Jump to content
Rotoworld.com Forums

Nerigal

Members
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Good

About Nerigal

  • Rank
    Double-A
  • Birthday 02/04/1980

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    Yes

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Nuremberg, Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This. I don't like the system where the league votes on trades, I prefer that only the Commish can veto a trade if it is collusion. But you have that system and the trade was vetoed and that should be the end of it. Trying to get the same trade through in the hopes people aren't paying attention is exploiting the system, should not be allowed and they should get a warning that there will be consequences if they try it again. And if that wasn't enough: That trade is so clearly unbalanced that as a Commish, I might even think about vetoing that trade without taking the other fac
  2. If that is the case, I am sorry for being hostile. But the "lol" at the end and the fact that in my mind, it couldn't be a serious suggestion to switch to DFS after having drafted for the season and having already played 5 weeks, lead me to believe that you meant say "if you scrubs can't stand the heat of having games cancelled on you, go play DFS". Then again, I am no expert in DFS, so maybe there is a way to sensibly do it. Anyway, if it was an honest suggestion, I misunderstood and apologize. Still, we will stick to our plan for now. Our leagues aren't that old, but one of it is
  3. Why should we? We found the right solution for us and we will play accordingly and have fun with it. I don't see any reason to change our system because some random people on the internet think we are having fun the wrong way.
  4. Hey, if that is the right way to do it for you and your league, good for you - go ahead and have fun with it! For us, that's a step too far. We enjoy setting a line-up, deciding who are the best players to start and taking calculated risks. The difference in my mind is that those are informed decisions - I can research the strengths and weaknesses of the defense my players are up against, how good the CB is my WR will most likely be covered by, look at past usage and trends, watch them play to see if they looked good in their last games. I can evaluate my opponent's team and decide
  5. I get where you are coming from and as I said, I see nothing wrong with your approach. It certainly isn't "necessary" to have substitutes. I think it comes down to personal preference and how you want to play, there is no "correct" way of doing it, just different ways. Let me try to explain the reasons why I landed on the other side of the decision and why it also is a viable way of approaching it: You say you don't see why you should "get all of the upside with none of the downside". The way I see it is: There is no upside. The substitution rule only limits the downsid
  6. That is actually a good point - I have to admit I didn't think about the possibility that MNF could be cancelled "out of the blue" after the Sunday games. So far, we only used substitutes for the "risky" games. How do you actually handle it in terms of how the substitutes work - can you designate a bench player as substitute for multiple players and hope that not all of the games get cancelled? I am a bit concerned that it could get really messy if you have a situation with multiple games on Monday / Tuesday. For example how it looked at some point last week, where there were two g
  7. In my humble opinion: Disregard completely. In my time playing on Yahoo (granted, it is a small sample size with 5 seasons played and 2 leagues), not once has the team that got the Yahoo trophy for "winning the draft" won the league. We actually make fun of whoever is declared the draft winner by Yahoo. I think that actually it is a good sign if you get a bad grade by Yahoo, because you did research on your own and made your own decisions instead of just going by what Yahoo tells you.
  8. I had Palmer as my interim QB till Luck gets back - just dropped him for Smith. Starting him with confidence this week, especially with Verrett out. I hope he continues to do well and takes some pain out of the Luck waiting game.
  9. I agree, you don't need 3 TEs. But I like Doyle more than Engram tbh. A lot of factors there and a lot comes down to personal preferences and who you believe in. I think in your situation, I would drop Engram and take a flyer on Higgins. You might also consider stashing Moncrief for when Luck comes back, but that depends on your league - you might be able to still get him later when you know more about Luck's return. I would stay away from McFadden and Morris - we don't know if the suspension will come, and if it does, there still is the question who will g
  10. I really like Parker against the Jets this week, so I would go with him. And even though Witten did great so far, I really liked what I saw from Doyle last week plus his great matchup against the Browns. So I would agree with Rod6874: Parker and Doyle.
  11. I agree with Mr.Joshua: Thomas is a must-start imho. You drafted him as a starter, he didn't do too bad so far and even though CAR is a bit scary, you should take advantage of the fact that Snead is still out this week so Brees can't spread the ball around too much =) I think I would monitor the news on Nelson, if everything sounds good, he would be my second there. If you don't feel good about his hamstring and there are no news that make you feel good about him, Higgins would be the next guy up for me. Since you are in a hole already anyway, taking the gamble might be the best chance yo
  12. I would 100% do it if I were in your position. You look good at WR, but need help with RB, especially since you don't know what will happen with Buck Allen once Woodhead returns (did you hold him / have an IR slot to stash him?) Add to that the scarcity at the RB position and the potential of Martin and you have a great deal there imho. Maybe take a look at mine?
  13. Hi everyone, I would love some advice on the following Trade: Short Version I trade away Alshon Jeffery and Jeremy Maclin for Mike Evans 12 Team League, 0.5 PPR, 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 Flex (RB/WR/TE), 1 K, 1Def Is that a fair trade for both sides? Long version I am the commish of a league where we all are pretty much newbies. Some of us played last year, the others started playing this year. In our first year, not much happened in terms of trades, so nobody really has any experience there. Although I lost Allen Robinson, I was lu
  14. If you get it, I would go through with the waiver claim. I fit doesn't, you have your answer anyway. If it goes through and you have to make the decision now, I would drop West - but if you can, I would wait as long as you can to monitor the situation before making a decision. Tough spot, you need all the information you can get in my opinion.
  15. I wasn't being serious =) But I can't explain otherwise how he ended up with 3 TEs. Well, actually, since his 2nd TE was drafted in the Flex slot, I believe he thought he was drafting a backup TE (bad enough) when he actually drafted his 3rd TE. Or he just likes TEs - I don't judge! But I'd rather believe his cat took over than him being a bit dumb since I like him =)
×
×
  • Create New...