LOTS less for T.J. Yeldon.

The quest for back-to-back championships continues to be in cruise control and will remain so until folks start making Minx eat his own words. He's been backing up all of that talk.

I had this inkling that stashing Chubb would eventually pay off. Also found a QB for this week :)

Also commish can this trade be pushed?

cloudy · Oct 19, 2018

Ummm. I feel that Luck/Drake trade is ridiculously lopsided so I disallowed it. I know it'll be controversial but I really don't want to deal with the complaints that would come

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

cloudy said:
Ummm. I feel that Luck/Drake trade is ridiculously lopsided so I disallowed it. I know it'll be controversial but I really don't want to deal with the complaints that would come

Are you fucking kidding me?! The guy literally has no starting running back and has Brees as a starting QB so there is no reason for him to have Luck. This trade makes his team better 100 percent. The fact that you just automatically disallow it is really troubling especially when I'm playing you this week. Also he offered the trade to me.

Also this trade chart shows Drake is more valuable than Luck.
https://www.fantasypros.com/2018/10/fantasy-football-trade-value-chart-week-7/

This is some shady shit. It's very controversial because that's not how a league should operate. I'm out of the league if this is how you are going to operate it.

cloudy · Oct 19, 2018

You're going to beat me with or without Luck. Also I'd make the same call even if we weren't playing each other. It's not like I'm struggling and can't afford a loss.

Bottom line, I just don't think that kind of trade is good for the integrity of the league. It is clearly a BS trade even if he needs a RB

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

cloudy said:
You're going to beat me with or without Luck. Also I'd make the same call even if we weren't playing each other. It's not like I'm struggling and can't afford a loss.

Bottom line, I just don't think that kind of trade is good for the integrity of the league. It is clearly a BS trade even if he needs a RB

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Bottom line, this trade helps both teams and the trade chart backs up the trade. Whatever opinion you have is then irrelevant considering the trade #1. Makes both teams better and #2. Is backed up by a trade chart so it's not NS in any way.

cloudy · Oct 19, 2018

131 fantasy points to 57 is ridiculous and you know it. I've been running this league for 10 years and even started players for opponents against my team so I dont get a "free" win. I really don't care if I drop 1 game at 6-0.

The trade is just ludicrous IMO. If others are fine with it, y'all can trade again and I'll let it go through just so you don't think I'm trying to win at all costs.

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

cloudy said:
131 fantasy points to 57 is ridiculous and you know it. I've been running this league for 10 years and even started players for opponents against my team so I dont get a "free" win. I really don't care if I drop 1 game at 6-0.

The trade is just ludicrous IMO. If others are fine with it, y'all can trade again and I'll let it go through just so you don't think I'm trying to win at all costs.

Dude you can't compare a starting QBs point total to another position. That's basic fantasy football. Also where does it state that you get to rule what trades are fair or not. Tell me how this trade doesn't help both teams.

And I'll say it again, THE TRADE CHART BACKS UP THE TRADE.

cloudy · Oct 19, 2018

I never said it doesn't help both teams. I said it's not good for the integrity of the league. I feel it's my duty as commish to veto it which I've done in the past on the rare occasion where we've had stuff like this

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

cloudy said:
I never said it doesn't help both teams. I said it's not good for the integrity of the league. I feel it's my duty as commish to veto it which I've done in the past on the rare occasion where we've had stuff like this

So let me get this straight. This league is called no quitters. The guy in last place is making a trade to make his team better. The trade helps both teams. AND THE TRADE CHART BACKS IT UP yet you still think you have the right to veto it? Wow.

cloudy · Oct 19, 2018

I have to step out for a bit and I'll let others chime in. If there are no majority complaints, you guys can trade again and I'll fast-track approve it.

As far as you threatening to quit, I also have to think about folks potentially threatening to quit if I allow such a lopsided trade.

Again, if most everyone is cool with it, I'll let it through

SaveWeyard · Oct 19, 2018

Minx said:
So let me get this straight. This league is called no quitters. The guy in last place is making a trade to make his team better. The trade helps both teams. AND THE TRADE CHART BACKS IT UP yet you still think you have the right to veto it? Wow.

Other trade value charts have Luck clearly more valuable than Drake, nearly double. Now, in this particular situation, you obviously need a bye week fill-in at QB, while he needs a reliable RB. You would get a QB1, a QB that is arguably better than the guy you have right now for the rest of the season based on matchups. He gets a flex RB who is in an unpredictable two-headed attack.

The trade is very lopsided, favoring you. I'd probably allow it, but it's a tough call and not as clear cut as you make it seem. Chubb for Luck is way more fair.

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

Luck's upcoming schedule is the hardest in the league and I don't don't see any given week he is such a huge upgrade over Big Ben that this makes my team extremely better. Now on the other hand, Dinner Out wouldn't be starting Luck over Brees at all. So he is ridding of a bench player for a player that immediately becomes his best RB by far. A RB that should have easily had 8 more points last week if he doesn't fumble on the 1 yard line. A RB that has been inconsistent this year but had the talent to win me this league last year. The fact that this trade makes each team better without a doubt and that the trade chart backs it up, I don't see any way it can be disallowed. I have made much more lopsided trades in this league before.

Hazelhurst · Oct 19, 2018

My two cents...

Only obvious collusion should be vetoed. This is not obvious collusion imo. I like to think we could all spot it and agree when collusion is happening. This is not it. We all have different viewpoints on player values. Minx just happens to have a player that Dinner Out needs and Dinner Out has a QB that Minx wants. Dinner Out's main QB, Brees, has already has his bye and is killing it. Dinner Out is hurting from Fournette and has a spare QB he can use to get a "possible" RB stud which are impossible to find. Yeah, Drake hasn't been what everyone thought this year, but he still has potential. He's had some solid games. I don't see anything wrong with this trade. Dinner Out's got a chance to trade-in one of his unneeded players, which has value to another player (Minx) for something he can really use right now, which is a possible RB stud.

I appreciate you looking out for the league, but this is a slippery slope. Like I said, only obvious collusion should be vetoed.

UberTag · Oct 19, 2018

Man, I go out to watch a movie and come back to see this nonsense.

Should Dinner Out be entitled to get something for Luck instead of having him sit neglected on his bench? Of course. He clearly has no need for him seeing how Brees just had his bye week.

Should he land better value than Drake for him? Perhaps. But with Fournette still on the shelf and his RB roster consisting of largely scrubs, it's not like there's point in being choosey. I would have probably made a play for Chubb over Drake... but that's just me.

If he offered the deal to a QB needy owner in Minx and Minx accepted it and there's clearly no collusion that I can see, the trade has no reason to be vetoed.

For what it's worth, I think trade charts are largely bunk.

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

To be transparent, he offered me the deal before the Chubb news came through. Regardless, I came to him with the original idea of getting a QB from him since any RB of mine would have been an upgrade for him. I really wanted Brees but he wouldn't budge so he offered Drake to me for Luck. I really don't think he was actively shopping one of his top 10 QBs before I came to him.

grang · Oct 19, 2018

I've gotta agree. I understand where you're coming from cloudy, even being a new addition to the league and not having any context for the history of it, but with his QB strength he can afford to unload Luck for less than he's "worth." I also agree that he could (should?) get more than Drake in return, cause I personally think Drake is kinda garbo, but if he's the one who offered the trade then...not sure if you can veto it. I appreciate you trying to look out for the league's sake but this case I don't think is a particularly egregious lopsided trade.

Hazelhurst · Oct 19, 2018

grang said:
I've gotta agree. I understand where you're coming from cloudy, even being a new addition to the league and not having any context for the history of it, but with his QB strength he can afford to unload Luck for less than he's "worth." I also agree that he could (should?) get more than Drake in return, cause I personally think Drake is kinda garbo, but if he's the one who offered the trade then...not sure if you can veto it. I appreciate you trying to look out for the league's sake but this case I don't think is a particularly egregious lopsided trade.

I like Drake. Drake has been really efficient with his opportunities. I like his potential for home runs. He's a very explosive exciting player. Loved him at Alabama. Gase, on the other hand, does not like those constant home run swings from Drake. Gase just wants him to get base hits, not try to knock it out of the park every time which can end up getting them in 3rd and long situations. Therefore, that's why he loves his man Gore, to play it very safe and not be a hero. Semi-bad situation for Drake, especially now with Brock at the helm. Who knows, maybe the QB change will help Drake get more short dump pass targets.

Also, Drake helped me win a championship in one of my big money leagues last year.

Minx · Oct 19, 2018

The two things required for scoring in fantasy football. Talent and opportunity. Drake has plenty of talent, that was obvious last year. This year Gase has been restricting his opportunity so he can't produce as expected. Opportunity can change in a week, talent can't. I still like Drake this year but he isn't the sure thing every week as expected. He has two duds, two solid games, and two good games with one of those solid games being last week that should have been a good one if he didn't fumble at the goal line. Gase went right back to him after the fumble so the confidence is still there. His remaining schedule is also pretty good.

If people think Luck should get him a better RB, that's on him, but Drake is still fair enough for the trade to not be denied espefislly considering who his starting RBs are which plays a huge factor in the trade. Like I said I don't think he was shopping Luck before I came to him to aquire a QB.

Regardless commish, it's clearly you acted a bit hasty and the trade isn't a egregious as you thought.

Crazymoogle · Oct 19, 2018

I'm fine with the deal. Basically okay with most deals when there is no collusion because especially in 16 team the chances of a 1:1 trade are remote. There is some value there, if you really look at Drake's schedule.

It makes me wish I could trade my backup (Cam) in Resetera, honestly

cloudy · Oct 20, 2018

Ok I'll fast-track it when you guys redo the trade. I still think it's a ridiculous deal but everyone seems to be okay with it *shrugs*

PS: Minx, just so you know, I was not trying to screw you cos of our matchup or anything. I just honestly think it's not close to an even trade.

Minx · Oct 20, 2018

Ok so now what happens if Dinner Out thinks he can get a better player since everyone is saying he can? Or if he never responds? He should be forced to redo it. We shall see, I sent it to him.

cloudy · Oct 20, 2018

Why wouldn't he accept it if it's such a great trade for both teams? ;)

I'll force it in if he doesn't (only because I'm playing you so you don't think I'm trying to screw you). I actually talked to him last night and he's basically resigned to losing

TheSkullPrince · Oct 20, 2018

Oh wow. Haven't checked the thread in a couple of days but when I do I return to this lol.

Not that it matters now but I would have been ok with the trade (since Brees already had his bye and Drake seems to have a favorable upcoming schedule).

Minx · Oct 20, 2018

cloudy said:
Why wouldn't he accept it if it's such a great trade for both teams? ;)

I'll force it in if he doesn't (only because I'm playing you so you don't think I'm trying to screw you). I actually talked to him last night and he's basically resigned to losing

Whether or not he has buyers remorse over the trade is irrelevant. Next time please don't veto so hastily because clearly you were the minority.

On the other hand I do appreciate you being involved in the integrity of the league, just maybe a little too swift of an action.

cloudy · Oct 20, 2018

Yeah maybe I should have polled it before vetoing? That said, this episode maybe shows a structural flaw in a 16-team league that we've seen in the past. It's just more evident with RB injuries and Bell's holdout this year.

RB is way too premium if a commitee guy is being traded for a top 5 or 6 QB and no one bats an eye!

UberTag · Oct 20, 2018

I think it speaks more to relative QB parity this season outside of Mahomes than RBs being overvalued.

If you want to look at a deep league format where RBs are overvalued I'll direct you to Frankman's league where my auto-draft team has been effectively crippled by an absence of available running backs where they're being horded like veritable cotton candy. I would happily trade one of my Top 10 receivers for a mid-range running back and be downright thankful for the opportunity. I simply haven't bothered to put much effort into it as I'm pretty much playing out the season and not returning next year.

There are easily 16+ QBs who are operating on a "good enough to start most weeks" scale in light of the passing explosion in the league this season. Even a scrub like C.J. Beathard has been just fine and dandy since he took over for Jimmy G in San Fran.

I think RBs are valued just about right... especially given that you can only start 2 per lineup in our format. The mistake Dinner Out made is that he wasn't looking to actively trade Luck for RB depth after Week 4.

UberTag · Oct 20, 2018

Man, I so did not need that late downgrade of Melvin Gordon to questionable this week with Royce Freeman having already played, Aaron Jones on bye and my bench more or less tapped out to account for favorable defense/QB starts. I need to win this week, damn it!

I should have never dropped Ekeler. Of course my opponent this week has him... but - speaking of unnecessary RB hoarding - he's also got White, Clement and Cohen to supplement Barkley so he's loaded for bear regardless.

If we institute any kind of change next season to address RB scarcity, I could easily get behind putting a roster cap of 4 RBs per team max at any one time. Would certainly help to forego trades like Luck for Drake if the waiver wire has RBs available that aren't projected for less than 4 points at best in a league format with a reception bonus in any given week.

FYI, I don't even know what I'll do with that spot if they elect to rest Gordon before the bye. There's nothing but trash on the waiver wire. This might be the end of my season right here. 2015 deja vu.

Might as well throw Gordon up on the trading block now and see if I can swing something. He's only RB3 on the season as a whole. Makes you wonder why folks weren't offering me something for him already. I'm clearly desperate.

cloudy · Oct 20, 2018

Instead of a cap, maybe remove one RB spot and add WRT next year? Just a thought. Haven't considered the implications lol

Minx · Oct 21, 2018

UberTag said:
Man, I so did not need that late downgrade of Melvin Gordon to questionable this week with Royce Freeman having already played, Aaron Jones on bye and my bench more or less tapped out to account for favorable defense/QB starts. I need to win this week, damn it!

I should have never dropped Ekeler. Of course my opponent this week has him... but - speaking of unnecessary RB hoarding - he's also got White, Clement and Cohen to supplement Barkley so he's loaded for bear regardless.

If we institute any kind of change next season to address RB scarcity, I could easily get behind putting a roster cap of 4 RBs per team max at any one time. Would certainly help to forego trades like Luck for Drake if the waiver wire has RBs available that aren't projected for less than 4 points at best in a league format with a reception bonus in any given week.

FYI, I don't even know what I'll do with that spot if they elect to rest Gordon before the bye. There's nothing but trash on the waiver wire. This might be the end of my season right here. 2015 deja vu.

Might as well throw Gordon up on the trading block now and see if I can swing something. He's only RB3 on the season as a whole. Makes you wonder why folks weren't offering me something for him already. I'm clearly desperate.

Did I hear the D word? I sent an offer. I won't be up in time to see if he plays so I won't see any counters FYI. You would also have to request the commish to push the trade and be up in time to do so.

UberTag · Oct 21, 2018

Minx said:
Did I hear the D word? I sent an offer. I won't be up in time to see if he plays so I won't see any counters FYI. You would also have to request the commish to push the trade and be up in time to do so.

Consider it a done deal.
Was worth it to get a body to go today better than... ugh, Kyle Juszczyk (yeah, the 49ers fullback)... AND to not have to drop the Ravens defense to do so.

Make sure you get Chubb into your lineup before his game kicks off at 1 Eastern.

Deleted member 4034 · Oct 21, 2018

Trusbisky, Dalton or Flacco

All three have good matchups this week and it's hard to tell which will go off. I'm leaning toward Trubisky at the moment.

Also, I talked a record amount of shit, I CANNOT lose this week of all weeks.

UberTag · Oct 21, 2018

Bobo Dakes said:
Trusbisky, Dalton or Flacco
All three have good matchups this week and it's hard to tell which will go off. I'm leaning toward Trubisky at the moment.
Also, I talked a record amount of shit, I CANNOT lose this week of all weeks.

I would LIKE to be able to say Trubisky as I'm starting him today... but the correct answer is Dalton.

Deleted member 4034 · Oct 21, 2018

I was nice enough to tell first place in my work league to bench Gordon, but on average he wakes up at 11 - noon so, * shrug *

UberTag said:
I would LIKE to be able to say Trubisky as I'm starting him today... but the correct answer is Dalton.

That's where my head is at as well. I'm playing Trubisky in my work league with Mahomes, but in my other league I have Dalton, Trubisky and Flacco. I want to put in Flacco, but that last second league tinkering will fuck you and i've done more than enough of that this morning.

SaveWeyard · Oct 21, 2018

Woah, that Gordon trade. I get that you were desperate, but I don't know if I could have pulled the trigger on that one.

grang · Oct 21, 2018

Damn, I was considering the CMC Allen offer but didn't realize that played this morning, otherwise would have acted sooner

SilentSoldier · Oct 21, 2018

Not in the era fantasy league, but can we discuss general fantasy football stuff/advice/etc?

UberTag · Oct 21, 2018

SilentSoldier said:
Not in the era fantasy league, but can we discuss general fantasy football stuff/advice/etc?

Well, you can... but there's already a thread suited for just that.

SilentSoldier · Oct 21, 2018

UberTag said:
Well, you can... but there's already a thread suited for just that.

Thanks, I guess I didn't look hard enough.

TheSkullPrince · Oct 21, 2018

Sony was just helped off the field. Uber can't catch a break.

Minx · Oct 21, 2018

Michel down...

UberTag · Oct 21, 2018

Just one of those seasons, I guess. Can't say I didn't try.

TheSkullPrince · Oct 21, 2018

OH SO NOW YOU WANT TO SCORE TDs

GODDAMMIT HOWARD AND NAGY

UberTag · Oct 21, 2018

Yeah, that's pretty much the end of my season. Another week where I'm up against the team scoring the most points in the league not to mention crippling my team by trading Melvin Gordon away for some magic beans.

If anyone wants to pick through the remains of my roster before the trade deadline for potential fruit you're more than welcome. Otherwise I'll be fielding my highest projected lineup for the next 7 weeks and doing little else. (Apologies in advance if handing Minx the keys to MG3 wins him the league.)

Deleted member 4034 · Oct 21, 2018

UberTag said:
I would LIKE to be able to say Trubisky as I'm starting him today... but the correct answer is Dalton.

YOU!

Minx · Oct 21, 2018

UberTag said:
Yeah, that's pretty much the end of my season. Another week where I'm up against the team scoring the most points in the league not to mention crippling my team by trading Melvin Gordon away for some magic beans.

If anyone wants to pick through the remains of my roster before the trade deadline for potential fruit you're more than welcome. Otherwise I'll be fielding my highest projected lineup for the next 7 weeks and doing little else. (Apologies in advance if handing Minx the keys to MG3 wins him the league.)

The trade was a smart one on both parts for various reasons but I may have inadvertently made the luckiest trade if Michel is done for the season or out for a significant period of time.

UberTag · Oct 21, 2018

Between Chubb becoming a bonafide starter thanks to the Hyde trade, landing Luck for Drake as a fill-in and then dodging the Michel injury bullet and netting MGIII in the bargain... coupled with the fact that you were already the highest scoring team in the league... it's certainly one of the luckiest fantasy winfalls in a single 3-day stretch for a single team I can recollect ever seeing.

grang · Oct 21, 2018

I would feel much better with an Ingram touchdown...

cloudy · Oct 21, 2018

I'd like my chances if Maher hadn't missed the FG after the BS penalty

OMG Hill just dropped the GW for me in the end zone lol

No Quitters Fantasy NFL Football League (Season 10) |OT|

Game Developer