Jace, Extat Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 I've completed trades with way less than 10 minutes before game time. BUT When they were in the works the commissioner was notified and we had terms ready to go and posted by kickoff so that rosters could be fixed. This business with the delayed response by WJ is unfortunate. I think I have to reverse my decision. The trade wasn't agreed to in time, it's that simple. I do, however, still find it unsettling that he won't get Savage for Sunday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyroclasticFlow Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Fuck Savage, that guys gonna ride the pine until week 11 and after, unless he somehow breaks the concrete off his feet and stops wanting to throw to the other jerseys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Ok question. Why do trades have to be for the entire week? Couldn't The trade just go through after yesterday's game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 10 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Ok question. Why do trades have to be for the entire week? Couldn't The trade just go through after yesterday's game? It involved a player who played yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudguard Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 If the goal is to allow Pyro to play Savage, we could cancel the trade and resubmit it as two separate trades. This would be better than pushing the whole trade through and retroactively swapping McCown. The trade for McCown and say J. Smith Shuster would be processed next week, and the trade for K. Hunt, T. Savage and A. Collins could be processed this week. Don't know if this would be acceptable to Whiskeyjack and Pryo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 3, 2017 Share Posted November 3, 2017 Got it ME. I like what Mudguard suggested, or something similar. Keep in mind this was a unique situation, where a starting QB went down just before a Thursday night game. If I hadn't been listening to The Right Time, I wouldn't have know and wouldn't have been able to switch out Watson for McCown in W-B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeyjack Posted November 3, 2017 Author Share Posted November 3, 2017 I think that sounds like a fair result, as long as pyro is good with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeyjack Posted November 3, 2017 Author Share Posted November 3, 2017 1 hour ago, Mudguard said: If the goal is to allow Pyro to play Savage, we could cancel the trade and resubmit it as two separate trades. This would be better than pushing the whole trade through and retroactively swapping McCown. The trade for McCown and say J. Smith Shuster would be processed next week, and the trade for K. Hunt, T. Savage and A. Collins could be processed this week. Don't know if this would be acceptable to Whiskeyjack and Pryo. @PyroclasticFlow Let me know if you want to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbigski Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 Yes. Of course Kareem hunt has lit me up about 4 times already this year in other leagues so who knows until Tuesday how this all plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudguard Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 Yeah, but I don't think there's a basis for arguing against a trade involving players that haven't played yet. Such a trade would normally go through without any issue. The only problem with the previous trade was that it involved a player that had already played and was locked. If the problematic portion is cut out, I don't see anything wrong with it anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 11 minutes ago, Mudguard said: Yeah, but I don't think there's a basis for arguing against a trade involving players that haven't played yet. Such a trade would normally go through without any issue. The only problem with the previous trade was that it involved a player that had already played and was locked. If the problematic portion is cut out, I don't see anything wrong with it anymore. Well, agreeing to one trade with the understanding that a second will be made later does come uncomfortably close to collusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 26 minutes ago, mcbigski said: Yes. Of course Kareem hunt has lit me up about 4 times already this year in other leagues so who knows until Tuesday how this all plays out. I see your point, but that segment of the trade could be made right now and it wouldn't prevent that from happening, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 21 minutes ago, Mudguard said: Yeah, but I don't think there's a basis for arguing against a trade involving players that haven't played yet. Such a trade would normally go through without any issue. The only problem with the previous trade was that it involved a player that had already played and was locked. If the problematic portion is cut out, I don't see anything wrong with it anymore. Yeah, I have to agree. As much as it would suck to have to play against Hunt 4 times in one year, this is fair game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyroclasticFlow Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 2 hours ago, Whiskeyjack said: @PyroclasticFlow Let me know if you want to do this. Like I stated earlier in the thread, I'm OK with letting it process for week 10. Call me crazy but I'll roll the dice and stick with 1 QB for this weekend. Wouldn't be the first time I've done it this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeyjack Posted November 4, 2017 Author Share Posted November 4, 2017 28 minutes ago, PyroclasticFlow said: Like I stated earlier in the thread, I'm OK with letting it process for week 10. Call me crazy but I'll roll the dice and stick with 1 QB for this weekend. Wouldn't be the first time I've done it this season Okay cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbigski Posted November 4, 2017 Share Posted November 4, 2017 he had forte and garbage man tyrod Thursday. Im still a dog w a bagel for deshaun. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeyjack Posted November 7, 2017 Author Share Posted November 7, 2017 Looks like all of the debate last week didn't matter. I would have lost either way, and Pyro would have won either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeyjack Posted November 7, 2017 Author Share Posted November 7, 2017 Power rankings for this league. They don't count for anything, but was just curious. 1) Jace: 60-21 (8-1) 2) Pyro: 54-27 (6-3) 3) Mudguard: 45-36 (6-3) 4) Mcbigski: 41-40 (5-4) 5) Whiskeyjack: 40-41 (4-5) 6) Brian: 39-41-1 (4-4-1) 7) Tywin: 37-44 (5-4) 8) Bluray: 32-48-1 (3-5-1) 9) Jaxom: 32-49 (1-8) 10) Manhole: 24-57 (2-7) Out of all of the leagues, this one is definitely the closest in terms of matching up power rankings with actual records. Tywin has been a little lucky, and Jaxom has been a bit unlucky (but still should be near the bottom of the league). Mudguard has maybe been slightly lucky. But overall, things line up right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 8, 2017 Share Posted November 8, 2017 Have I been? Because it feels like I'm getting a lot of bad breaks. Also my numbers are skewed a bit not having Fournette for the last three weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudguard Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 On 11/8/2017 at 2:35 PM, Tywin et al. said: Have I been? Because it feels like I'm getting a lot of bad breaks. Also my numbers are skewed a bit not having Fournette for the last three weeks. Whiskeyjack's comment about being lucky or unlucky was based on the difference between power rankings and actual record, which accounts for unlucky matchups (like losing in a week where you have the 2nd highest points scored) and lucky matchups (like winning in a week with the second lowest points scored). Most of the time, things tend to even out as the season goes on. Since you have a losing power ranking record, but a winning actual record, you would be considered lucky under this analysis. It doesn't take into account injuries to your team as being bad luck. For example, if you lost DJ, OBJ, etc., this wouldn't capture that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.