Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010

VietCampo posted:

Terrance West is available I should drop Inman for him right?

I'm just worried about Kenneth Dixon coming back.

Just grabbed him with Harbaugh saying they'll ride the hot hand, hopefully he'll keep it up just enough to secure the starting spot long enough from Dixon to get me through my bye's.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Arcturas
Mar 30, 2011

Arcturas posted:

ROS, would you rather have Bortles or Wilson? I need to drop one for bye week coverage (or Shephard, I suppose, but I was planning on dropping him for Powell and it seems foolish to roster 3 QBs.).

Anyone? Bortles v Russell?

VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010

Arcturas posted:

Anyone? Bortles v Russell?

I'd lean Russell, also i'm not sure i would drop Sterling Shepard for Powell unless you're really desperate at RB.

Rick Grimes
Oct 12, 2005

We Are The Walking Dead

RCarr posted:

I'd grab him unless there's absolutely no one on you bench you're willing to part with. Powell has looked great and will have amazing value if Forte misses any time.

I mean, I could drop Rawls. Or concussion Carson. Missed out on Dwayne Washington by about 5 min last week, but he got hurt yesterday, so meh.



Starters not pictured:
Ben
Crowell, Sims
AJ, Landry, Marvin Jones
Reed

kiimo
Jul 24, 2003

What was that rumor about Josh Gordon and the pound of weed?

Because he was just banned indefinitely from the NFL

Quiet Feet
Dec 14, 2009

THE HELL IS WITH THIS ASS!?





I'm going to be 2-2 tomorrow and would like to improve my WR or TE situation. I think I could finagle a trade with the Gronk owner, but I'm not sure what I'd have to give up. I'm Gang Green. He's Green Bowl Packers.





The guy's about to be 1-3 and is a huge Packers fan. I think I could get him to bite with Lacy. Rolling with Bell, Lacy and Gore ROS sounds pretty appealing though, and his RB group seems fine enough that I could see him not wanting to bite. Trades hardly ever happen in this league and most of the offers I've gotten since I joined it a few years ago have been really stupid poo poo like Joe Flacco for Peyton Manning or Rashad Jennings/Eli Manning for Bell. I can sniff out the obscenely bad trades, but I'm still not terribly great at evaluating.

Also looking to the upcoming week and beyond, would Bilal Powell or Terrance West be a better WW target? Gut says West. I'll be dropping Tate and Ivory soon for sure.

Azhais
Feb 5, 2007
Switchblade Switcharoo
I think bans are the end. This isn't an indefinite suspension again.

If his only problem is weed, guess its time to check back out of that rehab facility

VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010
What do you guys think of an offer of CMike + Pitta for Greg Olsen + Blount?


I'd be giving up CMike and Pitta

Mr. McGibblets
Sep 17, 2015

by Deplorable exmarx
With Carson Palmer looking like he is dead who do I pick up? I also have a feeling that I wont be the only one going for a QB so I'm gonna have to spend a decent amount to ensure I get someone. I was thinking Paxton, Fitzpatrick (Maybe he will get normal?) and Alex Smith who I dropped already once. I'm leaning Paxton for the boom bust potential.

axelord
Dec 28, 2012

College Slice

kiimo posted:

What was that rumor about Josh Gordon and the pound of weed?

Because he was just banned indefinitely from the NFL

He's in the program for Alcohol and weed. Supposedly he went into rehab for relapsing and drinking again. Whether it's true or not who knows.

VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010

Mr. McGibblets posted:

With Carson Palmer looking like he is dead who do I pick up? I also have a feeling that I wont be the only one going for a QB so I'm gonna have to spend a decent amount to ensure I get someone. I was thinking Paxton, Fitzpatrick (Maybe he will get normal?) and Alex Smith who I dropped already once. I'm leaning Paxton for the boom bust potential.



Hoyer has the Colts next week and has been playing fine.

Mr. McGibblets
Sep 17, 2015

by Deplorable exmarx

VietCampo posted:

Hoyer has the Colts next week and has been playing fine.

You know I was thinking that but, Palmer has a bye week of 9 and whatever QB I pick I'm probably gonna keep until Palmers bye. Hoyer has the same bye as Palmer. I know that at least 3 QBs are being taken for sure on waivers this week maybe four so I have to choose wisely or just be hosed week 9.

VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010

VietCampo posted:

What do you guys think of an offer of CMike + Pitta for Greg Olsen + Blount?


I'd be giving up CMike and Pitta

So I also just got an offer of GRONK for my Gurley. Though I maybe could get Olsen for the same Gurley deal

I also have Bell, Cmike, McKinnon, Ware, and Terrance West at RB. Starting Pitta at Te

VietCampo fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Oct 4, 2016

axelord
Dec 28, 2012

College Slice

Mr. McGibblets posted:

You know I was thinking that but, Palmer has a bye week of 9 and whatever QB I pick I'm probably gonna keep until Palmers bye. Hoyer has the same bye as Palmer. I know that at least 3 QBs are being taken for sure on waivers this week maybe four so I have to choose wisely or just be hosed week 9.

Fitzmagic is the only guy that fits that criteria. Alex Smith is on bye and Siemian may take the job over from Lynch when he's healthy.

If you can't get Fitz, streaming Hoyer and Alex Smith might work. Both have good match ups leading into week 9 could be ok.

89
Feb 24, 2006

#worldchamps
Think I might be pulling Gore for Maclin. :thumbsup:

Dren
Jan 5, 2001

Pillbug

VietCampo posted:

What do you guys think of an offer of CMike + Pitta for Greg Olsen + Blount?


I'd be giving up CMike and Pitta

I think you should keep Cmike and Pitta

Tyree
Sep 11, 2003

STRETCH

STRETCH

STRETCH
I have Marcus Wheaton,. I have seen enough and do not want Marcus Wheaton. 1PPR league, these guys are available.

Eddie Royal
Robert Woods
Sammie Coates

Terrence West
Bilal Powel
Wendall Smallwood

This is basically last spot on my bench, so just seeing what you guys think is the best route.

VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010

Dren posted:

I think you should keep Cmike and Pitta

I think i'm gonna go through with my Gurley + Pitta for Gronk + Ivory. Thoughts?

Ty1990
Apr 22, 2011

Plot twis Frank Gore is good and is great insurance to have on your bench IMO.

89
Feb 24, 2006

#worldchamps

Ty1990 posted:

Plot twis Frank Gore is good and is great insurance to have on your bench IMO.

Gore is awesome. His points for the first 4 weeks?

9.8
13.8
14.3
18.0

Next week? Bears run defense. Buy buy buy buy buy.

UPDATE: Trade went through. Gore is back home, no more Maclin :getin:

TUS
Feb 19, 2003

I'm going to stab you. Offline. With a real knife.


Everyone thought Stafford was going to shatter the Bears defense :\

MrSargent
Dec 23, 2003

Sometimes, there's a man, well, he's the man for his time and place. He fits right in there. And that's Jimmy T.
I never got feedback on a D/ST rule change we made in the league I commission this year. We were using standard ESPN scoring for D/ST.

In standard ESPN scoring, your D/ST starts with 10 points. This always seemed really odd to me because what that says is that holding a team to <100 yards and 0 points is only worth 10 points. This also made D/ST scoring a lot more flukey, since giving up even 2 touchdowns would usually bring your score down to 3 or so points, when in reality, holding a team to only 14 points over an entire game is pretty solid by today's standards. Points really relied on takeaways and TD's which are a lot more flukey than being able to hold a team's scoring and yardage.

I ended up starting each D/ST off with 15 points instead of the normal 10, and I smoothed the curve between the point tiers. I feel like this has REALLY helped make the position less volatile week to week, while streaming is still a viable option. Even in this format, two Defenses that were starting went negative this week (Carolina and KC).

Has anyone else tried something similar?

bird with big dick
Oct 21, 2015

MrSargent posted:

I never got feedback on a D/ST rule change we made in the league I commission this year. We were using standard ESPN scoring for D/ST.

In standard ESPN scoring, your D/ST starts with 10 points. This always seemed really odd to me because what that says is that holding a team to <100 yards and 0 points is only worth 10 points. This also made D/ST scoring a lot more flukey, since giving up even 2 touchdowns would usually bring your score down to 3 or so points, when in reality, holding a team to only 14 points over an entire game is pretty solid by today's standards. Points really relied on takeaways and TD's which are a lot more flukey than being able to hold a team's scoring and yardage.

I ended up starting each D/ST off with 15 points instead of the normal 10, and I smoothed the curve between the point tiers. I feel like this has REALLY helped make the position less volatile week to week, while streaming is still a viable option. Even in this format, two Defenses that were starting went negative this week (Carolina and KC).

Has anyone else tried something similar?

Pretty sure every league I've ever played in a shutout starts at 15 points.

e: and those defenses very much deserved to go negative.

RBX
Jan 2, 2011

Im on NFL.com but what settings do you use? PM me of you want.

MrSargent
Dec 23, 2003

Sometimes, there's a man, well, he's the man for his time and place. He fits right in there. And that's Jimmy T.
That's interesting since the standard as far as I know in Yahoo and ESPN is for D/ST to start with 10.

I totally agree they deserved to go negative, I was just indicating that smoothing the curve and boosting the initial amount didn't inadvertently reward a poo poo performance.

VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010
I had a league where a shutout was 20 points for the defense, but once they scored it dropped drastically to like 7 or so and after that i believe it followed the default scoring for defense.


Was a bit fun, not many shutouts that year i don't think and i'm not in that league anymore.

MrSargent
Dec 23, 2003

Sometimes, there's a man, well, he's the man for his time and place. He fits right in there. And that's Jimmy T.
Here is my D/ST scoring settings in ESPN for anyone interested.

Dren
Jan 5, 2001

Pillbug

VietCampo posted:

I think i'm gonna go through with my Gurley + Pitta for Gronk + Ivory. Thoughts?

Rostering Gronk is playing with fire. He's reckless and will be injured again. I won't touch him.

That said your trade might as well be Gronk for Gurley. Pitta is serviceable at TE with some upside. Ivory is an RB3 level player, he's probably worse at RB than Pitta is at TE. If you believe Gronk won't get hurt and the Rams won't figure out how to get Gurley going then I get the appeal of the trade but I caution you that Gurley is really good and really good players eventually have their days.

Beer4TheBeerGod
Aug 23, 2004
Exciting Lemon

TUS posted:

Awesome analysis, but I was asking about Russell Wilson vs Wentz :shobon:

Oh. I would trust Wilson. Especially with Graham.

VietCampo
Aug 24, 2010

Dren posted:

Rostering Gronk is playing with fire. He's reckless and will be injured again. I won't touch him.

That said your trade might as well be Gronk for Gurley. Pitta is serviceable at TE with some upside. Ivory is an RB3 level player, he's probably worse at RB than Pitta is at TE. If you believe Gronk won't get hurt and the Rams won't figure out how to get Gurley going then I get the appeal of the trade but I caution you that Gurley is really good and really good players eventually have their days.

Yea, it was more thinking Gurley is likely to have those good days, but usually sandwiched between 4 point weeks.

Also a Pats fan, so hopefully that doesn't come back to bite me in the rear end.

VietCampo fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Oct 4, 2016

Silly Burrito
Nov 27, 2007

SET A COURSE FOR
THE FLAVOR QUADRANT
My Eddie Lacy and Jarvis Landry for his Devin Funchess and Todd Gurley. Has Gurley looked that bad?

Never mind, saw that Funchess was hurt and I need another WR.

Silly Burrito fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Oct 4, 2016

Rick Grimes
Oct 12, 2005

We Are The Walking Dead

Silly Burrito posted:

My Eddie Lacy and Jarvis Landry for his Devin Funchess and Todd Gurley. Has Gurley looked that bad?

I would not do that, especially in PPR. 31 catches on 45 targets so far this season.

Ches Neckbeard
Dec 3, 2005

You're all garbage, back up the truck BACK IT UP!

Silly Burrito posted:

My Eddie Lacy and Jarvis Landry for his Devin Funchess and Todd Gurley. Has Gurley looked that bad?

Never mind, saw that Funchess was hurt and I need another WR.

That's awful even in standard. If this is PPR you're out of your goddamn mind Landry is a ppr stud.

bird with big dick
Oct 21, 2015

Dren posted:

Rams won't figure out how to get Gurley going then I get the appeal of the trade but I caution you that Gurley is really good and really good players eventually have their days.

Maybe I'm an idiot optimist, but this is what I'm banking on. And there may have been some flashes of it this week, I think he went 5 for 50 on receptions and I have him in PPR?

tsbicca
Aug 27, 2004
I have Howard & Langford for my RB3. How droppable is langford? I'm looking at getting rid of him for someone like West or Smallwood.

Papes
Apr 13, 2010

There's always something at the bottom of the bag.

tsbicca posted:

I have Howard & Langford for my RB3. How droppable is langford? I'm looking at getting rid of him for someone like West or Smallwood.

Langford is borderline droppable but not for such replacement level players like those

Honore_De_Balzac
Feb 12, 2013

MrSargent posted:

I never got feedback on a D/ST rule change we made in the league I commission this year. We were using standard ESPN scoring for D/ST.

In standard ESPN scoring, your D/ST starts with 10 points. This always seemed really odd to me because what that says is that holding a team to <100 yards and 0 points is only worth 10 points. This also made D/ST scoring a lot more flukey, since giving up even 2 touchdowns would usually bring your score down to 3 or so points, when in reality, holding a team to only 14 points over an entire game is pretty solid by today's standards. Points really relied on takeaways and TD's which are a lot more flukey than being able to hold a team's scoring and yardage.

I ended up starting each D/ST off with 15 points instead of the normal 10, and I smoothed the curve between the point tiers. I feel like this has REALLY helped make the position less volatile week to week, while streaming is still a viable option. Even in this format, two Defenses that were starting went negative this week (Carolina and KC).

Has anyone else tried something similar?

I would be interested on the math of this but my first thought is that 14 points is plenty to win a game on. So while good it may reward mediocrity too much. Tds are flukey but turnovers are key to winning actual nfl games.

coronaball
Feb 6, 2005

You're finished, pork-o-nazi!

tsbicca posted:

I have Howard & Langford for my RB3. How droppable is langford? I'm looking at getting rid of him for someone like West or Smallwood.

Langford has zero value now, you can drop him for anything at all. I'd take a shot on Smallwood.

RBX
Jan 2, 2011

How does my Blount and T Benjamin for Gore and Jordan Matthews in 1 PPR sound?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

pubic works project
Jan 28, 2005

No Decepticon in history, and I say this with great surety, has been treated worse or more unfairly.

RBX posted:

How does my Blount and T Benjamin for Gore and Jordan Matthews in 1 PPR sound?

You take that poo poo right now.

  • Locked thread