FF Ninja

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

403 Excellent

About FF Ninja

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. You missed my top 3 RBs: Martin, Hyde, and Abdullah. Jared Cook is not very significant, but he didn't play, either. I don't have him, but McCoy is also out. His owners are sporting the highest survival rate. That could change sharply if he sits.
  2. Yeah, most site track it, but there were rules such as "no transactions before week 1 count" or "each WW/FA pickup costs $1 but a trade costs $2"... these things make it so it's harder to track than just looking at the site's little transaction column. Ultimately, it was decided that it was better to encourage activity than discourage it. Plus, as we got older, money started to take different values for different people, so $5/transaction could feel like a lot for some people while it was nothing to others, so we didn't want money negatively impacting people's management.
  3. You. I simply recommended something for everyone to try. There was no need to reply to it, but you did and sounded a bit defensive from the beginning. Did I really insult your league? If so, I'm sorry. I was just shocked anyone still did this. I recall it being a thing over 10 years ago, but I never met anyone who actually liked it (and the commishes didn't like tracking it or trying to collect again at the end of the season) so it died off quickly. Thus, I was just shocked the practice still existed. Did not mean for my shock to come across as an insult.
  4. He's probably fumbled his way into the dog house for now, but wouldn't be surprised to see him get a decent share of carries if the game is out of hand in either direction.
  5. No, not at all. This game is obviously part strategy, part luck. Both playing huge parts. All I'm saying is that settings can be put in place that increase or decrease both aspects. IMO, replacing a K with a flex increases the strategy part and reduces the luck. No need to get so snippy about it. And I fully agree, in FF, the phrase "better lucky than good" could not be more fitting. But that doesn't mean I feel good about winning by 2 points when my kicker puts up 22 and the other guy's puts up 3 when they were both projected for 8. So no, I don't feel like it is all skill when I win and all luck when I lose, but eliminating the possibility of winning or losing due to a kicker has been well received in several different leagues I play in.
  6. I agree they are a wildcard, but wildcard = luck, and luck favors the weak. Adding extra lineup spots favors depth and depth is found on good teams. And yes, you can add an extra flex without eliminating the K, but people get used to seeing weekly scoring a certain way, so proposing the idea as a kicker for flex switch helps sell the idea. I'm just throwing it out there, though. Nobody is obligated to that this advice obviously. You guys still charge $ per move?! I haven't played in a league like that in over a decade. I'd rather just increase the buy in than nickel and dime active owners like that. But really, FF isn't about making money - unless the buy-in is four figures, the winnings are insignificant. The only real point of a buy-in is to keep people playing. Without $ on the line, a lot of people will quit early. But get the right group of competitive people together, and a free league can be just as fun as a $500 league.
  7. I recommend you guys try this, just for one year and see how you like it: Replace K with extra W/R/T Most of my leagues have eliminated the kicker and everyone seems to be happy about it.
  8. Could be, but Waldman was all over Spencer Ware long before his breakout. There has been zero dynasty buzz about Gillislee the past 3 years that I can recall. FWIW, I no longer pay much attention to draft pick - I find it much more telling to look at how many RBs were drafted before that player since drafting patterns have shifted (RBs being taken later and later these days).
  9. I agree Miami has a pretty inept front office, but it still says something when a team in need of RBs cuts a guy they drafted after just one year. But that's just one part. The reason I called him a JAG was from the sum of these parts: 1) mediocre college resume and combine 2) pre-draft scout reports on par with JAG 3) actual draft position pretty low (5.31 - 14th RB selected, I believe) 4) three games played as a rookie 5) cut after 1 year from RB needy team 6) experts still not impressed by his NFL film from 2 years The book is not written on him, but there's enough data that we can say the arrow is leaning more to JAG than hidden gem. Maybe he's the next Priest Holmes, but FF is a game of odds and the odds of Gillislee being better than a JAG are slim. But again, this was just a minor point of a quick answer to someone's question. Not sure why everyone wants to take issue with it. You guys been rostering him for 3 years on your dynasty squads? He's probably a nice one week spot start if McCoy misses this game. Why such vigor in defending his non-JAG honor??
  10. Are we talking about talent or fantasy? When you bring up Reed and Graham I feel like you must be confusing talent with opportunity. Reed got a lot of targets, particularly in the red zone (26 last year!). Graham got a lot of targets from one of the best QBs in the league in years past. Put Eifert in either of those situations and he'd do just as well if not better. I'm not saying he's the 2nd best, but he's close. Olsen's all round game earns him that honor. To me, the race for 3rd best TE is wide open. Eifert doesn't even have 16 games as his team's clear cut TE1, so we need to see a little more out of him, but he made the most of his opportunities last year.
  11. A couple pages back someone asked, if McCoy misses time, who is the player to own. I said, Gillislee is a JAG but he's the one to own in the short term, but long term Jonathan Williams is the play. Everyone decided to take issue with me calling him a JAG bc I guess there's nothing else to talk about while we wait for updates on McCoy's hamstring It is truly a pointless debate.
  12. No personal insults this time? Surprising. Looking good on 17 carries in 6 games means nothing. You should look into the significance of sample size sometime.
  13. FWIW, I agree with the bolded. I specifically said he's the guy to own short term, but Williams is the long term choice. I still don't know how everyone can be so certain he's not a JAG, though. As I asked Grigs, what is this based on? His college production was lackluster and his NFL sample size is minuscule. He was drafted very late and cut after 1 year. He made an appearance in eight games in two years. The dial is not pointing up...
  14. Why am I getting trolled by this Defensive Back? Because I had to break it to you that your hopes of Coates carrying your team were not realistic? Stop following me around and get a life. Anyway, I'm no scout and even if I was, I don't have time to watch every college game or even college highlights. I use statistics to form my opinions, when I can, and trust certain experts on their college film study. Far too many people clog up these forums with their meaningless eyeball tests and armchair scouting hot takes. I try to avoid that.
  15. And that strangely definitive statement is based on...? Those 17 carries this year? His mediocre college production? Getting cut from the RB-needy Dolphins? I'm not opposed to hearing new information on the subject, but it's got to be based on more than just hope from people who need a spot start.