-
I was referring to Mighty Max, whom I also haven't heard from in some time.
Plakata on
May 27, 2011 12:51 PM
-
Rufous Motmots is a friend of mine, so I can contact him. I told him he might want to check in. I see he got McLouth out of his lineup but now has Kendrick on the DL.
Bunt Cake on
May 27, 2011 6:25 AM
-
To be clear, which Max are we talking about? I've had some (not a lot) of contact with Maximus in the 2 months ish, but none I can recall concerning Mighty Max or Motmots.
Quasi Muto on
May 27, 2011 3:18 AM
-
I tweeted 127 the other day, and will check in with him again. No real update on Max or Rufous. Anyone know how to reach them?
Plakata on
May 27, 2011 1:43 AM
-
Or Rufous Motmots?
-
no, I offered him something about five days ago but no response. What about 127 Mauers?
-
Anybody heard from Mighty Max lately?
Quasi Muto on
May 26, 2011 10:54 PM
-
Babip Avengers's trading block has been updated!
Plakata on
May 26, 2011 6:53 PM
-
Poor Tim Collins... I want to say so many terrible things, but some sense of decorum prevents it.
Quasi Muto on
May 26, 2011 6:00 PM
-
The Collins-go-round continues!
Bunt Cake on
May 26, 2011 5:04 PM
-
Awful news
-
Luckily, I never had anything quite so bad, even in football. All of my injuries were non-contact plays.
Quasi Muto on
May 26, 2011 12:47 PM
-
Pretty brutal collision. You could tell it was going to be very serious, just based on how he went down.
Plakata on
May 26, 2011 12:23 PM
-
Per Twitter, Posey done for the season, Belt called up. Not exactly how I wanted to Belt to get called up.
Quasi Muto on
May 26, 2011 11:56 AM
-
Except, well, nobody jumped on Liriano, because, well, he stinks... :(
Quasi Muto on
May 25, 2011 6:39 PM
-
We didn't want to give the prospects up! I went through this with Liriano already.
Quasi Muto on
May 25, 2011 1:58 PM
-
Babip Avengers's trading block has been updated!
Plakata on
May 25, 2011 1:30 PM
-
I really did not think folks would jump on Nolasco like that. I would have traded him to any of you and covered most of his salary. Where were you guys then!?
Plakata on
May 25, 2011 12:52 PM
-
Everyone's Grudge's trading block has been updated!
Quasi Muto on
May 25, 2011 2:51 AM
-
I think one thing that we might consider for next year is a buy-in.
-
Poor King's Pitch, all alone in 4th place.
Quasi Muto on
May 25, 2011 1:25 AM
-
Another idea for improving the participation of all league members is for us (the more active players) to send some trade offers or messages to the less active members. I just reached out to a couple of owners that way.
-
7.6 points separate the top three teams right now... awesome.
-
This might be more debate than Delmon Young has caused in his entire career.
Quasi Muto on
May 25, 2011 12:04 AM
-
Totally agreed about not telling you. My comment about transparency was assuming you had both planned this exact course of action. And it was more of a suggestion.
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 5:52 PM
-
I think not revealing his intention to cut Young was brilliant on his part. Had I known he planned on cutting Young, I wouldn't have paid for nearly as much of Young's salary, knowing that what salary he was picking up would be off of his books quickly.
Quasi Muto on
May 24, 2011 5:37 PM
-
Lots of good stuff below the fold, so I recommend reading the posts from earlier today. Any owners have issues with trade/cut/reacquire transactions? Other thoughts?
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 5:36 PM
-
Of course, $$ means less to you (Grudge) but it's still a limiting factor in what you can do this year, and now you have less of it.
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 5:31 PM
-
So my feeling is that even though this is a little unorthodox, it might be ok for owners to try this, if they really want. Transparency would be preferable (maybe mention it in the trade dialogue). Given the risks, there?s no guarantee, and plenty to lose
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 5:29 PM
-
All loans clear at the end of the season, and since I've already declared I'm not playing for this year, my cap doesn't matter to me. I'm all about how to improve my team going forward at this point.
Quasi Muto on
May 24, 2011 5:29 PM
-
Right (Grudge), and he would presumably have some trade value at just $10+.
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 5:27 PM
-
And even if everyone was broke, they could theoretically still step in and stop it. It would just be at the cost of (potentially) twice that value from their own roster.
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 5:26 PM
-
Yeah, and I'm not especially concerned with Young's salary, so much as what I can get in return for him if I win the auction and elect to try to trade him again.
Quasi Muto on
May 24, 2011 5:26 PM
-
Basically, there are just a lot of ways this kind of transaction could go awry. If two owners did this intentionally with a decent player, other owners would simply drive the price of the player back up, costing the original owner even more, potentially.
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 5:25 PM
-
Right, Grudge is on the hook for essentially $27+ now if he wants to retain Young.
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 5:22 PM
-
I think this kind of trading, where an owner is using another owner to drive down the price of his own players, is only a problem if everyone else in the league is broke, meaning they can?t stop the two owners.
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 5:20 PM
-
I'm okay with it, too (and, more importantly, I don't see either party as having swindled the rest of the league). ottoneu just gives us a lot of interesting things to think about.
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 5:19 PM
-
Ump, don't forget that Grudge still has to pay a $17 loan to OMG for the rest of the year, and then Young's salary, if he manages to reacquire him.
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 5:18 PM
-
I guess the only real difference between that kind of deal and a prospect-for-star-with-loan deal is that the value received changes from points to $. Unless I'm missing something.
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 5:17 PM
-
Yeah, it's certainly worth discussing this kind of thing. I'm okay with it--doesn't seem fundamentally different than any other trade that benefits both parties, and Grudge runs the risk of losing Young to another owner.
-
(The same would work for me if I decided to cut Brandon Morrow.)
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 5:05 PM
-
Just to summarize, the end result of this transaction will be: OMG gains $7 cap space and a roster spot immediately, and $10 more if Young is claimed/added. Grudge gets a $3 keeper and presumably re-acquires Young at a lower price.
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 5:03 PM
-
I don't know, it seems hard to do something really bad.
-
Thanks for the explanations, guys. I figured everything was probably aboveboard. The whole cut/trade cap dynamic, and whether the current setup is most desirable, is probably a topic worthy of discussion. Is this a loophole worth trying to close?
Bunt Cake on
May 24, 2011 4:53 PM
-
If we do decide that an owner is inactive, I know someone who'd be interested in joining the league.
Quasi Muto on
May 24, 2011 2:46 PM
-
I had no idea about cutting Young, but I'm fine with it. He's helping his team by making cap space, I'm getting a keeper player in Jansen, and I can re-trade Young if I win the auction.
Quasi Muto on
May 24, 2011 2:40 PM
-
It also takes careful review of lineups to see if an owner is changing it daily/consistently. The exact same lineup will look different in the lineup page on different days, meaning you can't just eye-ball it.
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 1:52 PM
-
Funny you should ask. I was just talking with Niv yesterday about this. The short answer is no, there's no way to see recent line-up changes or review moves in one easy place.
Plakata on
May 24, 2011 1:46 PM
-
Is there a way to see the number of moves a team has made, i.e. transactions by type (trade, cut, add) as well as daily lineup moves? I'm mostly curious to see if there are any owners who have totally blown this off (thinking of Rufous Motmots).
-
(2/2) when someone re-acquired Young, who I valued at a little under $10. If after a month I was able to pick up Young for $10, I was considering cutting him yet again depending on his performance to that point in the season.
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages