Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by FreeBaGeL

  1. I remember this coming up in the D'Onta Foreman discussion but the real wildcard in trying to search for a decent comeback comp is Curtis Martin. 

    There is a possibility he tore his achilles in college.  It was a different era and injuries, especially in college, weren't nearly as heavily reported on so it is unclear.  Officially his season was cut short during his sophomore year in college for an achilles injury, but there are no specifics as to what the achilles injury was.  It could have just been tendonitis.

  2. I'm sure I had better trades but the one below will always stick out in my head because it has now become a motto I live by in fantasy.  That is screw sitting around and being happy to let someone else pick between guys in the same tier so you just get whoever falls.  If you prefer a guy just go ahead and pay for him even if you might get him anyway.

    Gave: 1.04 (Montee Ball), Stevie Johnson, 2nd round pick
    Got: 1.03 (Le'Veon)

    At the time Stevie Johnson was a pretty valuable player and I got pretty lambasted for the trade because the prevailing thought was why give up a good young WR just to move within the same draft tier.  But Le'Veon was my boy.

  3. 7 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

    The more I consider this the more I like the 1st. 

    No way LAR goes into the season with Henderson as their feature back. I just can’t see that happening. 

    Bell is the most likely fit, IMO. Maybe AP.

    regardless of who they bring in, I can’t imagine the Rams don’t bring in a back to share time in that backfield.  

    I agree, I think the Rams bring someone like Bell/AP/Gurley.  Granted I think that still leaves Henderson as the lead back but I could see it affecting his value.

    The fact that it was Superflex and the fact that the pick looks like it will probably be early (and the team I was trading with was trading someone else's pick they had so it wasn't even worsening the pick by giving the other team Henderson) were the clinchers for me to take the deal.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  4. 49 minutes ago, jm192 said:

    1.  You may want to downgrade/product change your CIP to like the Chase ink cash or the Chase ink unlimited.  That way you don't lose that card and shorten your credit history/hurt your credit score. 

    If you're able to get business cards and play the CC points game--the Chase Ink Cash is one of the smartest cards out there.  You get 5%  back on phone, internet and streaming and 2% back on gas stations.  I put our cell phone bills, cable/internet, and netflix on there.  It makes about 300$ a year in rewards points just by the things that are autocharged to it.  

    Thanks for the reply.

    I've heard (not sure how true it is) that Chase doesn't allow people to hold multiple cards from the same card family anymore.  So as I understand it if I downgraded the Ink Plus to Ink Cash I would still be ineligible for the Ink Preferred since I already have another Ink card.  Does this sound correct?

  5. Okay credit card gurus, Chase right now is offering 100k sign-up bonus on both the Sapphire Preferred and the Chase Ink Preferred.  I'm wondering if there are any holes in my plan here to earn a quick 200k ultimate rewards points...

    • Downgrade Sapphire Reserve to Freedom Unlimited, apply for Sapphire Preferred for 100k sign-up bonus
    • Cancel Chase Ink Plus, apply for Chase Ink Preferred for 100k sign-up bonus

    Net 200k sign-up bonus after meeting spend. Any reason this wouldn't work?

    Current Chase cards
    Sapphire Reserve (opened Feb 2017)
    Ink Plus (opened 2014)
    World of Hyatt
    Chase Freedom
    Amazon Visa

    Chase Apps within last 24 months: 0

    Also I assume my chase ultimate rewards points for the Sapphire Reserve would transfer to Freedom Unlimited points, and then once my CSP was opened I could transfer them to that card (re-opening transfer partners) without losing any points, correct?

  6. On 7/10/2021 at 9:32 AM, cubd8 said:

    A few questions on travel. I am anticipating traveling more (for personal reasons) over the rest of the year. 

    I just booked a trip with Southwest Airlines and opened an account for their Rapid Rewards. The way I understand it, it works similar to having a credit card with points and I can build points up and eventually use them for a flight.

    I paid for this trip using my Capital One Venture card which has 2x points for travel on all purchases (I believe it also has some stores that provide more points). It gets good reviews on The Points Guy website and others.

    Does using Rapid Rewards and my Capital One card allow me to 'double up' on both ends like it seems? I know it will take awhile to eventually redeem these, but think this makes sense but wanted to check with others.

    Any other cards you like, or that is better for travel?

    Yes, you would earn both Rapid Rewards points in your Southwest account and Venture points in your Capital One account.

  7. 44 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

    Actually it’s the blacks who implied there is a white national anthem by creating a black one.  HTH.


    The existence of a group that caters to some subgroup does not imply the existence of the same thing for every other subgroup.

    A black national anthem doesn't imply the existence of a hispanic national anthem.

    A women's empowerment group doesn't imply the existence of a men's empowerment group.

    A national rifle association does not imply the existence of a national brass knuckles association.


  8. Assuming I had a reasonably strong team I would pay a 1st, assuming it's not early, to upgrade to Mahomes from any QB other than maybe Murray.

    As history has shown us time and again the reality is a LOT of these top QBs are going to regress over the next few years, probably pretty heavily.  There was a time when Matt Schaub and middle of his prime Peyton Manning were considered somewhat interchangeable, and we're just a few years removed from Jared Goff and Carson Wentz being the top dynasty QBs and even closer than that to Baker Mayfield being considered a top 3 QB.  A few years before that Jameis, Mariota, and Carr were all borderline top 5 guys worth as much as Herbert, LJax, etc are now.

    That's not to say Mahomes isn't without his own risk but to me if we're talking about 1 or 2 of these guys being a future HoF, career long elite fantasy QB a la Peyton/Brady/Rodgers then Mahomes is way ahead at the top of that list of who is most likely to be that guy.  All the rest of them, and especially the untraditional LJax, it wouldn't really surprise me that much if 5 years from now we were talking about them like we talk about Goff, Wentz, Stafford, etc who have little value in 1qb leagues.  And it's likely that one or two of them will even be Flacco/Jameis/Baker/RG3 where they fall off the fantasy 1qb map completely.

    To me a mid/late 1st is a fair price to pay to make sure I'm getting a 25 year old Peyton rather than a 23 year old RG3 or a 24 year old Jared Goff.

    • Like 2
    • Thinking 1
  9. 52 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

    You’re changing the scenario to suit your response though. the old Star Trek “Kobayashi Maru” tactic. 🖖🏼

    I’m saying in that scenario that Herbert is it. No one who has QBs to deal needs a RB except Bill, and you slept with Bill’s girlfriend so Bill doesn’t wanna trade with you. That leaves Steve, and he’s got Herbert but that’s his asking price. 

    Would you rather overpay for Herbert & have a ~70% chance at making the playoffs/40% shot at winning the league, or stand pat with whatever scrub you can stream off the WW and have a ~30% chance of making the playoffs/10% shot at winning the league? 

    straight answer - no Captain Kirk-ing allowed. 

    In my case sure I would take Herbert there.  But that seems like such a far fetched scenario it's not really any more worth worrying about than whether I would take the Herbert side if I were playing a league where players named after adorable VW Beetle movie stars get triple points.

    • Like 1
    • Laughing 1
  10. 2 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:


    For starters, I'd prefer we as US society not use someone identifying as a Democrat or a Republican as a reason to insult them like the guy did with 

    2 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

    1) It's hard for me to think of any single data point more meaningful than political party in determining what someone's values and beliefs are.  

    2) Are you just referring to Democrat v. Republican?  Would you feel the same way if someone was criticized for being part of the Communist Party or the American Freedom Party?  



    I certainly agree JB, but I also think @fatguyinalittlecoat brings up an interesting point.  There are definitely people in each party who feel that the values of the other party are something truly immoral and evil and go well beyond a mere difference of opinion.  Similarly there was a time where I'm sure communists and nazi's were walking around and people were saying that it was nothing more than a different opinion.  

    I think abortion is a huge issue on how this can play out.  There are plenty of Republicans, especially heavily religious ones, for whom it goes well beyond a simple difference in opinion.  They see it as literal child murder and hence anyone voting in favor of someone that supports it is condoning baby murdering.  Obviously if you were at a point where you truly believed it equated to baby murdering, then finding out someone condones baby murder is going to change your opinion of them a lot more than "oh well they think differently than me on that issue I guess we'll agree to disagree".

    I think some democrats feel the same way on gun control, that people/a party turning their backs on even discussing/researching gun control in the wake of major school shootings is truly an evil act, and that hence anyone that supports it is truly evil.

    The same can be said of welfare ("you're literally stealing from me" vs. "you're literally letting people die"), religion ("forcing me to obey laws based on a religious text is evil" vs. "our nation is founded on Christian Principles and not following my holy book is a slight against God and represents evil"), etc.

    Obviously these people lie at the more extreme ends of each party but there are plenty of them out there, and all it takes is someone being on the extreme end of one issue to see the party on the other side of that issue as truly evil.  

    If someone thinks it's okay to own slaves that is very much going to change your opinion of someone to an extreme yet a few hundred years ago if we were having this same conversation we would be saying hey now, just because Southern Democrats have different political beliefs than you it doesn't make them bad people.

    I'm not saying any of today's issues are similar to that but there are certainly people out there that believe some of them are and view a political party that condones abortion as every bit as evil as one that condones slavery.  Even as someone that is heavily pro-choice I can understand how some people feel that way.

    • Like 4
  11. 2 minutes ago, jtd13 said:

    How sticky is that though? That's probably not to do with the lions offense than anything.

    The Lions offense has changed a lot over the 12 years of Matt Stafford's career yet he's only ever run for 3+ TD's once.  Brady has done it in 6 of the last 10 seasons.

    Brady hustling up to the line before the defense is ready for a 1 yard plunge for a 1st down or TD is one of the many staples of his skillset.

  12. Gibson is worth far more than Herbert straight up in most 1qb leagues, much less adding a 1st to the Gibson side.

    Gibson 2.04
    Herbert 6.07

    Trade calc....

    Gibson: 30.5
    Herbert 16.7

    Gibson 664
    Herbert 246

    I am all for going out and getting your guy but this is too large of a value gap for that unless it's a Zealots league or something where QBs have larger than normal value.  Like someone else said you could literally flip the 1st to the other side and leave everything else the same and the Gibson side would probably still come out on top in value. 

    This is the equivalent of three 1sts for a mid QB1 in a 1 QB league which is insane.  You could get Mahomes+ for that kind of value in most 1qb leagues.  Heck Gibson goes a round ahead of even Mahomes in 1qb startup ADP.

    • Like 5
  13. In my experience with SF QB values can vary pretty drastically across multiple leagues even with the same settings.  It all comes down to how much the league as a whole values them.  If the league collectively decides QBs aren't going to be worth insane amounts then that's probably not going to change after the draft. 

    I've never really seen people have much luck with hoarding QBs when they fall because the guys you are then trying to trade those QBs too are the same guys that just passed on them in the 5th round for a 4th running back.  Assuming a 12 team league it's not like people get SO desperate for one once the season rolls around that they start throwing out great offers for them.  Most people can get along just fine in a 12 team SF league without having to have 2 or 3 good QBs on their roster.

    • Like 1
  14. 3 minutes ago, Jayrod said:

    But did the defender do anything wrong there?  If he doesn't slide, Sterling has a free look at it...I guess he may have had better odds to just let Sterling take it.

    The pass was a little behind Sterling, he would have had to scoop it in with his back foot so there was a chance he wouldn't be able to get it in.  But no way for defender to know that he had to try and make a play on it.

  15. 9 minutes ago, DJackson10 said:

    It seems a lot of these matches are getting more ET then needed at the end. That or they've told the refs to allow the team with possession if they are still attacking to allow it even if the ball goes out until the OPP clears it to MF or takes possession 

    I would say the complete opposite, but I always think ET is way under-given.

    I have the Belgium/Italy game recorded so I just went back and looked.

    Play stopped for Chadli's injury at 71:00 and resumed at 74:00

    Play stopped for Spinazzola's injury at 75:50 and resumed at 79:30

    That's roughly 7 minutes right there just between those two injuries, yet only 5 minutes of ET was given at the end of 90 minutes (the added two mins in ET were for stoppages within ET).  And again that's not accounting for all the stoppages that took place over the rest of the 35 minutes in the half, especially towards the end.

    Realistically there probably should have been 10ish minutes of ET but they were awarded barely half that.

    And don't even get me started on the first half of games where they're just like "eh, it's the first half so no one really cares anyway....uh let's say 1 minute of ET".

    • Thanks 1
  16. 53 minutes ago, northern exposure said:

    The way I see it, they missed finding the nail in the tire. Your son pointed it out to them. So, the only restitution he should expect is they remove the nail and plug the hole for free. Then your son and his girlfriend leave with a patched tire that is still on its last legs. Your son got way more than that, so the Manager is just getting rid of a PITA customer that he doesn't want to waste any more time on. Congrats?

    I don't see why he would be entitled to any restitution unless he paid for the diagnostic, in which case I think it would be fair to refund that cost.

    I don't see why missing something in the diagnosis should mean you get a free tire or free repair.

  • Create New...