the lone star

Members
  • Content count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About the lone star

  • Rank
    Single-A

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    No
  1. Well if the trade is for fair-market value, then does that change anything? Also, is it collusion if someone says he'd rather trade with Team A than with Team B, because Team B has a better squad than Team A?
  2. Commissioner's Corner - 2018 Edition

    Here you go boss. So how would you all interpret the following rule? Please keep in mind that the site we use for this is MFL.The Rule:"Transition Tag 1. Owners will be able to transition tag one player per season, per team. 2. Prior to the start of RFA, owners must place a dollar amount on a transition player. This can be whatever amount the current owner is willing to spend to retain the player. 3. At the start of RFA period, other owners will have 48 owners to match this amount plus 25% (rounded-up) 4. If no bids are matched, player will go back to original team at the owner's assigned bidding price. 5. If the offer is met, plus 25% (rounded-up), the player goes to the new team at the new bidding price. 6. Additionally, the new owner also must immedietaly sign that player to a new contract and pay Dynasty Dollars for each year as follows: Player may only be given a maximum of 3 year contract, with each year costing $3. Max $9"Previous Example:So an owner who transition tagged Alex Smith wrote "Tag Smith at $6," and then said, "$11, 14, or $17 to match."Questions:How do you interpret this rule? Is it an auction/bidding system, a matching system, or something else? Does the the first team to match get the player, or can somebody bid after a player has been matched and increase the price?In the event that it is a bidding system, where do you apply the 25% kicker? Do you apply it to the tag price (to the $6 number on Smith), or do you apply it to each individual bid that is made on the player (so if someone bids $12, then the total price they pay will be $12 + (12/4) + 3(number of years signed for))? Using the previous formula, if somebody wanted to sign the player for three years, then it would be $12 + $3 + $9 = $24. Accordingly, if the bid was $14, then it would be $14 + $4 ($3.5 rounded up) + $9 = $27. If you apply it to the tag price of $6 for Smith, you get $8 ($6 + (6/4) = $8). So does that mean $7 would be an invalid price to pay for Alex Smith?Keep in mind that this is how the rule has been disclosed to the league the past few years and nobody has actually increased the bid on a match until this year. In fact, the commissioner was the one to match the tag for Alex Smith, and nobody came in with a price increase. Also assume that the intent of the commish and drafters of the rules are unknown.Need help. Thanks.
  3. Commissioner's Corner - 2018 Edition

    So long story short, in my fantasy football league, a rule was written in such a way that I and at least two other people interpreted it differently from the way the commissioner intended it to be read. I wrote an email to the commissioner explaining how we interpreted it, but he got very angry (extremely short temper) and told me that I do not speak for other people, so I should not presume to. I did not specifically name the people who interpreted it differently, and I know they saw it my way because we all had discussions about it. Given this set of facts, have I actually spoken on anyone's behalf?
  4. So long story short, in my fantasy football league, a rule was written in such a way that I and at least two other people interpreted it differently from the way the commissioner intended it to be read. I wrote an email to the commissioner explaining how we interpreted it, but he got very angry (extremely short temper) and told me that I do not speak for other people, so I should not presume to. I did not specifically name the people who interpreted it differently, and I know they saw it my way because we all had discussions about it. Given this set of facts, have I actually spoken on anyone's behalf?
  5. So long story short, in my fantasy football league, a rule was written in such a way that I and at least two other people interpreted it differently from the way the commissioner intended it to be read. I wrote an email to the commissioner explaining how we interpreted it, but he got very angry (extremely short temper) and told me that I do not speak for other people, so I should not presume to. I did not specifically name the people who interpreted it differently, and I know they saw it my way because we all had discussions about it. Given this set of facts, have I actually spoken on anyone's behalf?
  6. Any more insights would be greatly appreciated.
  7. Yeah, that's not cool at all. But does it matter if the commish did not personally know that the team was leaving?
  8. What if there is no collusion to split earnings though?
  9. In my dynasty fantasy football league, someone made a trade for Julio Jones in 2015. Here's how the deal looked back then. We use PPR scoring, but TEs get a premium of 1.5 per catch. Team A Receives:Allen Hurns (64 receptions, 1031 yards + 10 TD season)First Round Pick (turned out to be Carson Wentz, but Hunter Henry was still on the board)Second Round Pick (turned out to be Keanu Neal, but Deion Jones was also on the board)Team B Receives:Julio Jones (136 receptions, 1871 Yards, 9 TDs (8 Receiving TDs, 1 fumble return TD))However, prior to the beginning of the season, Team A told many owners that this was his last year. Team A traded rookie Todd Gurley to the commish for Reuben Randle (coming off a 71 catch, 3 TD, 900+ yard season) and a First Round Pick (Commish finished in the top 6 of the league that year, so it was at best the 11th overall pick in the draft). At a point prior to this deal processing, Team A had told Team B that this would be Team A's last year in the league. Team A told Team B that if Team B beat him in their matchup, then he would trade Julio to Team B. Team B did in fact win, and this win eliminated Team A from playoff contention. The commish likely did not know of this. However, Team B was unsure if Team A was serious, and nothing was offered to cement such a statement. Team A had said things the previous year that the previous year would be his last, but it wasn't. Team B still offered a deal to Team A after he won, which was rejected by Team A. TBH, Team A and Team B had been in trade talks for Julio for quite a while. Team B was trying to deal away Danny Amendola instead of Allen Hurns, and was trying to get Greg Hardy included in the deal. Obviously, neither of these happened. Team B was not trying to include both a first and second round either. Team B's initial offers were rejected by Team A, until Team A finally offered the deal above. The final deal actually involved negotiating and bargaining.However, prior to the deal, Team A told the commissioner's brother (Team C) that Team A was going to trade Julio to Team B to make the competition tougher for Team C. The commish did know about this, but Team B did not. There was no agreement between Team A and Team B that if Team B won, then he'd split his earnings with Team A. There was no collusion. The commissioner has to process all trades though to make them final. Prior to processing, the commissioner asked for the remainder of Team B's dues (dues are $120, so the league runs on a two-installment plan, where you pay the first $60 prior to the year, and then the final $60 at a date tba later). Team B paid this remainder at this time and not later because he and Team A had just reached a deal for Julio. Team B also thought that if he didn't pay dues at this time, then the deal for Julio definitely would not go through.Finally, the league does not vote on trades. In fact, I'm not even sure if the rules expressly allow for the commish to nix a deal. The commissioner has never nixed a deal before (if he has, then it's not well known at all). However, he still nixed this one, which was a first in the league.Since Team A is leaving, the commissioner was concerned with recruiting a new owner. He thought that a team with Julio would be more attractive than a team with Hurns, Wentz, and Neal.Considering all of this, should the commissioner have nixed the deal that Team B made for Julio Jones? Why or Why not?
  10. Rico Gathers 2018 Outlook

    Jarwin has a lot of hype behind him apparently.
  11. Carlos Hyde 2018 Outlook

    Hyde is inefficient. Just look at his yards per touch from this past season. Duke might not be a 3 down back, but he's a guy that you can play out there on all 3 downs between RB and WR. And at WR, you can line him outside and in the slot. He's good.
  12. Carlos Hyde 2018 Outlook

    Hyde is cool, but meh. I like Duke more. However, I think a team like the Cowboys should trade for Duke. That'd be dope.
  13. Kenyan Drake 2018 Outlook

    Buy Drake and McKinnon right now. I do like Ballage though. He's got good size for the NFL. Maybe he can be a starter, but those things are often unpredictable after round 3 of the rookie draft.