Jump to content

2018 Titans Report Dynasty League


Jamalisms

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 850
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Fortunately, thanks to CMJ I have a whole year to watch and learn how the draft works before I have to make any picks myself.

One thing you could do to participate in the draft is get pissy when someone doesn't make a pick within 15 minutes of being "on the clock". It'll be like CMJ never really left.

I'm gonna treat you like the Jags in 1999.

Posted Images

1 hour ago, abenjami said:

@Jamalisms go back to last season's website and look at all of CMJ and Nines transactions.  The constant cycling of players is not only annoying, but it's also very unrealistic.

So is having people available that teams want but can't obtain.

 

The constant pick ups were annoying but I find the idea of a change which potentially restricts valid transactions simply to prevent an annoyance to be more than a bit misguided. I've been in a league that tried to overregulate because of personality conflicts and the result was stupid. It's the classic unintended consequences trap.

 

I'm not sure this league is a democracy anyway, but I see no reason to debate it further. I've stated my opinion and the reasoning is it simple. People can consider it and make up their own minds. If @Cyrus wants a vote, it'll happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

So is having people available that teams want but can't obtain.

 

The constant pick ups were annoying but I find the idea of a change which potentially restricts valid transactions simply to prevent an annoyance to be more than a bit misguided. I've been in a league that tried to overregulate because of personality conflicts and the result was stupid. It's the classic unintended consequences trap.

 

I'm not sure this league is a democracy anyway, but I see no reason to debate it further. I've stated my opinion and the reasoning is it simple. People can consider it and make up their own minds. If @Cyrus wants a vote, it'll happen.

IMO, it's not simply to prevent an annoyance.  The more important reason is to keep some element of realism.  Teams don't have 100+ waiver pickups in real life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, abenjami said:

IMO, it's not simply to prevent an annoyance.  The more important reason is to keep some element of realism.  Teams don't have 100+ waiver pickups in real life.

They don't have waiver $ either. They just go in order.

 

Take the good players 9's drops or claim the good players he's claiming. If nobody is good, there's no victim. If somebody is good, use your skill.

 

Forced realism here (one guy makes fewer moves because we won't let him) restricts realism as well (everyone else potentially can't make moves they want to). It's not a meaningful improvement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bink said:

I think there are other solutions worth considering too, including a reasonable seasonal or weekly transaction limit. 

Not sure Yahoo has rules to implement that, but if they do then it's worth discussing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Jamalisms said:

They don't have waiver $ either. They just go in order.

 

Take the good players 9's drops or claim the good players he's claiming. If nobody is good, there's no victim. If somebody is good, use your skill.

 

Forced realism here (one guy makes fewer moves because we won't let him) restricts realism as well (everyone else potentially can't make moves they want to). It's not a meaningful improvement.

I think you really need to back and look at what they were doing to understand why some of us want this.

 

For the record, you seem to be the only person against what Wisco proposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I complained about and commented on it last year. I'm well aware.

 

2. My opinion is my own. Your opinion is your own. You make up your mind. I'll make up mine. I'm not going to change my vote (assuming there's a vote) just because "everyone else" (two or three people who've checked into the thread and commented on a Sunday) thinks differently. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not heated at all, for the record. Seems a pretty fruitless thing to debate. No nuance to it. A couple considerations and, if we do votes for rules, vote. That's it.

 

... but I'm a sucker for responding to direct interactions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Bink said:

I think there are other solutions worth considering too, including a reasonable seasonal or weekly transaction limit. 

In both of my money leagues, we only do waivers on Wednesday nights (before Thursday games) and on Saturday nights (before Sunday games).

 

It helps keep things more fair for owners who aren't glued to a computer all day and who aren't constantly monitoring practice reports for injuries and then running to the waiver wire to pick up the 3rd string RB before anyone else does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...