I don't think we've officially discussed this matter. This is more the Commissioner's place, but I wanted to see what everyone thinks about declaring our keepers. I move that we submit keepers this Sunday. We can do it by whatever means. Last year we all just e-mailed them to Scott because he was happy to disclose his obvious selections in advance. If anyone else feels similarly (and I think we all know that Ben will keep Peyton and Pierre even if he has to give up his first and second round picks to do so) please step forward. Or we can use a different system.
As a secondary issue, I would like it if we can set the deadline for Yahoo to update the rankings and give everyone a couple of days to look into last minute trades. If we go by Yahoo's rankings as of noon on Friday, for example, everyone would know what players would cost when they announce keepers. That would make it easier to determine how much the tweeners: Manning, Fitzgerald, Greene, DeAngelo, etc., will be worth if someone wants to make a move for such a player over the weekend. In a nutshell, I propose that we announce keepers on Sunday, August 22, and the value of those keepers will be based upon Yahoo's rankings as of noon eastern time Friday, August 20. I didn't consult a calendar, so I hope those days are correct. What say you?
2018-19 Conference Honors & Awards
7 years ago
I'm fine with whatever, but I just want to make sure we all have enough time to work trades out. I know I have a few trade negotiations going on, and I'd like enough time for the guys I'm discussing those with to have the proper time to look them over.
ReplyDeleteHey Taylor, are you trying to get someone's arm and leg for a player you aren't keeping just so you can barely keep your head above water again in this year's regular season? If so, I am sure the rest of the league would be happy to oblige by postponing a decision on rankings and keepers until it is convenient for you.
ReplyDeleteI still haven't figured out whether or not Tyler was joking when he named his asking price for an undersized, fumble-prone, Texans running back who underwent a cervical fusion in the off season. I appreciated your snarky comment nonetheless, Calhoun.
ReplyDeleteIf it was not clear Montana, there was no joking to my snarkiness. We don't have time to wait for TP to peddle out his leftovers for unreasonable asking prices. I'm sure however, that he will convince someone that his trade offers are mutually beneficial. Whoever that someone may be....just remember...he got me on that line when I shipped DWilly to him for Slaton. Fool me once...
ReplyDeleteDid Taylor fool you into that Sidney Rice for Ryan Moats deal? I previously suggested a Sammy Morrie moratorium for you, but I'm going to add all Texan RBs to the mix for your sake. I know you're probably thinking about Arian Foster, but that franchise has snake bitten you enough, my friend. Didn't you also enjoy owning Andre Johnson for his last unproductive season? Just remove all Texans from your draft board.
ReplyDeleteI'm keeping Peterson and Turner.
ReplyDeleteAre any of my unreasonable trade offers similar to Jason's unreasonable 8th round pick for Steven Jackson trade with Brandon last year? Seems to have worked out pretty well for Brandon.
ReplyDeleteIf you can name one unreasonable trade demand I'd like to hear it. I've simply attempted to get better by offering guys who I unfortunately unable to keep because of two guys I value higher on my team.
Jason,
ReplyDeleteYour passive-aggressiveness is off the charts.
Concerning the yahoo rankings and keeper announcement deadline, does anyone remember how we timed this last year?
ReplyDeleteDeAngelo Williams for anyone's draft pick below the ninth round is unreasonable for this year...is this not what you have been offering.
ReplyDeleteJason, your free pass has expired.
ReplyDeleteWhat are you basing that on, Tyler? Because, I think you are basing it on the fact that I'm not keeping him so that makes him less valuable.
ReplyDeleteThe seventh round (Yahoo) is this:
Harvin, Maclin, Bradshaw, Forte, Thomas Jones, Reggie Bush, CJ Spiller, Tony Gonzalez, Witten, Garcon, and Forsett.
Are you saying it's unreasonable to give up just the chance to draft one of those guys for DeAngelo Williams? I find it hard to believe you actually believe that.
I certainly do think this is unreasonable when one could draft Williams or someone similar for free in the first and not have to lose anything. Sorry to hate...but not really.
ReplyDeleteBut when they can keep Williams then and draft someone comparable in the first round, doesn't that make you better?
ReplyDeleteIt seems like we're arguing two different things. Taylor and I are talking about what it costs to obtain the best value for your draft picks. His DeAngelo argument is really a matter of whether you think DeAngelo is worth more than maybe Larry Fitzgerald and Jason Witten. It's a judgment call, and reasonable minds can differ. Bear in mind that last season Brandon gave me a sixth round pick, which I believe I used on Donnie Avery. Yeah, Donnie Avery, probably my worst pick of the draft. Who came out looking smart on that? There is a lot more certainty with Steven Jackson or DeAngelo than whatever you get in the sixth round.
ReplyDeleteTyler is saying that he doesn't like the idea of shopping players you won't keep. If that's the issue, then we can submit it to a vote, but I made it very clear last season that I wanted you all to think about approving my Steven Jackson trade to Brandon. That said, Tyler has four potential guys to shop, and that excludes Harrison, who seemed like a potential keeper as last season closed. The price may seem high, but nobody can complain about not being able to draft some of the big time players when those guys are being shopped openly prior to the draft.
What is a keeper? Is it like the Crypt-Keeper, because I really liked that show when it was on television.
ReplyDeleteI would like some clarity on when the rankings are locked in and when we have to declare keepers though. It doesn't seem like there has been objection to my proposal, but I don't want to assume anything.
ReplyDeleteBen, I don't remember the exact timing last year, but I believe it was that they had to be submitted to scott by like midnight right at a week before the draft. I want to say we submitted on Friday, and the draft was the following Saturday (eight days later). We also had to have Jimmy and Everett pick keepers from the leftovers...which, incidentally, worked out pretty well for them.
Just a reminder that Brandon's profile picture is the best part about this blog.
ReplyDeleteJust because Tyler is calling Taylor out on what he views as an unreasonable trade offer does not mean he's challenging league rules to the extent that we need to submit this issue to a vote - though maybe the rule in question should be challenged and maybe Tyler is challenging it. Regardless, just because the Steven Jackson trade was approved last year does not mean league members can't complain about or point out trades they view as unreasonable. It's quite possible that Tyler is arguing, not that the trade should be disallowed, but simply that someone who would make that trade is a fool.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Tyler and everyone else has a right to argue about trades being unfair, but the main mechanism is being able to vote against a trade, which is a right each of us has, except for maybe Jimmy. I'm not sure who has his voting rights anymore. There just seems to be a little more venom in his opposition to Taylor shopping DeAngelo. How is it a bad trade for anyone? First, only a Sith deals in absolutes. Second, if you don't have any RBs and can get DeAngelo by trade, but not by draft, then it may not be a bad move (depending on cost, obviously). It would be a ridiculous move for Scott or Everett. Nobody else has two RBs ranked higher than DeAngelo though.
ReplyDeleteI've understood Tyler to be making that argument, and am simply pointing out that I think it is unreasonable to consider that trade unreasonable. Look, if you don't value Deangelo Williams that is fine, I would understand not wanting to give up a later draft pick on a guy you don't value, but to consider that no one would view DeAngelo Williams worthy of anything better than giving up a 9th or lower draft pick is absurd.
ReplyDeleteWhen do I get my free pass back? Who has it? Answer me!
ReplyDeleteI think using Jason and Brandon's trade of Steven Jackson for a sixth round pick last year illustrates this point. That clearly worked out very well for Brandon. I feel like that precludes anyone from challenging what I've put out there for Deangelo to be unreasonable. If you don't covet Deangelo a lot more than guys like Benson, Addai, Moreno, or Stewart, then I would not have a problem with someone saying "I don't mind on missing on Deangelo because I'm confident in getting Benson in the second and not giving up an 8th round pick" then by all means that is a worthy argument in opposition to making the trade. What I do have a problem with is someone claiming the trade is certifiably unreasonable. I say look at Steven Jackson for a 6th rounder.
ReplyDeleteWhile I am comfortable discussing the wisdom/foolishness of a trade, I'm not that comfortable with the idea of voting down a trade. Not saying I'd never vote one down, but I've yet to be presented with a situation in which I've wanted to take that step. So, for some of us, voting against a trade is a mechanism we just don't use.
ReplyDeleteIf there is extra venom in Tyler's comments, I blame those on Taylor's constant comments concerning the have-nots' willingness to trade. For example, just recently, Taylor said that we've caused our own "misery" by not accepting trade offers. I'll leave it to you to untwist that bundle of logic. When Taylor proposes a trade offer, he wants it to be accepted. If it is not accepted, he wants a counteroffer or a response detailing the reasons for the refusal. Lest you think I am exaggerating, he told me this yesterday.
If you are asking how it is possible to have the opinion that Tyler holds regarding the DeAngelo for picks trade, here's my best shot. As it stands, DeAngelo, Ryan Grant, Cedric Benson, Jamal Charles, Pierre Thomas, and Jonathan Stewart may all be available on draft day. I think it is possible that someone believes DeAngelo is not that much better than the rest of the guys on this list given his splitting of carries with Stewart. I like DeAngelo (I don't even think he's the most overrated running back in fantasy), but I think that's a heavy price to pay for a guy who splits carries. Obviously, I believe it is entirely possible to have a different opinion on this issue. I just happen to think it's possible for Tyler to disagree. In fact, I think it's possible for Tyler to think the trade is unreasonable. Weird, I know.
For the record, Taylor believes Tyler is precluded from having this opinion. And, no, I'm not making that up.
I think it's impossible to consider that trade offer unreasonable. It's entirely possible to not think the trade works for you personally, or is not the right move, but it is impossible to call it unreasonable, meaning not even subject to reason.
ReplyDeleteTaylor,
ReplyDeleteYou, my friend, are the very epitome of unreasonableness.
Also, concerning the hole you've dug for yourself, will you be needing a ladder to get out?
And yes, I would like counteroffers or at least a reason why someone doesn't want to make the trade, rather than just a broad proclamation that the trade offer is unreasonable. There is reason behind any offer I make, and I would love anyone to explain to me how there is not reason behind such a trade offer.
ReplyDeleteBen, your explanation for someone not wanting to make the trade is completely legitimate, but it doesn't explain how someone can think the trade offer is unreasonable. There is reason for someone to value Deangelo Williams as the last RB available in the draft with top-level talent and not minding to sacrifice an 8th round pick to get him.
Calling a trade offer unreasonable is a lot different than calling a trade offer a bad move for me.
I am not challenging the rule/precedent allowing trades before the season. I like it because it allows for teams to get better and agree that Brandon and Jason's trade is a prime example of that. I am challenging Taylor's particular offers. Call me a propagandist, but I am loudly stating my personal opinion that his offers are not mutually beneficial nor is it reasonable for any owner with a 1st rd pick to make a trade for him. Players like Dwilly are available. Also, you are giving a guy who, makes sure to rub is half a championship in everyones face, two picks in a key round. In rounds 4-9, any player with multiple picks will be able pick up the best TE or D and still get their 3rd or 4th RB or 2nd or 3rd Wr. Or they can take a risk earlier in the draft and double up on the same position later. Taylor has tons of positive options from this trade and loses nothing. The other guy gets DeAngelo, sits out in one of these key rounds, and is behind the ball for at least one position. I am not complaining...let me be clear...I am trying to sway opinions.
ReplyDeleteI am also challenging the fact that we may be waiting for things to line out for him before we decide the keeper issue. I just got screwed in the new rankings...so how about we wait until some new ones come out that favor me and then establish keepers. Can I put that to a vote?
We're down to semantics boys. If the three of us agree that certain trades do or don't work for certain teams, then there's nothing more to say (I'll say more anyway). Nobody should eliminate the possibility of trading anyone on his team or rule out the possibility of acquiring a player he wants. It's all part of trying to get better.
ReplyDeleteTyler just wrote that it would be unreasonable to trade for Williams for anything lower than a 9th round pick. He wasn't playing what if games. It wasn't an equivocal statement. So I understand the Admiral's logic, and that may be what Tyler was saying, but that's not how I read it. If I had no RBs on my team and could pick up Williams, you bet your ass I would be very interested in acquiring him.
Tyler, your opinion has been precluded. You cannot possibly hold that personal belief. It is simply impossible. I'm sure that upon reflection you will see that the way you see this from your own personal perspective is incorrect.
ReplyDeleteDeangelo Williams will likely only be available for the two guys with the first and second pick, he's not available to the entire draft. Please look at the Jason Brandon trade last year, it epitomizes the point I'm trying to make in that you cannot call that trade offer unreasonable.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, I never suggested moving the trade deadline back. I just wanted to keep it known that people were discussing trades, several people had mentioned to me they were also still working out trades. But I think I started the first comment out with I'm fine with whatever. It's not fair to accuse me of being entirely self-serving in this ordeal. It is mutually beneficial for say John to make a deal to get Deangelo Williams ahead of where Brandon wants him and sacrifice an 8th round pick.
Ben, saying my trade offer is unreasonable is not personal to Tyler's team. If Tyler said it would be unreasonable for me make that trade, then by all means he has that opinion. But to call my trade offer unreasonable as to the entire league is just wrong. There is reason for someone to make that trade.
ReplyDeleteTaylor,
ReplyDeleteYou're going to have to speak up. I can barely hear you from up here.
Are you trying to trick me Jason? Is there someone on my roster you covet? Would you like Jerome Harrison, or Addai or Miles? If so, lets talk.
ReplyDeleteOf course I'm trying to trick you. I may be willing to part with a draft pick in exchange for one of those guys and my free pass.
ReplyDeleteWell, should we shut the blog down? I mean, where do we go from here? I think we are at the apex, and there's nowhere to go but down. Today, Taylor decreed an opinion held by Tyler to be both precluded and impossible. Ladies and gentlemen, it just does not get crazier than that. I mean, c'mon, people. I say we shut this thing down. Who's with me? If we don't pull the plug on this thing, we're going to jump the shark. No one wants that. Unless someone else decides to bring the crazy, I think we call it a good run and go our separate ways.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, let me make it clear that Taylor is my rival and my nemesis. We have a darkened past dating back to our pre-fantasy football days that I think needs no explanation.
ReplyDeleteOh, and did you all know that Taylor can also be a girl's name? A wimpy, whiny, pre-pubescent girl...
I think of Taylor as a hot girl's name. You know, somewhere in her 20's, sexually progressive, but still presentable to my parents. That's also how I think of real Taylor, but that's probably just a coincidence.
ReplyDeleteIt does get crazier than that. Like when Tyler claims a trade offer by me is unreasonable, yet by his standards an even more unreasonable trade (jason and brandon) worked out completely in favor of Brandon last year.
ReplyDeleteI've moved the actual discussion to a new post. Feel free to continue the tangential conversations here.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Scott.
ReplyDeleteTaylor,
ReplyDeleteBut what if Tyler was much higher on Steven Jackson last year than he is on DeAngelo Williams this year? Not possible? Impossible? Precluded? Yeah, I thought so.
What troubles me is how we are going to remove these illicit thoughts from Tyler's mind. I mean, the thoughts he has are clearly incorrect. But how to help him see the light? How to save him - that seems to be the question. We must silence his insolent views. If only we could teach him not to have impossible opinions.
I want this to continue. I want to ride this crazy train forever.
I'm just now climbing aboard. Please don't stop the train.
ReplyDeleteHe is fine to value Steven Jackson of last year higher than Deangelo Williams of this year. But Tyler was calling my trade offer unreasonable, he didn't say only he personally wouldn't make the trade. By calling it unreasonable, he's insinuating that it lacks any reason regardless of the situation. It's that view of the trade offer that I think is an completely incorrect statement.
ReplyDeleteThat's the thing about opinions, though, Taylor. They don't have to be right. Tyler can actually have an opinion that not only would he not make the trade but it would be unreasonable for anyone to make the trade. We're not dealing with black and white questions here. We're dealing with how Tyler values DeAngelo Williams in a split-carry backfield on a team with a new quarterback. And we're dealing with how Tyler values the draft field in the mid-rounds. Isn't it possible that Tyler is really low on DeAngelo this year? Isn't possible that Tyler is extremely high on mid-round draft talent this year? Isn't it possible that Tyler has bought into the notion that the days of the lead back being the key component on a championship fantasy team are a thing of the past? Isn't it possible that Tyler thinks other available backs are of relatively equal value to DeAngelo, and, therefore, no one should give up picks to acquire DeAngelo when Pierre Thomas, Cedric Benson, Jamal Charles, Jonathan Stewart, and Ryan Grany might be available? And isn't it possible that Tyler thinks other people should feel the same way? And isn't it possible that Tyler sees our league as a zero-sum game in which a benefit to you when you aren't giving up anything is bad for other teams? Isn't this all possible?
ReplyDeleteNo? You don't think so? Well, then I'm not sure you know what it means to be unreasonable.
None of those things are possible.
ReplyDeleteTo me, by using the word unreasonable, Tyler is suggesting that not only are all of those things possible, but it is unreasonable to think anything different.
ReplyDeleteI noticed the topic of game theory reared its head in this little discussion and I just wanted to point out a couple of things.
ReplyDeleteThis isn't really a zero-sum game because the valuation of the result is different. If we only look at the game as winner-take-all, then, yes, I can see a case for the zero-sum classification. However, we clearly value other aspects of the season (if for no other reason than the regular season also matters for future picks). Example: I think we are all shooting to make the playoffs this year, but the value each of us place on such a result is clearly different. If a trade were made such that both players now made it to the playoffs, and that had value for each player, then it is mutually beneficial and non-zero sum.
This trade idea is no different than any party with a glut of a particular resource. If the trade is made, both parties should gain or the trade was unfair and the player made a poor decision. If the trade isn't made, neither player benefits. To label a trade as unreasonable is simply saying that one side (Taylor's trade partner) would never benefit enough to recover transaction costs. This valuation is completely subjective.
I think Scott has again, like so many times before, clarified the issue. In the last line I understand him to say that a valuation of the reasonableness of Taylor's trade is completely left to the player's opinion. Thus, my opinion is that TP is currently offering unreasonable trades. Not unreasonable in that the trade cannot physically occur, just in that there is no point, zero, not at any time this preseason a good reason for making that trade....in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteWell stated, sir.
ReplyDelete