-
Thanks!
-
I guess those "n"s at the beginning of each link were my line breaks in an attempt to format. Make sure you delete those when you copy/paste the link. Also, the FanGraphs community forums and the Ottobeu slack site are two extremely valuable sources of information about Ottoneu strategy. There are lots of friendly and resourceful folks on both sites that will almost instantly answer just about any question you may have.
-
For those of us who might be looking to build/rebuild for next year:
https://fantasy.fangraphs.com/expert-advice-for-rebuilding-your-fantasy-team/
-
Here's what the Ottoneu vets are using to determine a player's value and surplus:
https://fantasy.fangraphs.com/ottoneu-surplus-calculator/
-
Hey guys. I'm really excited about this league. I'm hoping we have a community here that will provide hefty competition for years to come. I am new to Ottoneu, and I think there are a few others like me in this league. I want to share some of the more helpful online articles and tools that I found while trying to figure out what the hell I'm going to do to compete in Ottoneu. Here are some links:
https://fantasy.fangraphs.com/ottoneu-101-production-salary-surplus-value/
-
We seem to have a great group of owners here; one stupid trade isn't going to ruin it. Again, I will not be using the commish tools to veto this. Please vote as you see fit. Majority is needed, per rules. Revisit the rules (upper right) and settings of our league. Search for some articles on Ottoneu. Big loans aren't uncommon. $500+ cap isn't uncommon. I get the issues expressed with this specific trade. Let's try to settle this as a league and move on.
-
VLAD jr on the BLOCK - along with ohtani, eloy J, alonso and all other future assets! looking for pieces for this year. offer up!
-
Forearm Tightness's trade block has been updated!
-
The Tallahassee Horsefishermen Club's trade block has been updated!
-
...with that being said, I understand the issues here. The loan system is unique; I can see how it can be confusing. I WILL NOT BE VETOING THIS DEAL - there was no collusion. Ottoneu, however, does have a veto button available to each and every one of you. It's within the rules; use at as you see fit. I just hope this doesn't become a regular thing. Trades will happen you don't like. This is a competition.
-
Hey all, thanks for some excellent reading this afternoon! First of all...It is very much my intention that this league go on as an awesome, active, competitive league for as long as Ottoneu sticks around. To be clear: I am and always have been 100000% no-veto unless clear-cut collusion is going down. Bad trades happen; solid trades happen - trades that looked one-sided end up working out the other way. Injuries happen, unexpected breakouts happen...character limit? really?!
-
he made a trade involving Scherzer and a loan. he didnt realize the loan has value on it's own. he can use that $66 to trade for prospects to other teams all year long. just because it doesnt transfer over doesnt mean it doesnt have value... basically he traded 2 things thinking only 1 had any value because he didnt fully grasp the concept of the league/rules. how are u arguing that's fair to him and the rest of the league???
-
A $66 loan isn't crippling and it's almost expecting if you're looking to deal an $80 Scherzer for depth. Hell, as of end of season this year, that is a fantastic trade for LT moving forward and rebuilding. 100% chance Scherzer is cut and that loan is literally meaningless, that doesn't carry over at all. Quite simply, at this point, vote to veto or not. I don't see how arguing our subjective valuations is going to do anything productive.
-
when he made the offer he didn't realize the value of the loan... so let's set aside our subjectivity of player values and agree that Scherzer has substantial value and a $66 loan has substantial value. Since he didn't understand that the $66 loan has a ton of value on it's own when he made the offer i think it should be vetoed. It's a new concept to a lot of people and this could really cripple him...
-
From a purely financial perspective (loan) the trade is fine. There will be several teams (hopefully anyway) that will have in excess of $500 in cap space due to loans. They'll need to make cuts in the off-season to get back below $400 to account for that. The problem with this trade is the lack of current or future talent Lucifer is getting back for giving up Scherzer. It's tooooo lopsided. For me that's the issue. It has nothing to do with what the finances look like post trade.
-
I did read them and I understand the bid system and as I said, the loan "part" of the league is what's new to me. I understand why some people don't like this trade and I'll accept whatever is decided.
AKA Big Papi on
March 6, 2019 5:05 PM
-
Did you read the Ottoneu rules, LT? There's also a ton of resources online in articles and forums on Fangraphs. You're really going to put yourself in a bad place without understanding the loan and bid system.
-
LT, he's supposed to drop players to regain cap room to fit a new expensive player on to his roster. Instead, you gave him the equivalent of a $14 Scherzer for a bunch of bench players.
-
sorry, I didn't think people would get upset. and yeah I traded Scherzer because I made a mistake with his contract and need to fill up my roster with pieces that I think will help me along the way. The part that doesn't make sense to me is the loan but that part is all new to me. Don't know how he could fill 6 roster spots with 2-3 dollars to spend.
if the majority thinks this should be vetoed i'm all for democracy and all that jazz. don't really want to anger anyone.
AKA Big Papi on
March 6, 2019 3:44 PM
-
I'm fine with the trade
Highly doubt it had any sort of collusion and like others said you can't veto a trade just because you wouldn't make it
-
There are going to be weird trades. This is an Ottoneu league, so we are all in a constant state of rebuilding. I get it. But this trade isn't even remotely reasonable. It doesn't help LT compete this year or in future years. It seems like he simply doesn't understand the loan value. I am voting to veto (for like maybe the third time ever in 100+ leagues) that I've played in. I probably will never again vote to veto another trade in this league unless it's as clearly flawed as this one.
-
I'm not trying to be difficult here, I really don't want to cause a problem with the league, especially this early on. The draft was awesome and everyone seems really cool, engaged. I'll stop chiming in because I don't think anyone is questioning why I accepted. That said, I'll be fine with the league's decision on how to move forward, I just personally really dislike vetoing for anything aside for collusion. I hear the frustration though.
-
nobody wants to veto it selfishly. the trade doesnt add up. scherzer and $66 is too valuable. scherzer alone for those guys would be fine if we were in a league without loans and contracts but that needs to be factored in and i dont think it was properly valued. stop getting defensive and let's just see what he has to say
-
Also, Tallahassee, stop saying he's trading Scherzer as a $14 player. That isn't at all what's happening, you're missing a few other factors to consider.
-
agreed cheese. i just have a suspicion the value of the loan wasnt properly valued when he made the offer cuz it is a new concept for a lot of us. in that case i dont think it's fair to let the trade go through. as much as vetoing deals can ruin a league
-
And this is the problem, we're basing this on subjective valuations. So far I've heard DeJong and Contreras were the only real piece from one person while another has said that Eick/McKenzie/Weaver the only real upside with DeJong and Contreras being shit. Trades are veto'd for collusion and I think we all agree there. I think we agree this is not collusion. The biggest problem with this trade as of now is that everything thinks that LT could've gotten more of a return for Scherzer.
-
ya fair enough. you're right we shouldnt dictate what people SHOULD trade. that's dumb. but we should make sure that LT understands he's trading Scherzer as a $14 player which makes him by far the most valuable player in the league and the return in this deal doesnt justify that. i just think we need to make sure he realizes / realized that when he offered the deal. this league and these rules are new to a lot of people
-
I'm not saying the trade shouldn't be vetoed. Just providing commentary to try to avoid this becoming an argument every time a trade is accepted. I understand that this is clearly outside of a reasonable trade. It's just not clear to me where that line exists for future trades.
-
Why don't we hear from Lucifer?
-
This is kinda what I'm saying though. I don't think it's fair to start dictating what UCL needs to give up in order to make it a fair trade. Saying that he needs to include some of his $20 players to me is pointless. There is more future value associated with lower $ players that a team may place more value on. I have zero issue with the amount of the loan. What I have a major issue with is the lack of talent (current or future) that Lucifer is getting back.
-
and i know u said he offered it to you so i dont think anybody is at fault here i just think maybe the value of the loan wasnt fully understood during the offer and that's why we should discuss it
-
you adding in any of your $20- $40 players in the deal to offset the prices would be completely fair. you obtaining scherzer at $14 for the bottom of your roster is not...
-
and yes this needs to be vetoed. and yes can absolutely get depth pieces / a fair deal for $80 scherzer without giving a $66 loan...
-
Well, that's the rub isn't it? I wouldn't have taken the deal if it were only $50 coming my way even. If you understand the reason for the trade and just don't like the return cause you feel it could've/should've been larger than I can't get behind that. I understand being annoyed or upset by it, but I'd simply counter that you should've proposed a better offer or something. Also, what would we do moving forward when he tried to move Scherzer again?
-
Cheese you say about this trade that it is 'one that can be considered detrimental to the competitive balance of the league.' that's why it should be vetoed. He's giving away scherzer as a $14 player. i dont think he understands the value of the loan. I agree with you it wasnt done with the intent of collusion but he should be getting back a few of UCLs $20 players to offset scherzers contract not giving a $66 loan, let them try to rework this deal i think we all agree this doesnt make sense.
-
Yeah, LT has to trade a stud to get depth. But he shouldn't subsidize that stud to this degree for negligible return! How do any of those players make him more competitive now or in the future? I wouldn't veto if the loan wasn't there - I would still think it was imbalanced, but I'd sit back and see who UCL was going to drop to fit $80 Scherzer on to his roster. But the way it is, it sure looks like a huge mistake.
-
To me a veto should always come down to one simple thing, collusion. Does LT have a reason to be trading Scherzer for a large number of young, cheap players? Absolutely. Do I have reason to accept that trade when I see it offered? Clearly. Like I said, I understand people being upset about the deal as there are a ton of factors to consider here, and financially it's even stranger because an $80 scherzer is a clusterfuck of a terrible contract to move.
-
I need to have at least $1 per position player at minimum, I don't think me having ~$12 to fill 6 slots or whatever is a big part of the problem. Also, the large loan isn't abnormal at all for Otto leagues, I firmly suspect multiple teams will breach $550+ come the very end of the season as teams begin to rebuild.
-
My problem is the loan part of the deal. How could UCL have $12 left after this trade? That doesn’t seem fair. Don’t want to veto any deal, but this opens things up to any big loan deal. Where does that end?
Infinity ERA on
March 6, 2019 3:02 PM
-
I think we all know/knew that LT absolutely needed to move an $80 Scherzer. I think that in doing so he needed to return a large pile of players. When I saw an offer proposing this exact thing I accepted it gladly. I understand folks being unhappy with the deal, I really do. I don't see what other options LT has though, financially speaking keeping Scherzer simply doesn't work
-
Cheese, there is a humongous amount of grey area between vetoing a deal like this and one that is slightly (or even severely) imbalanced. I don't think a veto of this deal is going to lead to a slippery slope where even somewhat reasonable deals are vetoed.
-
I generally agree with you Cheese, you make a good point. In these situations I like both owners to explain in the message board why they're making this trade and what their outlook is. Why is he shedding a contract 5 days after the draft? It just seems odd, especially when we're talking the game's best pitcher. Is he planning for the future with this move?
-
Is this a shit deal? Yes, absolutely, one that can be considered detrimental to the competitive balance of the league. That being said, if we start vetoing deals on the basis that it's unfair, where do you draw the line? I don't want to be in a league that vetos every trade that is even just a little lopsided. This is an extreme case, but I generally will only veto a deal when it is clear that two owners are colluding on the deal. I do not believe that to be the case in this instance.
-
I am normally a "never veto" guy, but, frankly, this type of trade can't be allowed to go through. If it was Scherzer for all those guys (and no loan), I would disagree but almost understand. But LT is giving up $146 of value for basically Contreras and deJong. That's abhorrent.
-
Agreed. This is a nonsense trade.
-
What's the justification for this trade, Luciferian Towers? I'm not seeing how getting back scrubs and then paying for all but $14 of Scherzer is reasonable...
-
Anybody who put anything other than their team name as their slack name should change it. I want to send messages, but don't know who anyone is! Haha
-
Forearm Tightness's trade block has been updated!
-
Ultra Collateral Ligaments's trade block has been updated!
-
Cheese For Your Kitchen's trade block has been updated!
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages