ImageImageImage

The 2018 Fantasy Thread

Moderators: bwgood77, lilfishi22, Qwigglez, Kerrsed, batsmasher

bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,159
And1: 3,619
Joined: Sep 16, 2010

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#121 » by bigfoot » Mon Nov 26, 2018 1:15 am

WeekapaugGroove wrote:I'd be cool with adding a extra IR spot or two in the dynasty next season.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using RealGM mobile app


No way. Good as it is and we should reduce the number of keepers from 8 to 6 or 7.
User avatar
wheezy
Senior
Posts: 697
And1: 309
Joined: Jun 07, 2013
Location: Phoenix

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#122 » by wheezy » Mon Nov 26, 2018 1:50 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
batsmasher wrote:
wheezy wrote:I mean you were the one that proposed it in the first place.... We can hash it out over messages if you really want Montrezl that bad.

Yeah all good, the message was directed at the vetoers. We will discuss.

You need to give up more than Klay to get Montrezl Harrell.

I am totally unbiased and am totally not looking at your team as one that can prevent me from grabbing 1st place along with Qwigglez, WeekapaugGroove and Wordsenuff

My thoughts exactly!
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 58,299
And1: 32,095
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#123 » by bwgood77 » Mon Nov 26, 2018 3:30 am

batsmasher wrote:
wheezy wrote:
batsmasher wrote:Welp, give me a better offer? ...

I mean you were the one that proposed it in the first place.... We can hash it out over messages if you really want Montrezl that bad.

Yeah all good, the message was directed at the vetoers. We will discuss.


How many vetoers were there?
User avatar
batsmasher
Forum Mod - Suns
Forum Mod - Suns
Posts: 3,282
And1: 2,227
Joined: Nov 26, 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
 

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#124 » by batsmasher » Mon Nov 26, 2018 3:40 am

bwgood77 wrote:
batsmasher wrote:
wheezy wrote:I mean you were the one that proposed it in the first place.... We can hash it out over messages if you really want Montrezl that bad.

Yeah all good, the message was directed at the vetoers. We will discuss.


How many vetoers were there?

At least 5. Requires a third of the league to vote it down.
Image
de'aaron fox will be a hof'er, don't @ me
User avatar
MrMiyagi
Suns Forum Eternal Optimist
Posts: 4,738
And1: 4,000
Joined: Jan 10, 2010
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#125 » by MrMiyagi » Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:08 am

bigfoot wrote:
WeekapaugGroove wrote:I'd be cool with adding a extra IR spot or two in the dynasty next season.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using RealGM mobile app


No way. Good as it is and we should reduce the number of keepers from 8 to 6 or 7.
I disagree with everything you've just said.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 58,299
And1: 32,095
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#126 » by bwgood77 » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:52 am

MrMiyagi wrote:
bigfoot wrote:
WeekapaugGroove wrote:I'd be cool with adding a extra IR spot or two in the dynasty next season.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using RealGM mobile app


No way. Good as it is and we should reduce the number of keepers from 8 to 6 or 7.
I disagree with everything you've just said.


Yeah, I was thinking maybe move up keepers, but probably too early. But 8 is good.
User avatar
batsmasher
Forum Mod - Suns
Forum Mod - Suns
Posts: 3,282
And1: 2,227
Joined: Nov 26, 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
 

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#127 » by batsmasher » Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:31 am

So how many Montreal Harrell's do I need to trade Klay for so the trade goes through? 1.5 Montrezls? I need numbers here ppl :lol:
Image
de'aaron fox will be a hof'er, don't @ me
bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,159
And1: 3,619
Joined: Sep 16, 2010

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#128 » by bigfoot » Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:37 am

bwgood77 wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
bigfoot wrote:
No way. Good as it is and we should reduce the number of keepers from 8 to 6 or 7.
I disagree with everything you've just said.


Yeah, I was thinking maybe move up keepers, but probably too early. But 8 is good.


Yeah, yeah do everything possible to keep the best teams together. Maybe we should add a salary cap to make dynasty a little more fair. Then eight keepers and 3-4 IR would be okay. Also need to rework the snake draft. It's really not appropriate for other than the 1st draft.
User avatar
batsmasher
Forum Mod - Suns
Forum Mod - Suns
Posts: 3,282
And1: 2,227
Joined: Nov 26, 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
 

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#129 » by batsmasher » Mon Nov 26, 2018 11:49 am

All this discussion will be turned into polls at the end of the week.

So let's keep ironing out the wrinkles so we are certain on what we want to vote for.
Image
de'aaron fox will be a hof'er, don't @ me
bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,159
And1: 3,619
Joined: Sep 16, 2010

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#130 » by bigfoot » Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:24 pm

batsmasher wrote:All this discussion will be turned into polls at the end of the week.

So let's keep ironing out the wrinkles so we are certain on what we want to vote for.


Some real discussion is needed in order to make sure the dynasty league stays in line with what a real GM would have to deal with.

1) Upping the keepers certainly makes it easier on a GM. Each team has 12 slots (PG,SG,G,SF,PF,F,C,UTL,UTL,BN,BN,BN). Currently a GM is allowed to keep 8 out of 12 players. Upping it to 9 or more makes it much simpler on the armchair GM. The reality is true NBA teams probably have 40-50% roster turnover or more each season. Seven is probably a more realistic number for keepers.

2) A salary cap should be part of a dynasty league. I imagine if we looked at actual salaries consumed by some teams in our league we would see how out of whack things are. In reality, NBA players move to where the money is and GMs worry about paying the players they want to keep. Dollars are a major factor in keeping the league somewhat balanced.
User avatar
MrMiyagi
Suns Forum Eternal Optimist
Posts: 4,738
And1: 4,000
Joined: Jan 10, 2010
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#131 » by MrMiyagi » Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:20 pm

bigfoot wrote:
batsmasher wrote:All this discussion will be turned into polls at the end of the week.

So let's keep ironing out the wrinkles so we are certain on what we want to vote for.


Some real discussion is needed in order to make sure the dynasty league stays in line with what a real GM would have to deal with.

1) Upping the keepers certainly makes it easier on a GM. Each team has 12 slots (PG,SG,G,SF,PF,F,C,UTL,UTL,BN,BN,BN). Currently a GM is allowed to keep 8 out of 12 players. Upping it to 9 or more makes it much simpler on the armchair GM. The reality is true NBA teams probably have 40-50% roster turnover or more each season. Seven is probably a more realistic number for keepers.

2) A salary cap should be part of a dynasty league. I imagine if we looked at actual salaries consumed by some teams in our league we would see how out of whack things are. In reality, NBA players move to where the money is and GMs worry about paying the players they want to keep. Dollars are a major factor in keeping the league somewhat balanced.

I don't think we should up the number of keepers, I think it's fine where it is. It makes you have to engage in making roster moves (trading, playing the waiver wire) to maintain success or improve rather than just getting bailed out in the draft. It also makes drafting much more important, because if you're going to improve/sustain your team, you're going to have to take a gamble on a guy who might not have shown much thus far in their careers, but are going to make a leap. Basically, you have to stay engaged.

And I don't think a salary cap based on the real cap is a good idea. We shouldn't be punished for the stupid deals actual NBA GMs make to keep their players, and I don't think there is a good way or reason to implement a custom cap as it would be a bit of a pain to remember who makes what and trying to make money work. Like what would happen if you drop a player? Are you responsible for that money? Would there be penalties for going over the cap? None of that seems like fun to worry about and would just add bloat and barriers for engagement.
bigfoot
Suns Forum Anti-Tank Commander
Posts: 7,159
And1: 3,619
Joined: Sep 16, 2010

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#132 » by bigfoot » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:07 pm

MrMiyagi wrote:
bigfoot wrote:
batsmasher wrote:All this discussion will be turned into polls at the end of the week.

So let's keep ironing out the wrinkles so we are certain on what we want to vote for.


Some real discussion is needed in order to make sure the dynasty league stays in line with what a real GM would have to deal with.

1) Upping the keepers certainly makes it easier on a GM. Each team has 12 slots (PG,SG,G,SF,PF,F,C,UTL,UTL,BN,BN,BN). Currently a GM is allowed to keep 8 out of 12 players. Upping it to 9 or more makes it much simpler on the armchair GM. The reality is true NBA teams probably have 40-50% roster turnover or more each season. Seven is probably a more realistic number for keepers.

2) A salary cap should be part of a dynasty league. I imagine if we looked at actual salaries consumed by some teams in our league we would see how out of whack things are. In reality, NBA players move to where the money is and GMs worry about paying the players they want to keep. Dollars are a major factor in keeping the league somewhat balanced.

I don't think we should up the number of keepers, I think it's fine where it is. It makes you have to engage in making roster moves (trading, playing the waiver wire) to maintain success or improve rather than just getting bailed out in the draft. It also makes drafting much more important, because if you're going to improve/sustain your team, you're going to have to take a gamble on a guy who might not have shown much thus far in their careers, but are going to make a leap. Basically, you have to stay engaged.

And I don't think a salary cap based on the real cap is a good idea. We shouldn't be punished for the stupid deals actual NBA GMs make to keep their players, and I don't think there is a good way or reason to implement a custom cap as it would be a bit of a pain to remember who makes what and trying to make money work. Like what would happen if you drop a player? Are you responsible for that money? Would there be penalties for going over the cap? None of that seems like fun to worry about and would just add bloat and barriers for engagement.


The problem with your first part is there are very few decent keepers I can acquire. I inherited a team with 2 players in the top 100. Comparing to the rest of the league there are

Top 100 players/Number of teams

8/3
7/5
6/4
5/3
2/1 <----- Every other team has 3 to 6 extra players in the top 100

There is almost nothing I can do to improve my position other than draft. For example, I've had a few trade proposals sent to me that are lopsided trying to get one of my two decent players in exchange for a sub-100 player. Alternatively, if teams have only have 6-7 keepers then there is a glimmer of hope I can pick up a decent player or two next year in the draft. Really somehow I got screwed in this years tiered draft lottery picking sixth. That's why eliminating the snake draft is critical. The GMs with best teams end up picking all the good veterans before the cellar dwellers can get any. Basically losing GMs have to rely strictly on drafting rookies and hope to hit a home run. So far Bamba isn't really doing much for me other than keeping me at the bottom of the rankings because I have to play him with all the injuries I have.

In terms of salary it doesn't have to follow the what the NBA players are actually paid. We could agree on a budget for each team and then when players become free agents (in the real NBA) we can bid for them. If you don't have the money to pay for your FA player then you lose them.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 58,299
And1: 32,095
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#133 » by bwgood77 » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:22 pm

bigfoot wrote:
batsmasher wrote:All this discussion will be turned into polls at the end of the week.

So let's keep ironing out the wrinkles so we are certain on what we want to vote for.


Some real discussion is needed in order to make sure the dynasty league stays in line with what a real GM would have to deal with.

1) Upping the keepers certainly makes it easier on a GM. Each team has 12 slots (PG,SG,G,SF,PF,F,C,UTL,UTL,BN,BN,BN). Currently a GM is allowed to keep 8 out of 12 players. Upping it to 9 or more makes it much simpler on the armchair GM. The reality is true NBA teams probably have 40-50% roster turnover or more each season. Seven is probably a more realistic number for keepers.

2) A salary cap should be part of a dynasty league. I imagine if we looked at actual salaries consumed by some teams in our league we would see how out of whack things are. In reality, NBA players move to where the money is and GMs worry about paying the players they want to keep. Dollars are a major factor in keeping the league somewhat balanced.


We did a draft and had 7 keepers and voted to move it up to 8 last year. That's probably a good number to keep it at.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 58,299
And1: 32,095
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#134 » by bwgood77 » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:30 pm

bigfoot wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
bigfoot wrote:
Some real discussion is needed in order to make sure the dynasty league stays in line with what a real GM would have to deal with.

1) Upping the keepers certainly makes it easier on a GM. Each team has 12 slots (PG,SG,G,SF,PF,F,C,UTL,UTL,BN,BN,BN). Currently a GM is allowed to keep 8 out of 12 players. Upping it to 9 or more makes it much simpler on the armchair GM. The reality is true NBA teams probably have 40-50% roster turnover or more each season. Seven is probably a more realistic number for keepers.

2) A salary cap should be part of a dynasty league. I imagine if we looked at actual salaries consumed by some teams in our league we would see how out of whack things are. In reality, NBA players move to where the money is and GMs worry about paying the players they want to keep. Dollars are a major factor in keeping the league somewhat balanced.

I don't think we should up the number of keepers, I think it's fine where it is. It makes you have to engage in making roster moves (trading, playing the waiver wire) to maintain success or improve rather than just getting bailed out in the draft. It also makes drafting much more important, because if you're going to improve/sustain your team, you're going to have to take a gamble on a guy who might not have shown much thus far in their careers, but are going to make a leap. Basically, you have to stay engaged.

And I don't think a salary cap based on the real cap is a good idea. We shouldn't be punished for the stupid deals actual NBA GMs make to keep their players, and I don't think there is a good way or reason to implement a custom cap as it would be a bit of a pain to remember who makes what and trying to make money work. Like what would happen if you drop a player? Are you responsible for that money? Would there be penalties for going over the cap? None of that seems like fun to worry about and would just add bloat and barriers for engagement.


The problem with your first part is there are very few decent keepers I can acquire. I inherited a team with 2 players in the top 100. Comparing to the rest of the league there are

Top 100 players/Number of teams

8/3
7/5
6/4
5/3
2/1 <----- Every other team has 3 to 6 extra players in the top 100

There is almost nothing I can do to improve my position other than draft. For example, I've had a few trade proposals sent to me that are lopsided trying to get one of my two decent players in exchange for a sub-100 player. Alternatively, if teams have only have 6-7 keepers then there is a glimmer of hope I can pick up a decent player or two next year in the draft. Really somehow I got screwed in this years tiered draft lottery picking sixth. That's why eliminating the snake draft is critical. The GMs with best teams end up picking all the good veterans before the cellar dwellers can get any. Basically losing GMs have to rely strictly on drafting rookies and hope to hit a home run. So far Bamba isn't really doing much for me other than keeping me at the bottom of the rankings because I have to play him with all the injuries I have.

In terms of salary it doesn't have to follow the what the NBA players are actually paid. We could agree on a budget for each team and then when players become free agents (in the real NBA) we can bid for them. If you don't have the money to pay for your FA player then you lose them.


I had one of the last picks in the draft and took Tyreke Evans and then took KCP in the early second. Then took Zach Collins in the 3rd and Bojan Bogdanovic. I've dropped them all since then. Waiver moves can be very important in dynasty.

It does suck you took over a bad team, but we shouldn't reduce our keepers after working to build our teams over 2+ years because of that. I had to take over a keeper fantasy football team in a 20 team league with 4 keepers which leaves scraps...the team had had Peyton Manning for years but he retired and I was left with nothing. It's hard to do anything, but I can't ask them to change the rules just for me. Though I don't know how a team with Todd Gurley and David Johnson on it got the #1 pick this year to take Saquon Barkley.
User avatar
MrMiyagi
Suns Forum Eternal Optimist
Posts: 4,738
And1: 4,000
Joined: Jan 10, 2010
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#135 » by MrMiyagi » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:36 pm

bigfoot wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
bigfoot wrote:
Some real discussion is needed in order to make sure the dynasty league stays in line with what a real GM would have to deal with.

1) Upping the keepers certainly makes it easier on a GM. Each team has 12 slots (PG,SG,G,SF,PF,F,C,UTL,UTL,BN,BN,BN). Currently a GM is allowed to keep 8 out of 12 players. Upping it to 9 or more makes it much simpler on the armchair GM. The reality is true NBA teams probably have 40-50% roster turnover or more each season. Seven is probably a more realistic number for keepers.

2) A salary cap should be part of a dynasty league. I imagine if we looked at actual salaries consumed by some teams in our league we would see how out of whack things are. In reality, NBA players move to where the money is and GMs worry about paying the players they want to keep. Dollars are a major factor in keeping the league somewhat balanced.

I don't think we should up the number of keepers, I think it's fine where it is. It makes you have to engage in making roster moves (trading, playing the waiver wire) to maintain success or improve rather than just getting bailed out in the draft. It also makes drafting much more important, because if you're going to improve/sustain your team, you're going to have to take a gamble on a guy who might not have shown much thus far in their careers, but are going to make a leap. Basically, you have to stay engaged.

And I don't think a salary cap based on the real cap is a good idea. We shouldn't be punished for the stupid deals actual NBA GMs make to keep their players, and I don't think there is a good way or reason to implement a custom cap as it would be a bit of a pain to remember who makes what and trying to make money work. Like what would happen if you drop a player? Are you responsible for that money? Would there be penalties for going over the cap? None of that seems like fun to worry about and would just add bloat and barriers for engagement.


The problem with your first part is there are very few decent keepers I can acquire. I inherited a team with 2 players in the top 100. Comparing to the rest of the league there are

Top 100 players/Number of teams

8/3
7/5
6/4
5/3
2/1 <----- Every other team has 3 to 6 extra players in the top 100

There is almost nothing I can do to improve my position other than draft. For example, I've had a few trade proposals sent to me that are lopsided trying to get one of my two decent players in exchange for a sub-100 player. Alternatively, if teams have only have 6-7 keepers then there is a glimmer of hope I can pick up a decent player or two next year in the draft. Really somehow I got screwed in this years tiered draft lottery picking sixth. That's why eliminating the snake draft is critical. The GMs with best teams end up picking all the good veterans before the cellar dwellers can get any. Basically losing GMs have to rely strictly on drafting rookies and hope to hit a home run. So far Bamba isn't really doing much for me other than keeping me at the bottom of the rankings because I have to play him with all the injuries I have.

In terms of salary it doesn't have to follow the what the NBA players are actually paid. We could agree on a budget for each team and then when players become free agents (in the real NBA) we can bid for them. If you don't have the money to pay for your FA player then you lose them.

I've added 3 (Rose, Matthews, Holiday) of my 7 current top 100 players off of the waiver wire. Vonleh and McGruder have also been ranked in the top 100 in previous weeks and I added them too. You've got to strike when a guy gets hot and then decide if they're worth keeping long-term.

I was like the 3rd worst team last season, and although Hayward's injury was a pretty big blow to me, he hasn't been the one to really pull me back toward the top of the standings - Rose, Holiday and McGruder have. Maybe we should change the draft from a snake, but I really don't like any of the other suggestions you've made.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 58,299
And1: 32,095
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#136 » by bwgood77 » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:40 pm

MrMiyagi wrote:
bigfoot wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:I don't think we should up the number of keepers, I think it's fine where it is. It makes you have to engage in making roster moves (trading, playing the waiver wire) to maintain success or improve rather than just getting bailed out in the draft. It also makes drafting much more important, because if you're going to improve/sustain your team, you're going to have to take a gamble on a guy who might not have shown much thus far in their careers, but are going to make a leap. Basically, you have to stay engaged.

And I don't think a salary cap based on the real cap is a good idea. We shouldn't be punished for the stupid deals actual NBA GMs make to keep their players, and I don't think there is a good way or reason to implement a custom cap as it would be a bit of a pain to remember who makes what and trying to make money work. Like what would happen if you drop a player? Are you responsible for that money? Would there be penalties for going over the cap? None of that seems like fun to worry about and would just add bloat and barriers for engagement.


The problem with your first part is there are very few decent keepers I can acquire. I inherited a team with 2 players in the top 100. Comparing to the rest of the league there are

Top 100 players/Number of teams

8/3
7/5
6/4
5/3
2/1 <----- Every other team has 3 to 6 extra players in the top 100

There is almost nothing I can do to improve my position other than draft. For example, I've had a few trade proposals sent to me that are lopsided trying to get one of my two decent players in exchange for a sub-100 player. Alternatively, if teams have only have 6-7 keepers then there is a glimmer of hope I can pick up a decent player or two next year in the draft. Really somehow I got screwed in this years tiered draft lottery picking sixth. That's why eliminating the snake draft is critical. The GMs with best teams end up picking all the good veterans before the cellar dwellers can get any. Basically losing GMs have to rely strictly on drafting rookies and hope to hit a home run. So far Bamba isn't really doing much for me other than keeping me at the bottom of the rankings because I have to play him with all the injuries I have.

In terms of salary it doesn't have to follow the what the NBA players are actually paid. We could agree on a budget for each team and then when players become free agents (in the real NBA) we can bid for them. If you don't have the money to pay for your FA player then you lose them.

I've added 3 (Rose, Matthews, Holiday) of my 7 current top 100 players off of the waiver wire. Vonleh and McGruder have also been ranked in the top 100 in previous weeks and I added them too. You've got to strike when a guy gets hot and then decide if they're worth keeping long-term.

I was like the 3rd worst team last season, and although Hayward's injury was a pretty big blow to me, he hasn't been the one to really pull me back toward the top of the standings - Rose, Holiday and McGruder have. Maybe we should change the draft from a snake, but I really don't like any of the other suggestions you've made.


Yeah, it goes back and forth. I took Middleton late in the initial draft because he was out for the season so that pick really hurt me in year 1 and I didn't do so well, but it helped in the long run. Last year I did better with some health, but this year health has killed me again as 3 of my keepers are out. To have to cut one after all this would suck.
User avatar
MrMiyagi
Suns Forum Eternal Optimist
Posts: 4,738
And1: 4,000
Joined: Jan 10, 2010
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#137 » by MrMiyagi » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:46 pm

bwgood77 wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:
bigfoot wrote:
The problem with your first part is there are very few decent keepers I can acquire. I inherited a team with 2 players in the top 100. Comparing to the rest of the league there are

Top 100 players/Number of teams

8/3
7/5
6/4
5/3
2/1 <----- Every other team has 3 to 6 extra players in the top 100

There is almost nothing I can do to improve my position other than draft. For example, I've had a few trade proposals sent to me that are lopsided trying to get one of my two decent players in exchange for a sub-100 player. Alternatively, if teams have only have 6-7 keepers then there is a glimmer of hope I can pick up a decent player or two next year in the draft. Really somehow I got screwed in this years tiered draft lottery picking sixth. That's why eliminating the snake draft is critical. The GMs with best teams end up picking all the good veterans before the cellar dwellers can get any. Basically losing GMs have to rely strictly on drafting rookies and hope to hit a home run. So far Bamba isn't really doing much for me other than keeping me at the bottom of the rankings because I have to play him with all the injuries I have.

In terms of salary it doesn't have to follow the what the NBA players are actually paid. We could agree on a budget for each team and then when players become free agents (in the real NBA) we can bid for them. If you don't have the money to pay for your FA player then you lose them.

I've added 3 (Rose, Matthews, Holiday) of my 7 current top 100 players off of the waiver wire. Vonleh and McGruder have also been ranked in the top 100 in previous weeks and I added them too. You've got to strike when a guy gets hot and then decide if they're worth keeping long-term.

I was like the 3rd worst team last season, and although Hayward's injury was a pretty big blow to me, he hasn't been the one to really pull me back toward the top of the standings - Rose, Holiday and McGruder have. Maybe we should change the draft from a snake, but I really don't like any of the other suggestions you've made.


Yeah, it goes back and forth. I took Middleton late in the initial draft because he was out for the season so that pick really hurt me in year 1 and I didn't do so well, but it helped in the long run. Last year I did better with some health, but this year health has killed me again as 3 of my keepers are out. To have to cut one after all this would suck.

Yeah, I think having an extra injury spot is definitely a need for next season. Even being able to pick up a guy like Lonnie Walker and sit on him as a potential 8th keeper for next season should be an option for guys near the bottom. I was able to pick up George Hill and can afford to sit on him because my team is healthy (Melo is "injured"), but he should probably still be on the roster of whoever dropped him.
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 58,299
And1: 32,095
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#138 » by bwgood77 » Mon Nov 26, 2018 5:52 pm

MrMiyagi wrote:
bwgood77 wrote:
MrMiyagi wrote:I've added 3 (Rose, Matthews, Holiday) of my 7 current top 100 players off of the waiver wire. Vonleh and McGruder have also been ranked in the top 100 in previous weeks and I added them too. You've got to strike when a guy gets hot and then decide if they're worth keeping long-term.

I was like the 3rd worst team last season, and although Hayward's injury was a pretty big blow to me, he hasn't been the one to really pull me back toward the top of the standings - Rose, Holiday and McGruder have. Maybe we should change the draft from a snake, but I really don't like any of the other suggestions you've made.


Yeah, it goes back and forth. I took Middleton late in the initial draft because he was out for the season so that pick really hurt me in year 1 and I didn't do so well, but it helped in the long run. Last year I did better with some health, but this year health has killed me again as 3 of my keepers are out. To have to cut one after all this would suck.

Yeah, I think having an extra injury spot is definitely a need for next season. Even being able to pick up a guy like Lonnie Walker and sit on him as a potential 8th keeper for next season should be an option for guys near the bottom. I was able to pick up George Hill and can afford to sit on him because my team is healthy (Melo is "injured"), but he should probably still be on the roster of whoever dropped him.


Yeah, I have Dejounte Murray and Caris LeVert on IL, and Will Barton taking a bench spot, and for awhile had Westbrook taking another bench spot. Hard to keep up with games...just not many options.
User avatar
TASTIC
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 18,113
And1: 2,187
Joined: May 17, 2004
Location: New Zealand
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#139 » by TASTIC » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:21 pm

I haven't vetoed the trade - but can obviously see why some have shot it down.

I only really veto trades if there's collusion or obvious someone is doing a friend a 'favour'.

I'm a firm believer if the person/side that people are vetoing it for - ie "Harrell isn't on Klay's level" - but the person who offered it is on the 'inferior' side and they proposed it, then it should stand. It's not on us to 'save' someone from a trade we think they're getting screwed in, when THEY proposed the deal and are happy with it.

It's not really that lop-sided - would be more even in H2H, but even in roto, Harrell has him (easily) in FG%, REB, BLK. AST/STL are a wash (surprisingly), Klay obviously creams him in PTS, 3PT, FT%. Couple that with blocks being the hardest stat to find (1.8 per), along with a big that gets you a steal a game and is 4 years younger. Klay is better now, no argument there.

Maybe add a pick swap to even it out? Something like a 1st for a 3rd?
Image
User avatar
bwgood77
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 58,299
And1: 32,095
Joined: Feb 06, 2009
Location: Austin
Contact:
   

Re: The 2018 Fantasy Thread 

Post#140 » by bwgood77 » Mon Nov 26, 2018 9:42 pm

TASTIC wrote:I haven't vetoed the trade - but can obviously see why some have shot it down.

I only really veto trades if there's collusion or obvious someone is doing a friend a 'favour'.

I'm a firm believer if the person/side that people are vetoing it for - ie "Harrell isn't on Klay's level" - but the person who offered it is on the 'inferior' side and they proposed it, then it should stand. It's not on us to 'save' someone from a trade we think they're getting screwed in, when THEY proposed the deal and are happy with it.

It's not really that lop-sided - would be more even in H2H, but even in roto, Harrell has him (easily) in FG%, REB, BLK. AST/STL are a wash (surprisingly), Klay obviously creams him in PTS, 3PT, FT%. Couple that with blocks being the hardest stat to find (1.8 per), along with a big that gets you a steal a game and is 4 years younger. Klay is better now, no argument there.

Maybe add a pick swap to even it out? Something like a 1st for a 3rd?


I guess looking at batsmasher's standing rankings, being 1st in 3s and high in points, but lower in %s, boards and blocks, combined with Klay's %s dropping this year, it's not as lopsided a trade or as bad of trade as it first looks, particularly if batsmasher proposed it.

Return to Phoenix Suns