|
Spermy Smurf posted:It's on the transaction page clear as day right? Yeah, but knowing the actual 'current' totals is hard. Cool to be able to see what everyone has.
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
Does this happen to everyone now? The League Standings table on the main page scrolls left to right and doesnt fit anymore. I guess I can change it to Brief Standings Table so the "Standings" tab will have the full one. Let me try that and see how it looks. Edit: Huh, I cant do that, so I removed the Blind Bid Spent so only the balance is showing now and it seems to fit better. Edit2: i also cleared the chat because it was a mile long and useless. Spermy Smurf fucked around with this message at 14:27 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
Oh I was looking at the full page standings when I added the dollar amounts. We can all do basic math so removing the Spent column is fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
quote:I'd like to propose an increase in IR slots for next season. two is the amount for a normal league, we should have 4 or 5 for a dynasty league.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 05:24
|
|
|
I don't feel strongly one way or another on that. I remember a year or two ago wanting to stash more guys, but not since then. You still have to pay half their salaries, so there's still a cost for that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
Not sure "stashing" is the proper word. I'm guessing when you say that you're talking about people picking up FAs that are already on the IR. I've got 3 WRs that are on the IR and I've had all of them as long as it was possible to in this league. If a teams injuries start to add up then you've basically eliminated one team from competition as it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to drop a really good player because they're injured for 8-16 games. Right now I plan to see if I can wait out all these injures and if not then I'll basically be a free win for anyone I go against. I won't be intentionally trying to lose, but my roster is all tied up. In a normal league I'd just dump them and move on, but it's not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 07:16
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I don't feel strongly one way or another on that. I remember a year or two ago wanting to stash more guys, but not since then. You still have to pay half their salaries, so there's still a cost for that. I also don't have deep thoughts about it. In team McLean's case, it looks like there are three guys on his team on IR and a bunch of Qs. He'll have to drop some players at the end of the season to be cap compliant before thinking about the draft. You've still got 5 RBs and 6 non IR WR on your roster. That feels like a good amount of space for stashing, maybe? Especially since some of your roster will have to go for cap reasons? I'm not sure if a small bench is a bad thing, because it does make stash decisions harder for roster players? In fact, one might look at the roster and say it would be better to protect taxi squad players in some way (e.g. If stolen, you get a pick back from the same round) as squad theft generally has had a bigger impact thus far, and everyone starts with three on the squad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 11:35
|
|
|
atomictyler posted:Not sure "stashing" is the proper word. I'm guessing when you say that you're talking about people picking up FAs that are already on the IR. I've got 3 WRs that are on the IR and I've had all of them as long as it was possible to in this league. If a teams injuries start to add up then you've basically eliminated one team from competition as it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to drop a really good player because they're injured for 8-16 games. Right now I plan to see if I can wait out all these injures and if not then I'll basically be a free win for anyone I go against. I won't be intentionally trying to lose, but my roster is all tied up. In a normal league I'd just dump them and move on, but it's not. Yeah this is a good point, if your superstars are injured they're going to use up bench space which makes it much harder to field a waiver wire fill in without losing important players. Zauper posted:I also don't have deep thoughts about it. In team McLean's case, it looks like there are three guys on his team on IR and a bunch of Qs. He'll have to drop some players at the end of the season to be cap compliant before thinking about the draft. You've still got 5 RBs and 6 non IR WR on your roster. That feels like a good amount of space for stashing, maybe? Especially since some of your roster will have to go for cap reasons? We could potentially add IR slots and remove a regular bench slot to balance that? Also, I know Spermy is in favor of multiyear taxi squads - that is, once someone is on taxi, you can leave them there past their rookie year - and we can certainly consider compensatory picks from taxi theft, too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
How does MFL order the processing of waiver claims? I've got two open slots, but put in more waivers than that. Does it do highest bid to lowest? Order you entered them?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
I think it goes highest bid to lowest, but if you have two bids of the same dollar amount, I think they're in the order in which you entered them. Ordering only matters if you have more waiver claims than you have bench spots, of course.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Second question. If I want to trade someone on my Taxi Squad for another player that I intend to put on my Taxi Squad do I need to have bench slots open to complete the trade? How does that work?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
You need a bench slot, because MFL doesn't let you move a player directly to a taxi squad. However, per our "soft cap" rules, you don't need to clear cap space for a player you're transiting to your squad. The only way around this restriction would be to have a commissioner manually do these types of transactions, which is problematic since the commish would know about the transaction before it takes place, which is potentially a competitive advantage, and also just a hassle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:We could potentially add IR slots and remove a regular bench slot to balance that? Also, I know Spermy is in favor of multiyear taxi squads - that is, once someone is on taxi, you can leave them there past their rookie year - and we can certainly consider compensatory picks from taxi theft, too. I'd not be a fan of removing bench space. If we wanted to add IR slots I would suggest also adding starting slots - another idp or off flex, rather than decreasing bench size. It has a similar outcome, but doesn't force drops. That said, I still don't see much of a reason to expand IR at this point. Only enough room to stash two stars there seems ok? Use your bench to stash a long term value after that instead of some other lottery ticket.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:You need a bench slot, because MFL doesn't let you move a player directly to a taxi squad. However, per our "soft cap" rules, you don't need to clear cap space for a player you're transiting to your squad. Coullllllld let people put ineligible rookies on squad temporarily for the trade? Though that would be a hassle to enforce.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
Zauper posted:Coullllllld let people put ineligible rookies on squad temporarily for the trade? Though that would be a hassle to enforce. And would directly benefit owners of ineligible rookies over owners who don't have any. We could add a permanent "transition only" bench slot based on the honor system, but like you said, that'd be a hassle to enforce. We already had one owner accidentally overshoot during the draft because we had those three temp bench slots, and it'd gently caress up things like waiver claims where you bid on five guys hoping to get two, you'd wind up with the third due to the open bench slot, etc. I think the reality is, we're stuck with the "have to clear a bench slot" for transiting IR and taxi eligible players, until/unless MFL implements a feature for direct transfer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
Pretty much everyone has had to deal with a injured player taking up roster spots at this point, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
gurley 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:gurley I hadn't really expected his performance so far this season. But.. Yikes. Even with the unsustainable TD rate, he's posting decent to good yardage / reception numbers. Disappointed that I didn't throw in garcon. I had thought hard about it because I'm worried about Howard, but didn't trust Hoyer Zauper fucked around with this message at 08:14 on Sep 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 08:08
|
|
|
gently caress whoever stole Goff of my taxi squad last year btw I shoulda given up Smallwood and kept Goff
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2017 13:48
|
|
|
Bradford done for the year? McCown train 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
poo poo, I benched stefon diggs
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Woohoo I broke 85. Suck my dick, world!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
I broke 100. I am the greatest fantasy footballer in the history of this league
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
I'm going for 200, gently caress all of you!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
No one likes a showboater.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
of course I sat Diggs. the Titans need to start feeding Derrick Henry
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
I'm unreasonably afraid of Jason Witten scoring a bunch of points tonight
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Stevie Lee posted:I'm unreasonably afraid of Jason Witten scoring a bunch of points tonight When you got a guy putting up 12pts minimum, plus a large lead? I'm just happy I scored more than 100. Seriously, this year in all my leagues has been trash.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
I suspect fumble recoveries are scoring six points: He's currently credited with one fumble recovery, so we're doubling up somehow. If I fix this, I think it goes retroactively, which I haven't checked but could alter the results of previous matches? e. Yeah we added fumble recovery (from opponent) to all positions so offensive players would get credit for them, but didn't remove fumble recoveries on defense from the IDP guys. Note that the overlap only occurs on fumble recoveries from opponents - IDP get credit for fumble recoveries from fellow teammates (which on IDP should be pretty loving rare) but offensive players do not. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Sep 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I suspect fumble recoveries are scoring six points: Was that not intentional? I would assume that fumbles and int's would have the same value
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
Found more: Jordan Hicks, week 1, was started by FDS. Devin McCourty, week 1, was not started by FDS Mason Foster, week 1, was started by titoons Jarrad Davis, week 1, was not started by balls of fury, but BoF started him the following week, suggesting this high score may have helped him decide to start Davis Karl Joseph, week 2, was started by balls of fury I only checked these three teams, but it looks like based on this sample there's going to be quite a few -3 point adjustments if I fix this. Zauper posted:Was that not intentional? I would assume that fumbles and int's would have the same value Causing a fumble is worth 4 points, btw.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
Don't worry about my team losing points. It won't hurt me. This is why I think defensive guys should only have defensive items in their section of scoring. That would fix it right? I think we chatted about this ages ago.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Spermy Smurf posted:Don't worry about my team losing points. It won't hurt me. Yeah. We can tear open the scoring and do that. The alternative is to just consolidate all of the scoring in one category for all players - like in this instance, would it be bad for offensive players to get 3 points for recovering a fumble by their own teammates?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
holy crap i think i might actually win a game
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
Lavonte David had one for me in week 2. I thought it was odd then but totally forgot about it
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Scoring options for fumble recoveries are: Fumble Recoveries (from opponent) This is the total number of fumbles that are recovered by a player or team. This does not include fumbles by a player's own team that are then recovered by his team. It only includes fumbles that are then recovered by the opponent. This includes ALL fumble recoveries, whether they occurred on defense or special teams. So if you assign this rule to the Team Defense position, it will include the total number of fumble recoveries by the ENTIRE team, even if they occurred on Special Teams. Fumble Recoveries On Defense This is the total number of fumbles that are recovered by a player or team while on defense. This stat is not updated during the games in the live stats. It is only updated after the games are finalized. Fumble Recoveries On Special Teams This is the total number of fumbles that are recovered by a player or team while on special teams. This stat is not updated during the games in the live stats. It is only updated after the games are finalized. Number of Own Fumble Recoveries This is the number of own fumble recoveries. This ONLY includes fumbles that are recovered by a player's own team. For example, if a Running Back fumbles at the 1 yard line right before scoring a TD, and then a Wide Receiver on the same team recovers the ball at the 1 yard line and advances to the endzone for a TD, then it is considered an Own fumble recovery TD. So what happened here is, I didn't notice that last category because it starts with a different word loving come the gently caress on why did you do this MFL arrrgh I mean it could have just been "Fumble Recoveries (from own team)" to follow the same wording format huh? OK anyway, I think the easiest way to fix this is to just have "Number of Own Fumble Recoveries" PLUS "Fumble Recoveries (from opponent)" together, and set for all positions. This covers all possible fumble recovery types, with no overlap. e. I intend to fix this tomorrow morning, after all the stats are in. It may alter the outcomes of close matches from weeks 1 through 3.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
started jarrad davis vs thomas davis in week 2 cuz there was a mention that thomas davis had a knee injury (iirc)
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
I've updated the scoring. I believe it can take a while to propagate back through previous matches? Hopefully it does it automatically. If not, I'll go back and manually adjust scores, which will probably take like an hour so I'd like to avoid it but it's not a huge deal. e. Nope it's already updated! Based on checking Jordan Hicks' week 1 result, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:I've updated the scoring. I believe it can take a while to propagate back through previous matches? Hopefully it does it automatically. If not, I'll go back and manually adjust scores, which will probably take like an hour so I'd like to avoid it but it's not a huge deal. If you look at a given players week scoring, it's correct... But if you look at the players scoring history (and team pf, schedule) it still reflects the old values.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
Zauper posted:If you look at a given players week scoring, it's correct... But if you look at the players scoring history (and team pf, schedule) it still reflects the old values. poo poo. OK well I know that pre-season, after setting up rules MFL says to wait a while for them to propagate, but I don't know if their systems re-visit prior matches after you change a rule. If not, I'll go in and manually fix things. Probably do that tomorrow to give 24 hours for things to maybe get fixed on their own.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2017 19:54
|
|