• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

39 Excellent

About wakelawyer

  • Rank
  • Birthday March 17

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    New Jersey

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Miami Dolphins

Recent Profile Visitors

2,346 profile views
  1. At what point does this discussion get moved out of the Shark Pool? All sides raise arguments and points they are entitled to argue, and most do it very well. But this has absolutely nothing to do with real football or fantasy football. All we know right now is that we have a QB that opted out of his contract and, from what I understand, has not scheduled any visits to any teams or received any offers. While people should be free to argue about his stance on the flag, etc. in the FFA, this thread shouldn't be littering the Shark Pool until we at least get a "rumor" of even a "potential" visit or "interest" of any sort from any team. BTW, I anticipate getting flamed on this. I will not respond so have at it.
  2. Agreed. That's why I was wondering if they were able to monetize the software or IP. It also makes you wonder if this is a situation where he could have avoided bankruptcy.
  3. I didn't even realize that FBG maintained this. Very helpful resource. And props to you for including links to competitors' sites.
  4. Does anyone know if the Trustee was able to sell the software? Or the domain name?
  5. Considering that he was a backup TE for most of the season, 36-478-8 is spectacular and, with the possible exception of TDs, I don't see any reason why his numbers don't improve. How many guys can legitimately claim that as a floor? As for rookies, you really think 2-4 rookies in this year's draft will match Hunter's performance? That seems to be a bit of a stretch. Or is it 2-4 that could match his numbers, such that 1-2 actually matching the numbers is a good result? If the latter, I'd rather take the safe bet than burn a 1.7, 2.1, 2.3, or 2.7 on a guy who might just be Kellen Winslow but hoping that he's Henry.
  6. As some have noted, you have to value Henry over Howard. Which logically means that if you're about to draft Howard, it makes sense to offer that pick for Henry, although I would argue that it would cost you more to get Henry. So if you have Howard at 1.7, then it necessarily follows that Henry is worth more than the 1.7. I understand the argument that some wouldn't give a first for any TE because of depth or variability at the position. But those owners also have to realize that they won't have a shot at guys like Gronk, Eifert, Kelce, Henry, Olsen, or even Howard. So what they would pay for Henry doesn't really factor into the equation of what Henry is worth.
  7. How did this get to 6 pages? It seems that the major justification was the AR15 was only the 71st highest-scoring player last year. Even if so, and even if that was an indication of value, and even if AR15 didn't pick up some value because he's younger than most other players, the 71st player off the board in startups is roughly equal to the rookie 1.7-1.9.
  8. Gotta be honest. I noticed a few of your posts in the dynasty trades thread. You seemed to be a bit of a tool there. And more so here. Hopefully people have stroked your wounded ego enough. Gonna move on to more interesting threads.
  9. I find it interesting that you come to a message board asking for opinions but decline to give even the most basic information. I personally wouldn't post the offer. But if there was an owner that has a history of making awful deals and this deal happened to be another awful deal, then I wouldn't be as opposed to a public shaming. Given your refusal to post the offer, I'm beginning to wonder about how bad your offer was.
  10. Which side is bad? I prefer Cooper but that's a decent collection of picks in a good draft.
  11. I thought that I read somewhere that MFL wasn't going to change the servers or league IDs for leagues going forward. If that's the case it would make it a lot easier to carry over from season to season. I would also think that, down the road, the single sign-on might allow the possibility to mass import leagues instead of having to do one at a time. On the My FBG front, do you foresee the ability to transfer over scoring rules as well as teams? I imagine that it's limited to what MFL makes available. But that would be huge if it could be done.
  12. Thanks for starting this thread and at least listening to ideas. Looking above, some are easy to implement and some are tougher and probably won't make the cut. But there are some that make sense and should be done. Rankings - absolutely necessary to have at least two sets in the 35-day window. And this is as much for FBG as it is for us. There are a lot of sites with dynasty rankings and I bet that "dynasty rankings" is a popular google search. When people put in that search and get to your rankings (even if it's a top 5 teaser with a link to join) you want to see several rankings. FBG is good in that it removes stale rankings, whereas some other sites keep them out. But to the person coming to your site, you want to show them the value that you offer. If you had 6 guys doing this, you could have them update the 5 times noted below and then have each do a set on 2 other occasions. So 2-5 hours 7 times a year. Rankings part 2 - there are key dates that you should focus on -- January (trading opens for a lot of leagues), some point between opening of free agency and rookie drafts (a lot of startups occur here and you have changes based on free agency and more rookie knowledge), after NFL rookie draft, July-August, and one in season (maybe October - November before trade deadlines). You really should have 4 or 5 rankings available for these time periods. This seems like a lot but, for those dedicated to the dynasty side at FBG, this shouldn't be a major task -- 2-5 hours 5 times a year. ADP data - I think that FBG might be the only site that doesn't offer this and a lot of people use this in lieu of rankings, especially in startups. But it does take some time and effort. But you could solicit volunteers from the subscribers/message board posters to take away some of the burden. Up and coming players -- the waivers of the future article seems to be written without real-league context. It would be nice to get a weekly list of one-two guys that each staffer is watching in their leagues. This can be a quick process and shouldn't take more than 2-3 minutes per staffer that participates. Pick 3-10 staffers (or more or less) and ask them for 1-2 players that they're watching and ask them to give a one sentence blurb. We don't need anything in depth. For example, last year, a statement such as Tyrell Williams -- has measurables, no path to playing time now, but could have high upside if he gets a shot. Or Mike Glennon -- free agent at end of year, could end up in good situation. We then have a list of guys that we can research -- we don't need FBG to do that, we can. But giving us a list of people would be helpful. Podcasts -- I don't listen to them and probably wouldn't if you added them. But people like them. And they're easy. Set up a weekly call in season for 5 guys that do this and have them talk dynasty football for 15 minutes. People would eat this up. And it's easy. But it does take 15 minutes. If you did 25 of them (in season and maybe once a month offseason), it only requires 6 hours total for each guy. Rookie analysis -- this takes a lot of time, but you do it anyway. BTW, love love love the Bloom Post-Draft 100. If you had 5-6 people doing this (which I think that you have that many who dip their toe in dynasty), we're talking less than 50 hours per person each year. I realize that many do this part-time but that breaks down to an hour a week, which should be doable. If not, maybe it makes sense to recruit from the subscribers/boards for help. I'm fairly confident that you have a lot of people that would be willing to dedicate that time to be able to add FBG contributor to their resume or tag line.
  13. Time will tell. But I remember AP demanding a new contract before he committed to playing for the Vikes last year. He wants money. He likes money. He'll push for money. I understand that he said that he'll take less than $18 million but how much less. Only two RBs have a contract with an average of more than $8 million per year -- AP and Jamaal Charles. Only 10 RBs have a contract with an average of more than $5 million per year. And only 21 RBs have a contract with an average of more than $3 million per year. So, even though you have no idea what someone will pay, it's very likely that he's going to get his contract cut in half, and most likely a lot more. Maybe he'll agree to play a few more years and make $5 million per year or even $6 or 7 million. No one knows. But I do know that the guy negotiating last year didn't sound like a guy that was willing to play for less than $10 million. So, as I said, there's a "realistic chance" that his pride takes over and he doesn't sign a contract. I didn't say that it was likely but there is certainly some percentage chance that it could happen. To say that there's no chance that he won't be signed by another team after being cut means that you're certain that either a team will give him what he wants or that he'll be willing to accept any offer that he gets. And that doesn't always happen.
  14. You won't see any team give up anything for Peterson with his current contract. No one is paying him $18 million next year. So he either renegotiates or the Vikes cut him. And the Vikes will cut him because I can't see him renegotiating and the Vikes won't pay him under the contract. So he becomes a free agent. And, given the draft class and other vets on the market, as well as AP's baggage, I'd be surprised to see any team give him more than $4 or 5 million in real money for 2017. And I'm not sure that AP would play for that amount. With that in mind I think that there's a realistic chance that AP may end up like Welker and be forced into retirement because of contract demands.