Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
Subject to peer review, of course.

The Eeyores ship Marvin Harrison to Chicos in exchange for a third and a seventh in next year's draft. Presumably Naj will designate a player to be released.

48 hours for yada yada begins now.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What happened to our agreement!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!


I've been emailing you!!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What happened to our agreement!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!


I've been emailing you!!!


Last I heard you said a 4th or forget it. I countered and never heard back. If you emailed me since then I sure never received it. I'm not trying to stiff you but as far as I knew there was no deal. If something got misrouted or something else happened I'm sure Naj will stand aside , but let me know pronto.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The Eeyores ship Marvin Harrison to Chicos in exchange for a third and a seventh in next year's draft. Presumably Naj will designate a player to be released.

Seems consistent with the trades made last year. I forget which was which, but I shipped off Manning and Ricky Williams last year, and one of them garnered me a 3rd and a 6th and the other Andre Johnson (worth about a 3rd round pick, I think) and a 6th.

I'm fine with it.

--WP
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Screw it man. I wanted Harrison, but if you started talks and concluded a deal with someone else...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I will trade Justin McCareins to ZipCode's next year last round pick if he wants too.

Naj
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I will trade Justin McCareins to ZipCode's next year last round pick if he wants to.

Who's Justin McCareins?

And what's the deal with my draft picks? I've got some guys I will probably want to keep next year; which picks will I be losing when I do that?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Who's Justin McCareins?


I would like to have Justin McCariens, or even Marvin Harrison. Any way I could get in on these 'giveaways'?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Oh MY LORD!! one of the top 3 recievers in the league for a 3rd round pick and a 7th round pick??? What? Is Harrison going to get a 4 game suspension for drug violations or something?

With another deal where one party felt a deal was close to "done", and then it gets snatched...smells like something fishy going on to me...Chico and eeyores in together on sumthin?? ;)

seriously, anyone else other than the parties involved feel like this is a fair deal?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
No.

I'm offering Vick and a fourth.

:)~
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
seriously, anyone else other than the parties involved feel like this is a fair deal?

I've got no problem with it. This is a keeper league, but you can't keep your picks from the first two rounds. Harrison was drafted in the first round so he can't be kept. Essentially he's being rented for the remaining 8 weeks of the regular season plus any playoff time. Giving up a high and middle round draft pick next year seems like a reasonable price for renting a top tier receiver for a couple of months.

I did the same thing last year with Pup. I rented Ricky Williams right before the playoffs and gave up a 3rd and 6th round pick in this year's draft. I *still* got knocked out of the playoffs in the first round (I think) and had a pretty crappy draft because of the lack of picks this year. It was a gamble that didn't pay off. Oh well.

Of course, it's an even better deal for the person giving up the draft picks if they won't be in the league next year (say, by dropping out of the league on draft day).

Wot
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Of course, it's an even better deal for the person giving up the draft picks if they won't be in the league next year

Didn't need to pull that kind of shady deal to whup all y'all last year, now did I?

hmmm...Vick and a 4th or a 3rd and a 7th??? Which is the better value? I still say something "fishy" is going on...

LD
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
I still say something "fishy" is going on...


I think the fishy smell is coming from under the bridge you're living under, troll.

You gave up your right to have an opinion on this league when you ditched us all on draft day. Please go away. You've been asked to do so politely several times. This league no longer concerns you--by your own choice.

--WP
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
you gave up your right to have an opinion on this league

No, he's entitled to his opinion.

You (we) don't have to listen to it though.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
WP,
I have been nothing but civil in my posts here yet you resort to name calling?? My decision to bow out keeps looking better and better. Problem is, AS LAST YEARS CHAMP I kinda feel obligated to check in and post here from time to time, particularly in reguards to "irregularities" in the fairness of the whole thing. As GB said, you can either listen or not-your choice...but people have always had a hard time hearing the truth.

hmmm, seems to me that the commish would at least post a poll so folks could vote on the trade and is 48 hours really enough time for everyone to check in? not everyone lives on the FLOM board to check on trades, draft times, etc...maybe an e-mail to everyone would be prudent, as well as a little more time to process eveything and get back to the league on the issues in question. Just a thought from last years CHAMPS!

and I still don't buy that a 3rd round and a 7th round pick is worth one of the top 3 recievers for any amount of time over 2, maybe 3 games. Particularly when you don't know if those picks will be early round picks or late round picks. Throw in the fact that the 2nd most vocal member of the league as it pertains to being maybe a little unhappy with how things are being run-bearsfanGB-was involved in the trade talks, yet felt at least a little slighted, well it just does not seem right. (bearsfan, I hope I am not out of line but looking back on your posts, they seem to have at least a slight tone of displeasure in them-you in general and 77's posts when he took issue with the expansion draft)

either way y'all have a wonderful Friday and good luck this weekend.

LD

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
I have been nothing but civil in my posts here yet you resort to name calling??

You've accused patchdodd of conspiracy with Naj, and said his deal is "fishy" and "shady". That's not civil.


Problem is, AS LAST YEARS CHAMP I kinda feel obligated to check in and post here from time to time, particularly in reguards to "irregularities" in the fairness of the whole thing.

As last year's champ, you still have the same vote in the day to day operations as any one else who is not a part of this league: none. You were a member last year. Your input was relevant then. It isn't any more. I'm not stalking you around and commenting on your leagues' operations because they're none of my business. Do us the same favor.


As GB said, you can either listen or not-your choice...but people have always had a hard time hearing the truth.

Don't confuse your opinion with the truth.


hmmm, seems to me that the commish would at least post a poll so folks could vote on the trade and is 48 hours really enough time for everyone to check in?

Why post a poll? Everyone capable of reading the poll is capaple of posting a reply to it. Anyway, posting a poll would let non-league members vote--why should you or anyone else have a say? And I've never seen a trade review timeline of longer than 2 days. That's a standard length of time in fantasy leagues.


and I still don't buy that a 3rd round and a 7th round pick is worth one of the top 3 recievers for any amount of time over 2, maybe 3 games. Particularly when you don't know if those picks will be early round picks or late round picks. Throw in the fact that the 2nd most vocal member of the league as it pertains to being maybe a little unhappy with how things are being run-bearsfanGB-was involved in the trade talks, yet felt at least a little slighted, well it just does not seem right. (bearsfan, I hope I am not out of line but looking back on your posts, they seem to have at least a slight tone of displeasure in them-you in general and 77's posts when he took issue with the expansion draft)

A 3rd and a 7th may or may not turn out to be a good deal, but it is consistent with the market price that has been established for this league. Last year's deals have already been explained--this is very much on par with a 3rd and a 6th for Ricky Williams, made last year.

It doesn't matter if another party wanted to make a deal--if a better one came in, that's how life works. No one has an obligation to go through with a deal until it is done, especially if a better offer comes in.

Your earlier post said the competing offer was Vick and a 4th? I'd take the 3rd and 7th. The 3rd is clearly better than the 4th. Vick was a second rounder so has no keeper value. Since his only value is thus this year's performance--which stinks--he's not worth much at all. A pick is worth more, if you have a good young player.

I intentionally stockpiled 6th rounders last year to help my keeper list. The keeper round has dropped this year so a 7th can be used on a keeper. I would rather have a promising player worth a 7th rounder that I could keep for up to 4 years than an underperforming QB that isn't even as good as what's on the waiver wire. That's just me, and others can feel differently. But there's a legit value to a 7th rounder.

I don't blame another party for being upset if he thought a deal was close but didn't get done. I've had deals swept out from under me in the past, and I've swept deals out from others in the past as well. That's how life works. (You think the Jets were upset about the Vikings sweeping Antoine Winfield away? Damn straight. But there was nothing illegal or unethical about it--they just made a better offer at the last second.)

Your criticism isn't constructive. You've obviously had a grudge against patchdodd for a long time, based on your reasons for ditching us all on draft day and based on your posting history ever since. Coming here to continue to slander him by calling his deals "shady" and "fishy" is inappropriate. It is, by the very definition of the word, trolling.

Please go away and stop harassing the board.

--WP
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
WP, you da man.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
No problem with the trade here.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Vick was a second rounder

No he wasn't.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
No he wasn't.

He was a fourth rounder originally but a second rounder this year. He can not be kept. I never saw your offer with Vick for whatever reason GB but I doubt I would have accepted it for precisely the reasons WP laid out. Vick doesn't really have much value to me barring a miraculous comeback for him and for my team.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
He was a fourth rounder originally but a second rounder this year.

Ok...the rules are confusing me again.

I got him in the fourth round last year. That means that as long as I keep him, he costs me a second round pick.

That was the way it was explained to me.

Not that his value escalates every season until I can't keep him anymore.

Thats stupid.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Not that his value escalates every season until I can't keep him anymore.

Thats stupid.


Dude it's all in the bylaws. We can change it but first you have to read it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I got him in the fourth round last year. That means that as long as I keep him, he costs me a second round pick.

That is how I understood it too.

But really, to keep things simple you guys need to adopt my method of drafting poorly so that you don't have anyone worth keeping. ;)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I thought it was pretty clearly spelled out that it costs more each year to keep a specific player. I don't remember if the cost escalates by 1 or 2 rounds each year but it's one of those two numbers.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Found it in the by-laws. Sorry for misunderstanding, but it does make sense.


By-law 6 reads in part:

Each team shall have the option to reserve up to 6 players from
their year-end roster in the following season. Each player reserved
shall cost the team its draft spot 2 rounds higher than its current year
draft position. In other words a 10th round pick would cost an 8th
rounder in the following year's draft. The year after it would cost a
6th rounder.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I thought it was pretty clearly spelled out that it costs more each year to keep a specific player. I don't remember if the cost escalates by 1 or 2 rounds each year but it's one of those two numbers.

Agreed. It's in the bylaws. Cost continues to go up every year.

That's why a good low-round value player is worth far more than a good high-round player.

--WP
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I thought it was pretty clearly spelled out

It's not clearly spelled out when multiple members have to go to the "upon further review" route to get things straight.

Things seem loopy. If you're the worst in the league, you don't even get one of the top picks. It's all random...

Alright...I'm going to take a lunch break and clear my head.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Cost continues to go up every year.

Unearthing a nugget and losing him in two seasons with no option to keep him...even at high cost...is crazy.

Thats like telling an NFL team that after a players rookie contract ends they can't resign him.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Thats like telling an NFL team that after a players rookie contract ends they can't resign him.

And something the NFL teams deal with every year. Not in exactly the same way, but they do have to let players they want to keep walk away because the price is too high.

I too, thought as you did, that the same draft pick was forfeited each year, so I went and re-read the bylaws and found out that was not the case. Every year you keep a player, the price goes up.

If you want to change that rule, then after the season formerly propse to make the change, present your arguement and the league will vote. But it is in effect for this year, and has been ever since the start of the season. I'm sorry if you did the same thing that I did and just skimmed the by-laws without much thought, but they are what they are and complaining about them mid-season is just a waste of energy.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
And something the NFL teams deal with every year. Not in exactly the same way, but they do have to let players they want to keep walk away because the price is too high.

Yeah...but they have a choice...as un unpalatable as it may be...they are the ones that get to make the call.

I may just release Vick, Plummer, Green and the rest and let you guys have at them...for a season or two at least.


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
oh...and nice troll for recs.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Dude, if want recs I will just head over to the PA board says Bush sucks, it will get me a lot more than 3.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I may just release Vick, Plummer, Green and the rest and let you guys have at them

Not even I want them.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Dude, if want recs I will just head over to the PA board says Bush sucks, it will get me a lot more than 3.


lets see:
http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=21487103
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
With no objections it looks like the trade has gone through. Naj you are going to have to release someone or let me know who you want to release so I can put Harrison on your roster.

In the interests of fairness I will deactivate him for this week if I don't hear from you in time for the games.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
In the interests of fairness

OH, all of a sudden we are interested in fairness?

and WP, there is soooooooo much wrong with your post I have neither the time nor the inclination to address it other than to say you were fortunate to get ricky williams as cheap as you did last year and it still did you no good as I whupped all y'alls arses.

ramsfanray-way to cheerlead!!

and bearsfanGB, it is not I who is rec'ing you so there is at least one other viewer/poster/lurker-somebody who thinks along the same lines as you do....

Y'all have a GREAT evening

LD
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
OH, all of a sudden we are interested in fairness?

Indeed.

bearsfanGB, it is not I who is rec'ing you so there is at least one other viewer/poster/lurker-somebody who thinks along the same lines as you do....

:)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Indeed.

GB

Name something that I have done that wasn't fair.

This is a fun league. It happens to be a fun league that I am spending some time and money trying to keep going in a reasonable manner but it is still a fun league. The very few command decisions I have made were following parameters set by the whole league.

Anyhow I'd really just like to have fun with this thing. It's not all that much fun to have a league member sniping at me for nothing.
Print the post Back To Top
Advertisement