Mr. Irrelevant

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

932 Excellent

About Mr. Irrelevant

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Falling asleep on my couch waiting for my name to be called

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Philadelphia Eagles

Recent Profile Visitors

8,879 profile views
  1. These two statements are not mutually exclusive.
  2. QB - Wentz (4.16), A. Smith (7.01) RB - Gurley (1.01), Collins (5.01) WR - Thielen (2.16), Baldwin (3.01) TE - Burton (6.16) As usual in this season's survivors, I'm starting off with a fantastic QB duo, average or better talent at RB/WR, and a gaping hole at TE. I don't think Burton has the makings of a fantasy QB1, but with some high floors already on my roster I can afford to take a big hack and hope I'm wrong.
  3. This team just won the Super Bowl with the league's 3rd-ranked rush offense ... without a single guy that cost more than a 4th-round pick to acquire, at a cap hit of $6.8M for the entire position (and $4M of that was on Darren Sproles!) I get what you're saying about BPA, but taking a RB at 32 would seem to run counter not just to Howie's draft philosophy but to their entire organizational philosophy. You can always find mid-level RB talent on bargain-bin salaries anywhere - via FA, via trade, in the mid-rounds of the draft - in my mind there just isn't a reason to spend a 1st-rounder on anyone who's not at the Barkley / Gurley tier of the talent spectrum.
  4. It makes no sense at all to take a RB with the 32nd pick. Zero. The incremental value of the fifth-year option is huge, but only if you use it on a position where market value for a 4-year vet is way above the slot option cost (QB, EDGE, maybe OT or OLB). Someone who wants one of those positions will pay way over the odds to move up to 32. Howie knows this better than anyone, and if he's planning on going RB early it'll be via a trade down.
  5. Reinforces my long-held belief that for WRs (and TEs) in dynasty, the "barbell theory" is the way to go - anyone on your roster who's not a young stud should be either a highly productive 30+ yo vet or a young guy with some chance of developing into a stud, even if that chance is relatively small. It costs virtually nothing to acquire the Fitzes and Garcons, and even one year of plug-and-play WR1/2 production from those types buys you another year of development from your stable full of Lees / Merediths / Richardsons / Enunwas ... and hopefully a breakout or two.
  6. I just took Thielen and Baldwin at the 2/3 turn, and was taken to my roster page where it shows my team has Gurley, Thielen, Baldwin ... and Russell Wilson. No idea how that happened or where he came from. I'm gonna go in as Commissioner and try to pull him off but, man, that's weird.
  7. Don't believe anyone's touched on QBs yet. In larger 1-QB leagues, Tyrod and Bridgewater. Neither are likely to put up QB1 numbers, but they're both capable of it when healthy, and due to current situation their values are at "throw-in" levels. Nick Foles fits this bill as well, although due to recency bias you're unlikely to get him at a discount. In 2-QB leagues (where all current starters are generally rostered), Davis Webb would be a big-time target, with my reigning namesake Chad Kelly another intriguing option.
  8. You have to "Link Franchise", link the Commissioner to your login using BnB's password above, then go to Franchise Setup under Commish settings, create your own team's access code, then unlink as commissioner, click "Link Franchise" again, then select the "Comet" franchise and enter that access code you just created. I think that's everything. I may have left out a step or two. I've been playing on MFL for 6-7 years now and I swear to God they somehow manage to make this process less intuitive every season.
  9. Found it and fixed it. In typical MFL fashion, it's buried 5 levels deep in a menu with an unrelated title, and I only found a link to it when I clicked a totally different topic. But we should be good to go now. ETA: For future reference, it's under "Setup" > "Appearance Setup" > "Reports and Security Settings" > "Display NFL free agents on fantasy free agent lists?" Because of course it is.
  10. I was faced with this exact dilemma, in the same round, and made the same choice. Ohtani went two picks later. I’m not good at this hobby.
  11. 15 would be easy - in fact I think preferable in some ways - you're down to the final 4 a week early (after week 11) which means you get 3 sets of two-week battles. I like that option as it reduces the randomness a little bit for teams strong enough to make the F4. Even 14 could work the same way, you're down to F4 after week 10, three 2-week combos and everything wraps up by week 16 - which is how 95% of leagues roll these days anyway given all the week 17 uncertainty. I'm sure we can find another person or two between now and Thurs. but I'd be fine rolling either way.
  12. That's because there was (and is) no real agreement as to what these types of threads mean. In my experience they almost always devolve into "bold predictions" threads regardless of whether the thread title calls for bold predictions or, oh, I don't know, "bet your house on it". In the summer, remind me to set up a "90% / 50% / 10%" thread asking folks to provide one prediction they think has each likelihood, and let's see how those fare. If everything's a "coin toss" then you'd expect to see all three groups of predictions have the same hit rate - which I don't think will happen.
  13. In. If we uphold recent SSL tradition of a league(s) with traditional lineups and one with a flex spot my preference would be the latter.
  14. I have nothing but respect for Matt Harmon, but this seems like a weird hill for him to die on. For years, he's been front and center shouting about the need for WRs to have a "trump card". He often points to contested catches, precise route-running, or success against all types of coverage as examples of that trump card that have made otherwise unremarkable athletes like Antonio Brown and Allen Robinson into superstars. 4.33 speed is its own trump card! You don't need to be the world's best WR at making contested catches or against press coverage when CBs are 3 yards behind you. It doesn't mean that all you need is speed to succeed, or Stephen Hill would be a household name. But when you're average to above-average at most aspects of the position and have a trump card on top, Matt's own writing shows that's a recipe for being a consistent fantasy WR1.
  15. They're in the same tier. They're one spot apart. In the words of David Sklansky, "The point is that the decision is close. If you don't like my numbers, choose ones you do like." FWIW, I would take Mahomes over Trubisky in a startup, and I suspect I'm not alone - FantasyPros' composite dynasty rankings have them at #16 and #21 respectively (although I'd personally slot Trubisky over a couple of names he's going behind in those rankings, such as Brees and Roethlisberger). Ultimately, in 1-QB leagues, anyone without a top-6 QB is losing points each week on average to the field, week in and week out, year in and year out. So personally, I bucket dynasty QBs into just three groups: (a) reliable top-6 QBs; (b) those with a fair or better chance of becoming top-6 QBs; (c) everyone else. Mahomes and Trubisky are both solidly in bucket (b), and beyond that it's somewhat a matter of personal preference IMO.