-
Just remember the normal $2 salary inflation numbers haven't been added yet...
-
My roster organizer tells me that I now have $270 to spend on 10 roster spots. That oughta be fun.
Eckfords ⚾ on
October 2, 2014 7:19 AM
-
Arbitration starts October 15
-
It'd be interesting to go that way overall - see which champs had the most & fewest of those guys.
-
Calculated that my league 168 championship team had 11 of the top 20 most-owned championship players. Cray.
Eckfords ⚾ on
October 1, 2014 7:41 PM
-
The Syndicate's trade block has been updated!
-
Confirmed: FMW approached me this AM. Sending MadBum to FMW for Frazier/Seager.
-
Ok. Corey Seager/Todd Frazier to Lucky Strikes for Madison Bumgarner.
-
message board. Then I can move players for you. We'll end this trade period on the day arbitration begins (TBD).
-
Half the league seems to agree with opening up a trade window (haven't heard any objections yet), so unless anyone has a strong objection I'll just go ahead and say "open for business". To trade, both owners must announce the details of the trade via the
-
Pre-arb trades would be fine by me.
-
Arbitration update: https://twitter.com/ottoneu/status/517357530742554624
-
Only real risk I see is that player movement history would not follow the players traded since I'd have to force them through. Of other owners disagree, speak up.
-
I am in favor of trading pre-arbitration.
-
I don't see why not
-
Obviously there would be no trading during arbitration. Thoughts?
-
At the risk of being accused impatient and self-serving, would anyone be open to opening up a trade period now, before arbitration begins? Wed have to announce and I'd have to force them through, but loans are irrelevant now.
-
Not sure when arbitration begins (best guess is 10/15). As a reminder its a 30 day process, and it's doubtful we will have the option this year to shorten it or close it out early.
-
Lucky Strikes's trade block has been updated!
-
I think there are three players on my team with two Ottoneu "rings" (C. Lee, Miggy, and Holland), each of whom won with WAR Horse in 2013. Not sure there's a player that has been a part of 3 championships.
-
Arrieta was a good guess, Jed...https://twitter.com/Fazeorange/status/517323600760942593
-
Durham Tobacconists's trade block has been updated!
-
Somebody said this earlier, but perhaps the real solution to the problem I raise is just to never again have teams that are eliminated from contention on April 1. Ideally you shouldn't have to do a *complete* teardown in dynasty.
Eckfords ⚾ on
October 1, 2014 7:03 AM
-
Probably Jake Arrieta? (I owned Danny Santana on both of my LW championship teams, btw.) : )
Eckfords ⚾ on
October 1, 2014 7:00 AM
-
To WAR's point about being good for the two teams, but bad for the league: I really don't see a way to stop that. It seems very hard to argue against a trade being good for the two involved teams but trying to stop it in the future
-
Anyone want to guess who the most common MLB player was on winning Otoneu teams this season? I wouldn't have guessed it, but it makes sense. Daniel Santana was the 10th most common "championship" player. Kershaw was 9th. (Hat tip to Nate for the data)
-
I just still think it's possible for a trade to be great for both teams but bad for the league.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:27 PM
-
Yeah, I mean a $74 Trout *should* be available because it's a horrible contract. LOL. But....if he gets traded on April 3 for Austin Hedges, then yes, I will be an unhappy camper.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:26 PM
-
Of course if it's only me who is miffed by high April/May team salaries I can just voice that via trade veto rather than rule change.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:25 PM
-
Agree with Durham that PPI and Knights played it right by committing to being bad this season. But the sell-off phase of the season just started too damned early for my liking.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:24 PM
-
I'm perfectly fine with the way the rules are today; they are equal for all. But I'm also making it painfully obvious that a $74 Mike Trout could be available out of the gate. If that's a problem, we may need to continue the discussion
-
against mega-loan trades that shift the balance of power on March fricking 31. Let's not do that again.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:21 PM
-
Again, I tanked this season after a certain point, and people were unhappy with some of my fire sale trades. It's more just a visceral reaction
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:21 PM
-
No, not saying it's irrelevant, it's just, as you observe, this year had really exceptional gap between top 3 and bottom 3.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:20 PM
-
I think my proposal has the benefit of at least giving the illusion that we are all on a level playing field for 30, 60 days.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:19 PM
-
But getting back to the main point -- the March 31 fire sale is just bad for business. It's a shitty experience, no matter how well the superstar is shopped. This was proven last March.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:18 PM
-
Using salary above $400 is part of the system, part of the game, not independent of it. All leagues can and do use it in the same way. It makes sense a $700 team salary would score high, but doesn't make it irrelevant
-
I think all the concerns I had have been raised in the past 50-80 posts. LOL.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:17 PM
-
Not trying to hate, but what do our league leaders' astronomical point totals really tell us? Yes, if you carry $700 worth of assets in a league with a $400 cap, you may score a shit-ton of points. Great for the record books, but not much else.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 30, 2014 8:13 PM
-
Durham would have won 63% of the leagues in 2014 with his 18,429 points; Chiefs would have won 95% of the leagues with 19,373 (all but 4).
-
The interaction, banter, debate, even the whining and arguments all keep me entertained and engaged!
-
I'm fine with that. I've been playing fantasy baseball for a long time, and this is my favorite league ever. Maybe the $678 team salary two weeks into the season was just a freak occurrence.
-
Unless I'm blown away this off season, Mike Trout is likely getting traded sometime in 2015. I think I can compete, but if I find out I can't, whether in April or July, Trout is likely getting moved. And 10 teams won't have the best package at the time.
-
p.s. I'm one of those teams that needs to be better. I get that. I've been stuck in 7th place for a reason. Communication/trades/etc are factors of why.
-
I agree, and the "just do better" sentiment ties into Durham's early comment. Some teams just need to be better, in all facets, and that includes simple things like trade communications. It's all part of healthy competition.
-
/tirade
-
...tough cookies. Just communicate better. Instead of just proposing a trade, explain your level of interest and talk about what you're willing to part with. Instead of rejecting a trade, explain why. I don't think we need to set up rules. We're not kids.
-
...but that eliminates the "I didn't know" argument. If you want a player, go out and get him. We have to quit b*tching about not getting a player. The only unfair thing is if there is collusion. Other than that, if a team doesn't want to trade with you..
-
I disagree that superstars should be announced. They certainly can be announced if the owner wishes, but let's just say: no player is off limits on any team. It may get annoying to have Trey hammer us with trade requests for the same guy over and over...
-
Available superstars should be announced. But assumed that rule is followed to the letter, that isn't going to end the conflict because as soon is some owner says they could've given more after the fact, frustrations will fly. Value is subjective.
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages