Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

I’m not here to rub anyone’s face in this. But I am willing to suggest that avoiding Todd Gurley because of his knee is just as dumb trading Tyreek Hill on the cheap.

You don’t give up on a stud player until he’s actually off the field or clearly a shell of himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Raptors409 said:

I’m not here to rub anyone’s face in this. But I am willing to suggest that avoiding Todd Gurley because of his knee is just as dumb trading Tyreek Hill on the cheap.

You don’t give up on a stud player until he’s actually off the field or clearly a shell of himself.

I think making blanket statements is dumb.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I think making blanket statements is dumb.

That thinking leads to trading away Tyreek Hill for a garbage sack lunch. Being stubborn with blanket statements protects you from that. That’s how my brain is wired at least.

Sometimes you have to be irrational. My logic is if I have a stud player, I refuse to have him blow up on somebody else’s team.

 

This thinking will protect you much more than it will hurt you. Willing to give up the 30% chance I’m wrong to be right 70% of the time.

Edited by Raptors409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s like playing blackjack. Even if you’re counting cards, you’re not going to hit against a 6.

You sit back and let the dealer beat you like a man. Worst case scenario here was that Hill comes back next year or missed some games.

It was never like his next 3-4 years were in jeopardy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Raptors409 said:

That thinking leads to trading away Tyreek Hill for a garbage sack lunch. Being stubborn with blanket statements protects you from that.

No it doesn’t that’s the whole point. Every trade has some level of risk-reward analysis and saying “trading Gurley is dumb” does not take into account that there very well could be something seriously wrong with his knee and for fantasy purposes he’s now a RB2 for the rest of his career but his name value may still land you a nice package in return.

No one is suggesting trading these players away for garbage because that also does not take risk v. reward into consideration.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Raptors409 said:

It was never like his next 3-4 years were in jeopardy.

The thing is at one point his entire career was in jeopardy - do you think if he did actually break his kids arm in anger he was going to be playing next season or the season after? He could have went to jail.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dr. Octopus said:

No it doesn’t that’s the whole point. Every trade has some level of risk-reward analysis and saying “trading Gurley is dumb” does not take into account that there very well could be something seriously wrong with his knee and for fantasy purposes he’s now a RB2 for the rest of his career but his name value may still land you a nice package in return.

No one is suggesting trading these players away for garbage because that also does not take risk v. reward into consideration.

Trading Gurley is dumb because it’s the antithesis or buy low, sell high.

It’s all opinion, so I’m not going to try to convince you to think otherwise. But there are certain players in their prime that are untouchable to ME.

 

Gurley is 24. Until he gets tackled on the field and doesn’t get back up. Until the Rams decide they don’t want to pay him $14,000,000 a year to be their lead back. He’s going to be on MY TEAM and not anyone else’s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the numbers - 87/1479/12 - repeatable?  Certainly, but I did notice, as his YPR has jumped from 9.7 to 15.8 to 17.0, his catch % has dropped from 73 to 71 to 63.  It's that 63% that gives him the "inconsistent" label, but for me that doesn't change where I would draft him, which is right around WR4 or 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

The thing is at one point his entire career was in jeopardy - do you think if he did actually break his kids arm in anger he was going to be playing next season or the season after? He could have went to jail.

I still think you willingly take the complete loss. It’s just as catastrophic having him scoring 2 touchdowns for 130 yards on someone else’s team. Getting a future first helps nothing. This guy is irreplaceable. Without him you’re rebuilding or at least much less dangerous than before and a few draft picks ain’t going to change that.

But that’s just me and differing opinions is what makes this country great.

 

”I’m proud to be an American...”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheWinz said:

Back to the numbers - 87/1479/12 - repeatable?  Certainly, but I did notice, as his YPR has jumped from 9.7 to 15.8 to 17.0, his catch % has dropped from 73 to 71 to 63.  It's that 63% that gives him the "inconsistent" label, but for me that doesn't change where I would draft him, which is right around WR4 or 5.

I would imagine it’s normal for catch % to drop when YPR go up since deep balls are lower percentage plays.

Obviously one cant say those numbers are not repeatable, but it’s unlikely Mahomes matches last season’s numbers - even if he develops into a better NFL QB. It’s a simple matter of statistics. It stands to reason if Mahomes comes back to the pack a little Hill’s numbers can go down a little. I’d still expect him to be a top 10 and probably top 5 WR when all is said and done though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this saga has done has made those who drafted early and got Hill in late rounds have some pretty amazing rosters. There were some who refused to draft Hill due to what some thought was a certainty of some length suspension, or maybe permanent ban, and some didn't want a player that was a terrible child- beating, girlfriend-abusing POS on their squad. These folks are now kicking themselves a bit as their decision to DND list Hill has given their team a disadvantage.

I know if you go through early TFC drafts (which are the semi-equivalent of the FFPC FBG leagues, without the TE premium scoring), you'll find there are teams that got Hill in rounds10-14. I don't believe you can get into the FFPC teams and check (that's really a bonus of RT Sports), but there are guys grumbling on boards that there's no reason to join leagues anymore because the winning team has already been drafted and it got Hill late.

It really throws leagues out of balance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

I would imagine it’s normal for catch % to drop when YPR go up since deep balls are lower percentage plays.

Obviously one cant say those numbers are not repeatable, but it’s unlikely Mahomes matches last season’s numbers - even if he develops into a better NFL QB. It’s a simple matter of statistics. It stands to reason if Mahomes comes back to the pack a little Hill’s numbers can go down a little. I’d still expect him to be a top 10 and probably top 5 WR when all is said and done though.

I just thought his 15.8/71 looked better than his 17.0/63.  That's a pretty big drop in % for a mere 1.2 YPR.  KC was 9th in pass attempts, over 100 behind PIT, and 23rd in total plays, but 1st in scoring and total yardage.  While I don't foresee a repeat by Mahomes in the TD department, he can easily increase his attempts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

ProFootballTalk's Mike Florio suggests the Chiefs may look to trade contract-year WR Tyreek Hill.

The Chiefs plan to resume long-term talks with Hill now that he's been cleared of a suspension. The sides weren't close before his off-field situation, so it's hard to see a deal getting worked out. Hill could push for $20 million annually — potentially pricing himself out of Kansas City. With Mecole Hardman as an in-house fallback, it's possible the Chiefs tag-and-trade Hill next offseason.

SOURCE: ProFootballTalk on NBCSports

Jul 20, 2019, 11:40 AM ET

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TDCommish said:

Looks like inactive dynasty owners are the winners here while those who were swayed by posters (here and other forums, FBG rankings, Twitter, etc.) speculating long suspensions or worse and sold cheap are the real losers here. Maybe there's a lesson to be learned here.

 

Can't really make these generalizations. I'm an active repeat champ in the league where I have Tyreek and refused to sell for a 1st, 2nd, or devy. He was worth way too much to me to panic like that. I never thought he'd never play again, and it never smelled right to me for some reason. 

This feels like a weird defense mechanism to me. "I can't feel bad about my moves because I just fell victim to being an active owner! Ahh the pitfalls of being too GOOD at this!" lol

Edited by ConnSKINS26

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Faust said:

 

Florio is a troll at this point. Just click bait. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Florio is a troll at this point. Just click bait. 

He’s been wrong on everything so far regarding Tyreek’s case.  He’s basically led the charge for Tyreek never to play in the NFL again.  I won’t read or watch Florio ever again after the crap he’s done with Hill’s case.  I pretty sure when it is all said and done, the Chiefs will extend Tyreek and Florio will be totally wrong again.  It’s going to be pretty ironic if Florio loses his job over how he’s covered this case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, Kevrunner said:

He’s been wrong on everything so far regarding Tyreek’s case.  He’s basically led the charge for Tyreek never to play in the NFL again.  I won’t read or watch Florio ever again after the crap he’s done with Hill’s case.  I pretty sure when it is all said and done, the Chiefs will extend Tyreek and Florio will be totally wrong again.  It’s going to be pretty ironic if Florio loses his job over how he’s covered this case.

Yeah I can understand how emotions can get the best of people but he owes Tyreek, the NFL, and the Chiefs organization an apology. Until he publicly comes out and does that I can't take anything he says seriously because he's only worried about clicks not about get the info right. 

Edited by Milkman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Deamon said:

Well said.  I personally don't play dynasty so wasn't affected at all by this, but I really can't fault or throw people under the bus who sold him and are at a loss because of it.  The poker analogy is right, and it sucks that human nature is to obsess over being 'right' to the point of judging a decision based on how something unexpected played out. 

Obviously those who sold for 2 5th rounders shouldn't have done it, I'm not saying give him away for nothing.  But if someone like yourself or Octopus made an assumption based on the news, and a calculated risk by gaining some assets for them, then I applaud those moves even if it didn't work out.

Again, everyone takes risks in fantasy by over drafting a guy, taking a risk on an injured player, starting a guy you have a good feeling about, etc.  Even many of the good decisions at the time, don't work out.  This result was a surprise to the majority.

It’s one thing to make fake football decisions based on what little or no information you have. Kinda like in poker. It’s another thing to adamantly judge and convict a dude based on what little or no information you have. Both of those things happened in here. Hill was called a monster and a child abuser in here because of what they thought happened recently.  He HAD to be guilty. I was called names and had my character and integrity called into question simply for wanting to see how things played out.  The Chiefs organization was called classless, etc. Those that threw out snap judgments and convictions maybe need to look in the mirror and and do a little self reflection. 

It was easy to jump to conclusions and convict him, there were a lot seats and company on that bus.  That was easy to do. Mob mentality, go along with the masses, sit at the cool kids table. It was harder to sit back and wait for details. That made you a bad guy, etc. Again, its one thing to make fantasy decisions, its another to make pretty serious accusations, determinations, and judgements, and to be wrong.  Some egg on some faces and some belly full of crow. 

Hill should be a slam dunk top five WR, and Mahomes stock and possibilities of actually following up last year with another uber elite year are increasing. They added another explosive piece to an already loaded offense.  Lots of fantasy points coming.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stinkin Ref said:

It’s one thing to make fake football decisions based on what little or no information you have. Kinda like in poker. It’s another thing to adamantly judge and convict a dude based on what little or no information you have. Both of those things happened in here. Hill was called a monster and a child abuser in here because of what they thought happened recently.  He HAD to be guilty. I was called names and had my character and integrity called into question simply for wanting to see how things played out.  The Chiefs organization was called classless, etc. Those that threw out snap judgments and convictions maybe need to look in the mirror and and do a little self reflection. 

It was easy to jump to conclusions and convict him, there were a lot seats and company on that bus.  That was easy to do. Mob mentality, go along with the masses, sit at the cool kids table. It was harder to sit back and wait for details. That made you a bad guy, etc. Again, its one thing to make fantasy decisions, its another to make pretty serious accusations, determinations, and judgements, and to be wrong.  Some egg on some faces and some belly full of crow. 

Hill should be a slam dunk top five WR, and Mahomes stock and possibilities of actually following up last year with another uber elite year are increasing. They added another explosive piece to an already loaded offense.  Lots of fantasy points coming.  

Your patience paid off for sure this time.  Other times it doesn't.  I had a friend close to the Lions organization a few years back that told me Calvin was gonna retire and there wasn't even a sniff of it anywhere.  I posted it in here and got scolded and mocked and ridiculed as much if not more than you did in here.  So I get where you're coming from.  In that case though, those who were 'patient and waited for the real news to come out' got burned.  A few people traded him and were HEAVILY rewarded because they weren't patient.

I suppose you are right that people who threw the book at him right away should have been patient... and yes I fully agree with you that they shouldn't have traded him for peanuts... but from a fantasy standpoint, all I'm saying is that sometimes 'waiting for all the details to come out" can hurt you and you have to act preemptively to win this fake football game we all play.  So I don't blame those who ultimately lost out, but got a decent return for him at the time.  Sucks for them and didn't work out but patience can be a good or bad thing in fantasy football/the stock market/etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Foosball God said:

:shrug: I'm with him on this.  Doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of some other suspensions.  But, it really doesn't make much difference one way or the other I just hope Hill's son is out of danger whomever the culprit is.

This I agree with completely. I hope the child is out of danger, and the suspensions don’t make a whole lot of sense. Herndon gets four games for DWI, but the NFL seems reluctant to punish in domestic violence cases. I don’t believe Hunt would have been suspended without the video. As a matter of fact, I seem to recall that the NFL was going to let him walk, and then the video was released. They need to reassess how they approach these cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, twistd said:

This I agree with completely. I hope the child is out of danger, and the suspensions don’t make a whole lot of sense. Herndon gets four games for DWI, but the NFL seems reluctant to punish in domestic violence cases. I don’t believe Hunt would have been suspended without the video. As a matter of fact, I seem to recall that the NFL was going to let him walk, and then the video was released. They need to reassess how they approach these cases.

 

Just now, twistd said:

This I agree with completely. I hope the child is out of danger, and the suspensions don’t make a whole lot of sense. Herndon gets four games for DWI, but the NFL seems reluctant to punish in domestic violence cases. I don’t believe Hunt would have been suspended without the video. As a matter of fact, I seem to recall that the NFL was going to let him walk, and then the video was released. They need to reassess how they approach these cases.

 

1 minute ago, twistd said:

This I agree with completely. I hope the child is out of danger, and the suspensions don’t make a whole lot of sense. Herndon gets four games for DWI, but the NFL seems reluctant to punish in domestic violence cases. I don’t believe Hunt would have been suspended without the video. As a matter of fact, I seem to recall that the NFL was going to let him walk, and then the video was released. They need to reassess how they approach these cases.

 

1 minute ago, twistd said:

This I agree with completely. I hope the child is out of danger, and the suspensions don’t make a whole lot of sense. Herndon gets four games for DWI, but the NFL seems reluctant to punish in domestic violence cases. I don’t believe Hunt would have been suspended without the video. As a matter of fact, I seem to recall that the NFL was going to let him walk, and then the video was released. They need to reassess how they approach these cases.

bro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, i have no idea how I did that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TDCommish said:

Looks like inactive dynasty owners are the winners here while those who were swayed by posters (here and other forums, FBG rankings, Twitter, etc.) speculating long suspensions or worse and sold cheap are the real losers here. Maybe there's a lesson to be learned here.

Not in my league. In my league, the inactive owners who didn’t respond to my offers of Tyreek are definitely the losers here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I should say inactive owners who owned Tyreek Hill are the real winners and not the active owners who owned him and saw him to drop to the 70s in some FBG rankings and/or read all the posts here. The info here probably helps the majority of the time. This time it definitely did not and this is a big one. In the end, it's still the owner's responsibility to make his own decision.

Edited by TDCommish
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:
5 hours ago, TDCommish said:

Looks like inactive dynasty owners are the winners here while those who were swayed by posters (here and other forums, FBG rankings, Twitter, etc.) speculating long suspensions or worse and sold cheap are the real losers here. Maybe there's a lesson to be learned here.

 

Can't really make these generalizations. I'm an active repeat champ in the league where I have Tyreek and refused to sell for a 1st, 2nd, or devy. He was worth way too much to me to panic like that. I never thought he'd never play again, and it never smelled right to me for some reason. 

This feels like a weird defense mechanism to me. "I can't feel bad about my moves because I just fell victim to being an active owner! Ahh the pitfalls of being too GOOD at this!" lol

Absolutely agree.  I didn't even consider selling him cheap.  Even if he missed the entire 2019 season it's a dynasty league and when he gets back he's a game-changer.  It would have taken a 95% value offer to get me to bite on the risk and that was never gonna happen.  The one offer I did make was to a rebuilding owner for Bell straight up, which today wouldn't even be that bad a value given that Hill does still pose some moderate long-term risk.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Deamon said:

Your patience paid off for sure this time.  Other times it doesn't.  I had a friend close to the Lions organization a few years back that told me Calvin was gonna retire and there wasn't even a sniff of it anywhere.  I posted it in here and got scolded and mocked and ridiculed as much if not more than you did in here.  So I get where you're coming from.  In that case though, those who were 'patient and waited for the real news to come out' got burned.  A few people traded him and were HEAVILY rewarded because they weren't patient.

I suppose you are right that people who threw the book at him right away should have been patient... and yes I fully agree with you that they shouldn't have traded him for peanuts... but from a fantasy standpoint, all I'm saying is that sometimes 'waiting for all the details to come out" can hurt you and you have to act preemptively to win this fake football game we all play.  So I don't blame those who ultimately lost out, but got a decent return for him at the time.  Sucks for them and didn't work out but patience can be a good or bad thing in fantasy football/the stock market/etc.

The fantasy football side of it doesn’t really matter that much to me...it was always the other bs....

Edited by Stinkin Ref

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, twistd said:

Sorry, i have no idea how I did that.

F5'ing the page after a submission can do that as can inadvertently multi-clicking the submit button before the page advances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Deamon said:

Your patience paid off for sure this time.  Other times it doesn't.  I had a friend close to the Lions organization a few years back that told me Calvin was gonna retire and there wasn't even a sniff of it anywhere.  I posted it in here and got scolded and mocked and ridiculed as much if not more than you did in here.  So I get where you're coming from.  In that case though, those who were 'patient and waited for the real news to come out' got burned.  A few people traded him and were HEAVILY rewarded because they weren't patient.

I suppose you are right that people who threw the book at him right away should have been patient... and yes I fully agree with you that they shouldn't have traded him for peanuts... but from a fantasy standpoint, all I'm saying is that sometimes 'waiting for all the details to come out" can hurt you and you have to act preemptively to win this fake football game we all play.  So I don't blame those who ultimately lost out, but got a decent return for him at the time.  Sucks for them and didn't work out but patience can be a good or bad thing in fantasy football/the stock market/etc.

I remember that! Glad I listened!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Raptors409 said:

It’s like playing blackjack. Even if you’re counting cards, you’re not going to hit against a 6.

You sit back and let the dealer beat you like a man. Worst case scenario here was that Hill comes back next year or missed some games.

It was never like his next 3-4 years were in jeopardy.

Actually a second offense for DV can carry a indefinite or lifetime ban.  They threatened Zeke with it after his first as a warning.  And Hill's prior DV conviction still counts and will never come off unless his wife admits he didn't do it and the state removes the charge.  He pleaded guilty so he can't deny it now unless she cooperates with him.  Even if the state removes it there is nothing saying the league has to do so.  The CBA says whatever the commish feels like pretty much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What it comes down to in this particular situation is how you felt about the situation, how you read it and read into it, and what you were willing to do if you owed him or were willing to gamble if you wanted to trade for him. There are no right or wrong answers in a situation like this and each and every owner whether or not you owned him or not had to figure out if he was worth the risk to either keep him or trade for him. Some owners received offers that they thought were too good to keep him so they traded him away. Others made offers to assume that risk and might be rewarded because of it. Some owners wanted to wash their hands of the whole situation and gave him away for whatever they could get for him. Each and every owner in every dynasty/keep fantasy league across the country had to make a call what they wanted to do with tyreek and they made it. Some will be rewarded some won’t. Some will be sorry with how they handled it. But in the end I’m assuming everyone did what they felt was right in their own individual situation. 

There are no rights or wrongs on this 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NightStalkers said:

Actually a second offense for DV can carry a indefinite or lifetime ban.  They threatened Zeke with it after his first as a warning.  And Hill's prior DV conviction still counts and will never come off unless his wife admits he didn't do it and the state removes the charge.  He pleaded guilty so he can't deny it now unless she cooperates with him.  Even if the state removes it there is nothing saying the league has to do so.  The CBA says whatever the commish feels like pretty much.

Scary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NightStalkers said:

Actually a second offense for DV can carry a indefinite or lifetime ban.  They threatened Zeke with it after his first as a warning.  And Hill's prior DV conviction still counts and will never come off unless his wife admits he didn't do it and the state removes the charge.  He pleaded guilty so he can't deny it now unless she cooperates with him.  Even if the state removes it there is nothing saying the league has to do so.  The CBA says whatever the commish feels like pretty much.

Except he hasn't had a first offense for DV under the NFL policy.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NightStalkers said:

Actually a second offense for DV can carry a indefinite or lifetime ban.  They threatened Zeke with it after his first as a warning.  And Hill's prior DV conviction still counts and will never come off unless his wife admits he didn't do it and the state removes the charge.  He pleaded guilty so he can't deny it now unless she cooperates with him.  Even if the state removes it there is nothing saying the league has to do so.  The CBA says whatever the commish feels like pretty much.

What?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hankmoody said:

Except he hasn't had a first offense for DV under the NFL policy.

Yes he does.  They can consider his past conviction as a first offense.  He couldn't be punished as he was in college but the policy states that it can be considered, sort of like a legal record.  That has been quoted repeatedly by the national media.  Zeke, Mixon and Hill all have this threat.  Will the NFL actually banish?  Maybe maybe not.  They didn't banish the Stallworth and he killed someone in a DWI.  In real terms it may not matter.  The league can let teams know to not sign them like they did with Ray Rice etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, finfansteve said:

What it comes down to in this particular situation is how you felt about the situation, how you read it and read into it, and what you were willing to do if you owed him or were willing to gamble if you wanted to trade for him. There are no right or wrong answers in a situation like this and each and every owner whether or not you owned him or not had to figure out if he was worth the risk to either keep him or trade for him. Some owners received offers that they thought were too good to keep him so they traded him away. Others made offers to assume that risk and might be rewarded because of it. Some owners wanted to wash their hands of the whole situation and gave him away for whatever they could get for him. Each and every owner in every dynasty/keep fantasy league across the country had to make a call what they wanted to do with tyreek and they made it. Some will be rewarded some won’t. Some will be sorry with how they handled it. But in the end I’m assuming everyone did what they felt was right in their own individual situation. 

There are no rights or wrongs on this 

Huh? Seems like there were plenty of right and wrong decisions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh shoot I put this on the wrong forum was at a wedding reception and just clicked on the wrong  link sorry guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Milkman said:

What?

I think you might want to read the other thread that FBG's put out on potential suspension possibilities.  Pretty much as Domestic Violence goes Goddell has tons of leaway.  He doesn't need a conviction(Zeke was never charged) and can set the penalty as severe as he wants if he feels there are aggravating circumstances.  There has been actual legal people who have been quoted in this thread as to potential outcomes.  He could even suspend Hill if he lies or don't cooperate in the investigation.  They did that to brady when he destroyed his phones....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, NightStalkers said:

I think you might want to read the other thread that FBG's put out on potential suspension possibilities.  Pretty much as Domestic Violence goes Goddell has tons of leaway.  He doesn't need a conviction(Zeke was never charged) and can set the penalty as severe as he wants if he feels there are aggravating circumstances.  There has been actual legal people who have been quoted in this thread as to potential outcomes.  He could even suspend Hill if he lies or don't cooperate in the investigation.  They did that to brady when he destroyed his phones....

You mad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Milkman said:

You mad?

why would I be mad?  I have never owned Hill or Mixon ever.  I play dynasty exclusively.  For Zeke I traded him last year for Kamara.  For Hill I think he should have gotten what the Jimmy Smith got for the threat, but I don't sweat it.  If he his smart he will get away from the woman and keep his nose clean.  4.25 speed doesn't grow on trees.  He has a great career ahead if he does the smart things.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.

I am risk adverse when it comes to DV.  I was offered Hill for a first by Mike Clay of ESPN and I told him I would do it for  a third.  My feeling are still the same.  The risk is to high for my likings.  It is probably wrong sometimes but what if someone had traded 2 2020 first for him back in Febuary and then faced the possible things that were at stake in May?

Edited by NightStalkers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, NightStalkers said:

Yes he does.  They can consider his past conviction as a first offense.  He couldn't be punished as he was in college but the policy states that it can be considered, sort of like a legal record.  That has been quoted repeatedly by the national media.  Zeke, Mixon and Hill all have this threat.  Will the NFL actually banish?  Maybe maybe not.  They didn't banish the Stallworth and he killed someone in a DWI.  In real terms it may not matter.  The league can let teams know to not sign them like they did with Ray Rice etc...

Do we know this to actually be the case? That they consider him to have a first DV offense?  I would think if the NFL considers him to have a first offense that would be pretty well known.  The player wold have wanted to know if that was the case.  I know the NFL can consider it an aggravating circumstance, but not sure an actual “first DV offense”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NightStalkers said:

why would I be mad?  I have never owned Hill or Mixon ever.  I play dynasty exclusively.  For Zeke I traded him last year for Kamara.  For Hill I think he should have gotten what the Jimmy Smith got for the threat, but I don't sweat it.  If he his smart he will get away from the woman and keep his nose clean.  4.25 speed doesn't grow on trees.  He has a great career ahead if he does the smart things.  Will he do it?  I have no idea.

I am risk adverse when it comes to DV.  I was offered Hill for a first by Mike Clay of ESPN and I told him I would do it for  a third.  My feeling are still the same.  The risk is to high for my likings.  It is probably wrong sometimes but what if someone had traded 2 2020 first for him back in Febuary and then faced the possible things that were at stake in May?

Do you know what Hill and his attorneys shared with the NFL investigators?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Stinkin Ref said:

Do we know this to actually be the case? That they consider him to have a first DV offense?  I would think if the NFL considers him to have a first offense that would be pretty well known.  The player wold have wanted to know if that was the case.  I know the NFL can consider it an aggravating circumstance, but not sure an actual “first DV offense”.

I think we may be saying the same thing.  If it is an aggravating circumstance then it gives Goodell the ability to go very harsh if he wants.  I think in the long Hill thread there has been some quotes that it is considered as a first offense even though he was in college.  One of things that I have said in this thread is about money.  If Goodell gets bad press and loses sponsors money then he would get the Ray Rice treatment.  Rice never got back in and the league was loosing money due to the original Rice decision...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Milkman said:

Do you know what Hill and his attorneys shared with the NFL investigators?

A.  It doesn't matter to me what they shared.  I don't own him in my leagues and won't unless I get a screaming bargain and would trade after I got him.

B. He signed a written letter saying he abused the woman in college. ( what I alluded to as the first incident)  

C. I am not a Chiefs or AFC West fan so I don't have any fandom involved.

 

Of the three I talked about Hill, Mixon and Zeke:

1. Mixon- I have not heard a peep from him since he got in the NFL.  Seems to be least risky.

2. Hill- Until this came up recently this year the same could be said of him.  Medium risky of the 3.

3. Zeke- He seems to  have his own chair in Goodell's office.  It may be just immaturity or he may just not get it.  Maybe there is more in the background for Zeke as Goodell pushed his power the most when dealing with his DV incident.  The NFL uses former cops so maybe the heard something and passed it to the commish.  I heard someone on Sirius say that Bosa moved out from zeke's dorm due to his drug use.  Who knows if any of this was true or not.

Edited by NightStalkers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NightStalkers said:

I think we may be saying the same thing.  If it is an aggravating circumstance then it gives Goodell the ability to go very harsh if he wants.  I think in the long Hill thread there has been some quotes that it is considered as a first offense even though he was in college.  One of things that I have said in this thread is about money.  If Goodell gets bad press and loses sponsors money then he would get the Ray Rice treatment.  Rice never got back in and the league was loosing money due to the original Rice decision...

I guess I’m just saying if a second DV offense could result in a perma ban....the player and his reps/agents would want it to be pretty clear if he is in fact labeled as having a first DV offense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stinkin Ref said:

I guess I’m just saying if a second DV offense could result in a perma ban....the player and his reps/agents would want it to be pretty clear if he is in fact labeled as having a first DV offense. 

I think the actual DV policy states that you can be banned if circumstances warrant but you can reapply for reinstatement after a year.  I don't think  there is a set punishment for anything beyond the 6 games in the original DV case if he is in the NFL.  The CBA on this is very loose for what the commish wants/and or decides to do.  Probably why zeke went to court as he wasn't charged and had people vouching for him at the incident if I remember right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, NightStalkers said:

A.  It doesn't matter to me what they shared.  I don't own him in my leagues and won't unless I get a screaming bargain and would trade after I got him.

B. He signed a written letter saying he abused the woman in college. ( what I alluded to as the first incident)  

C. I am not a Chiefs or AFC West fan so I don't have any fandom involved.

 

Of the three I talked about Hill, Mixon and Zeke:

1. Mixon- I have not heard a peep from him since he got in the NFL.  Seems to be least risky.

2. Hill- Until this came up recently this year the same could be said of him.  Medium risky of the 3.

3. Zeke- He seems to  have his own chair in Goodell's office.  It may be just immaturity or he may just not get it.  Maybe there is more in the background for Zeke as Goodell pushed his power the most when dealing with his DV incident.  The NFL uses former cops so maybe the heard something and passed it to the commish.  I heard someone on Sirius say that Bosa moved out from zeke's dorm due to his drug use.  Who knows if any of this was true or not.

I stopped reading at B. 

Like there's never been a black man that's pleaded guilty to something he hasn't done in this country. 

 

I'm just saying that's ^^^^^ a possibility. 

 

If that's ^^^^^ a possibility until we know what he shared you are doing this entire situation a huge disservice. 

Ok? 

No hard feelings but nothing about this case makes sense. Lets all take a step back and wait for the facts. Myself included. 

Edited by Milkman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Milkman said:

I stopped reading at B. 

Like there's never been a black man that's pleaded guilty to something he hasn't done in this country. 

 

I'm just saying that's ^^^^^ a possibility. 

You could be right.  You nor I have any idea as only 2 people were there.  He signed the guilty plea so he has that against him fair or not.  As far as league is concerned he has that in his past.  It will take a lot to remove that but it is possible.

One thing I will say is he keeps hanging around with the same lady who accuses him of that crime.  If I was him I wouldn't go near her ever after the charge from college.  If he was lied on why is he still with her?  That is his fault/risk on him entirely.  He can't claim it is always her if keeps putting himself with her.  Better to be far away and have witnesses to his visitation rights...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Milkman said:

I stopped reading at B. 

Like there's never been a black man that's pleaded guilty to something he hasn't done in this country. 

 

I'm just saying that's ^^^^^ a possibility. 

 

If that's ^^^^^ a possibility until we know what he shared you are doing this entire situation a huge disservice. 

Ok? 

No hard feelings but nothing about this case makes sense. Lets all take a step back and wait for the facts. Myself included. 

Anyone in Hill's situation would be a fool to not take the plea in this case, even if it meant admitting to something he didn't do. 

There is zero question at all that he made the smart move taking the plea, innocent or not.  

Throwing yourself at the mercy of the criminal justice system when there is guaranteed zero jail time offered would be absolutely crazy. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kittenmittens said:

Anyone in Hill's situation would be a fool to not take the plea in this case, even if it meant admitting to something he didn't do. 

There is zero question at all that he made the smart move taking the plea, innocent or not.  

Throwing yourself at the mercy of the criminal justice system when there is guaranteed zero jail time offered would be absolutely crazy. 

Absolutely. Any one of us would have taken that deal. I'm not a lawyer but is that a better deal than is normally offered in similar cases? If it is......why was such a sweet plea deal offered? 

So many rumors floating around about this case. For instance I heard the nurse thought the girls injuries were self inflicted. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.