WR Josh Gordon, KC (3 Viewers)

[cstu]

When discussion becomes pointless, repetitive arguing that drives people away from reading the thread, it needs to stop.

Arguing whether faults in the lab and test procedure were part of Gordon's appeal became that. Made worse by there not being any evidence it was argued in the appeal. So everyone was asked to move on or show a link that this specific argument was made.

The message to take away is that the line got crossed between discussing, and arguing in a way that drives others away from the thread. And not to do it again. The complaints about this thread are more than the rest of the Shark Pool combined. This shouldn't still be going on after the amount of mod posts to point out the line here.

This is too important of a topic to shut down. We've tried to make it clear what won't fly before reaching the point we just have to remove those who can't figure it out. But these same exact problems keep coming back.

Enough discussion of this please.

The is the same problem the NFL is having with Gordon and that's what happens when you're too lenient. Like the NFL, I don't expect you to be too lenient with the next violation.

 

[daveR]

There's a video interview over at PFT with Mary Kay Cabot and she is claiming that it's her understanding that Harold Henderson can actually impose a penalty somewhere in the middle. It isn't just all or nothing as PFT has been reporting. There seems to be some gray area, but Mary Kay couldn't explain it in much detail. Who knows, but it's something. (Sorry if posted already, I skip most of the discussion in this thread for obvious reasons)

Mary Kay said the Cleveland Browns (the only team she covers) traded up to draft Manziel 1st overall. And this wasn't a tweet, this was a published article.

I'm aware her reputation is on thin ice, but it was new info to me no matter how truthful it really was.

Last year, according to her published opinion, "Jason Campbell is elite".

 

[Shawn]

Wow... its amazing seeing this thread at the bottom of the first page... its about time someone put a stop to the blatant bickering and assumptions on this thread...

 

[ROYALWITCHEESE]

I can't believe they couldn't rule by today. They have all the info now.

 

[Banger]

not that it means anything but what do people that have followed this situation closely think the probability is that he gets a full year vs. full exonoration?

Having a tough time benchmarking....I'd put it at a coin flip right now... maybe a little more towards being suspended the full year...55/45 that he'll be out for the year.

I can see three reasons why the two sides would not be negotiating.

1) The NFL is very confident in its case and sees no need to throw Gordon a bone.

2) Gordon is very confident in his case and doesn't want to throw the NFL a bone.

3) Neither side is confident, but the NFL does not want to set a precedent that suspensions are subject to negotiation.

Reason #2 strikes me as far less likely than reason #1. The NFL has a lot less at stake than Gordon, which means we should expect Gordon to be more willing to negotiate relative to his confidence level. I mean, if I'm being tried for murder, and I'm 99% sure that it's not going to hold up, I'll at least entertain the idea of negotiations just because the penalty for being wrong is so ridiculously steep for me. I might not accept the negotiations, but you can be sure I'm at least talking with the prosecution and seeing what's on the table.

So for me, it seems that either the NFL believes its case is ironclad, or else the NFL is wary of establishing precedent. The "NFL is confident in its case" explanation seems more intuitive to me (since the league had no problem negotiating with Gordon last year and has never shied away from establishing precedent), but I'm open to either possibility. Given that, I'd probably put the odds at 80+% that Gordon's gone for the year. I'm not ruling out the possibility of a successful appeal out of hand, but I would not want to bet on it unless I was getting some awfully friendly odds.

thanks. I think your logic is solid, unfortunately. I have a keeper deadline of today and I'm thinking I may have to part ways with him. I'll likely drop him for a J. Bell or Gerhart and I'll shoot myself if he gets his suspension overturned (he'll be the #1 pick in the draft). Keepers would be Ellington, AJ Green, Gronk, Cobb and either Gordon or Bell/Gore/Gerhart/C Johnson in the last spot. The decision is so feast or famine and if he wins his appeal my team would be ridiculous receiving wise (but maybe only a 20% chance of that occurring) or I can hedge it out and the team won't be as strong but it's safer.ugh....

After much deliberation I decided to roll the dice and stick with the talent. I may end up with a dead roster space but I managed to have Vereen, Cobb and Gronk out for most of the year last year and win my league so I figured worst case scenario is he loses his appeal and I end up with a dead roster space. If he wins I have a very good shot at winning my league.

My final protection list was gerhart (instead of Cobb), Ellington, Gordon, AJ green and Gronk. I dropped Cobb, CJ?k, Joqie bell, gore. Cobb vs gerhart was a tough call. Adp wise it's a mistake but even though I doubt I'll be able to get Cobb back at the 12th spot, I can likely get others not far off like Crabtree, Floyd, Andre Johnson, victor Cruz. While the rb drop off is more dramatic.

ThAnks all for the input and now I need the arbitor to roll snake eyes and overturn the suspension!

 

[ghostguy123]

Wait, did I miss something??? Why is Gordon possibly going to get suspended?

 

[ghostguy123]

 

[Adam Harstad]

By "my money's all in on him playing", are you saying that you think there is a 100% chance on Josh Gordon winning his appeal and beating his suspension? If not, what percent chance do you think Josh Gordon has of winning his appeal? Do you think he has a 99% chance of winning his appeal? 80%? 50.1%?

100% chance of winning.

Thanks!

 

[ghostguy123]

By "my money's all in on him playing", are you saying that you think there is a 100% chance on Josh Gordon winning his appeal and beating his suspension? If not, what percent chance do you think Josh Gordon has of winning his appeal? Do you think he has a 99% chance of winning his appeal? 80%? 50.1%?

100% chance of winning.

Thanks!

We know who to never take gambling advice from.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Shifting gears a bit...

I'm a big fan of slow drafts, but they always create situations where new information comes out when someone is on the clock and that person has an unfair advantage in that he is the first who gets to act upon that information. The advantage is doubly-unfair because the quicker an owner makes his picks, the less likely he is to receive this advantage; basically, the worst (or, at the very least, least diligent) owners gain an advantage over the best (or most diligent).

Despite being unfair, I've always thought this was a fun little quirk of the slow draft. Usually these bits of news wind up being blurbs about 3rd string WRs moving up to the 2nd string, or guys forcing an RBBC. In over a decade of running slow drafts, the biggest case of a piece of news breaking and everyone scrambling to draft the player was... Mike Bell in 2006. Very rarely does one of these advantages wind up proving consequential when it comes to determining the competitive balance of the league. But the Josh Gordon situation has the potential to be just that; if Gordon's appeal gets overturned, it's very possible that some guy who is sitting on the clock in the 11th round is going to get himself a proven top-5 wide receiver for free, just because he was dragging his feet and taking forever to pick.

Is anyone else running any slow drafts right now? If so, what are you doing to combat this effect? I've personally told my league that they are free to draft Gordon before the results of his appeal are announced, but the second the announcement is made Gordon becomes undraftable and cannot be rostered through the first four weeks of the season. After four weeks, the worst team in the league will have the choice to add Gordon if they want. I think it solves the capriciousness problem (and makes sure that owners aren't feeling incentivized to drag their feet a bit until the ruling is handed down). Anyone else have any better ideas?

 

[EastonBlues22]

Could have a mini-pick auction (blind or otherwise) up front. Everyone has a chance to offer the highest pick they are willing to give up (that they own in the draft) in exchange for Gordon's services. Gordon is then automatically drafted by the person who offers the highest pick at that slot whenever it happens to come up, regardless of who else is available. Nobody else is allowed to take Gordon earlier, regardless of what news breaks.

 

[Nucker101]

Shifting gears a bit...

I'm a big fan of slow drafts, but they always create situations where new information comes out when someone is on the clock and that person has an unfair advantage in that he is the first who gets to act upon that information. The advantage is doubly-unfair because the quicker an owner makes his picks, the less likely he is to receive this advantage; basically, the worst (or, at the very least, least diligent) owners gain an advantage over the best (or most diligent).

Despite being unfair, I've always thought this was a fun little quirk of the slow draft. Usually these bits of news wind up being blurbs about 3rd string WRs moving up to the 2nd string, or guys forcing an RBBC. In over a decade of running slow drafts, the biggest case of a piece of news breaking and everyone scrambling to draft the player was... Mike Bell in 2006. Very rarely does one of these advantages wind up proving consequential when it comes to determining the competitive balance of the league. But the Josh Gordon situation has the potential to be just that; if Gordon's appeal gets overturned, it's very possible that some guy who is sitting on the clock in the 11th round is going to get himself a proven top-5 wide receiver for free, just because he was dragging his feet and taking forever to pick.

Is anyone else running any slow drafts right now? If so, what are you doing to combat this effect? I've personally told my league that they are free to draft Gordon before the results of his appeal are announced, but the second the announcement is made Gordon becomes undraftable and cannot be rostered through the first four weeks of the season. After four weeks, the worst team in the league will have the choice to add Gordon if they want. I think it solves the capriciousness problem (and makes sure that owners aren't feeling incentivized to drag their feet a bit until the ruling is handed down). Anyone else have any better ideas?

I actually thought about this today as well, but honestly I'd prefer to just let it play out in dynasty leagues since his adp/value seems to be on the upswing lately anyway so I doubt hell be available too late. Giving him to the last place team if he somehow wins this appeal seems like a bigger issue to me. Redrafts are a different animal, although a slow redraft doesn't seem like a popular format to begin with, especially during pre-season.

 

[ghostguy123]

Let it play out. And don't do slow drafts during preseason unless it is a dynasty league maybe.

We wont take hear news for two weeks anyway

 

[Pumpnick]

If Gordon gets the year, is it possible the suspension start date is when it was told to Gordon, before any appeal process? So maybe it would be until may 2015?

 

[rct]

Shifting gears a bit...

I'm a big fan of slow drafts, but they always create situations where new information comes out when someone is on the clock and that person has an unfair advantage in that he is the first who gets to act upon that information. The advantage is doubly-unfair because the quicker an owner makes his picks, the less likely he is to receive this advantage; basically, the worst (or, at the very least, least diligent) owners gain an advantage over the best (or most diligent).

Despite being unfair, I've always thought this was a fun little quirk of the slow draft. Usually these bits of news wind up being blurbs about 3rd string WRs moving up to the 2nd string, or guys forcing an RBBC. In over a decade of running slow drafts, the biggest case of a piece of news breaking and everyone scrambling to draft the player was... Mike Bell in 2006. Very rarely does one of these advantages wind up proving consequential when it comes to determining the competitive balance of the league. But the Josh Gordon situation has the potential to be just that; if Gordon's appeal gets overturned, it's very possible that some guy who is sitting on the clock in the 11th round is going to get himself a proven top-5 wide receiver for free, just because he was dragging his feet and taking forever to pick.

Is anyone else running any slow drafts right now? If so, what are you doing to combat this effect? I've personally told my league that they are free to draft Gordon before the results of his appeal are announced, but the second the announcement is made Gordon becomes undraftable and cannot be rostered through the first four weeks of the season. After four weeks, the worst team in the league will have the choice to add Gordon if they want. I think it solves the capriciousness problem (and makes sure that owners aren't feeling incentivized to drag their feet a bit until the ruling is handed down). Anyone else have any better ideas?

Breaking news is to always to the advantage of whoever is on the clock when the news breaks, whether it is a slow draft or a faster draft. I don't think an exception should be made for specific players - and if the prospect of losing a shot at Gordon bothers someone that much, then IMO they should roll-the-dice and grab him before the league hands down the ruling on the suspension appeal.

 

[Bamac]

Shifting gears a bit...

I'm a big fan of slow drafts, but they always create situations where new information comes out when someone is on the clock and that person has an unfair advantage in that he is the first who gets to act upon that information. The advantage is doubly-unfair because the quicker an owner makes his picks, the less likely he is to receive this advantage; basically, the worst (or, at the very least, least diligent) owners gain an advantage over the best (or most diligent).

Despite being unfair, I've always thought this was a fun little quirk of the slow draft. Usually these bits of news wind up being blurbs about 3rd string WRs moving up to the 2nd string, or guys forcing an RBBC. In over a decade of running slow drafts, the biggest case of a piece of news breaking and everyone scrambling to draft the player was... Mike Bell in 2006. Very rarely does one of these advantages wind up proving consequential when it comes to determining the competitive balance of the league. But the Josh Gordon situation has the potential to be just that; if Gordon's appeal gets overturned, it's very possible that some guy who is sitting on the clock in the 11th round is going to get himself a proven top-5 wide receiver for free, just because he was dragging his feet and taking forever to pick.

Is anyone else running any slow drafts right now? If so, what are you doing to combat this effect? I've personally told my league that they are free to draft Gordon before the results of his appeal are announced, but the second the announcement is made Gordon becomes undraftable and cannot be rostered through the first four weeks of the season. After four weeks, the worst team in the league will have the choice to add Gordon if they want. I think it solves the capriciousness problem (and makes sure that owners aren't feeling incentivized to drag their feet a bit until the ruling is handed down). Anyone else have any better ideas?

Breaking news is to always to the advantage of whoever is on the clock when the news breaks, whether it is a slow draft or a faster draft. I don't think an exception should be made for specific players - and if the prospect of losing a shot at Gordon bothers someone that much, then IMO they should roll-the-dice and grab him before the league hands down the ruling on the suspension appeal.

The problem is that the league as a whole benefits if owners make timely draft picks, but individual owners have an incentive (stronger than the normal one) to pick at the last possible minute.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Redrafts are a different animal, although a slow redraft doesn't seem like a popular format to begin with, especially during pre-season.

Let it play out. And don't do slow drafts during preseason unless it is a dynasty league maybe.

We wont take hear news for two weeks anyway

Slow redrafts are a poor format if all you care about is maximizing competitive balance, but they're my favorite format if all you care about is maximizing fun. I've run at least one slow redraft through preseason in every season for over a decade, and so far the most consequential "on the clock" piece of news to come out was when Denver announced Mike Bell would feature prominently in their RBBC with Tatum Bell. Basically, the late-breaking news adds a bit of fun, but rarely has any noticeable impact on competitive balance. The Josh Gordon situation is quite unique as it's the first instance I can remember where a specific piece of news has the ability to take a player from undrafted to a 1st/2nd round pick pretty much instantly.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Breaking news is to always to the advantage of whoever is on the clock when the news breaks, whether it is a slow draft or a faster draft. I don't think an exception should be made for specific players - and if the prospect of losing a shot at Gordon bothers someone that much, then IMO they should roll-the-dice and grab him before the league hands down the ruling on the suspension appeal.

In a live draft, though, the entire draft takes place in a 3-hour span, and each pick might only be on the clock for a minute or two. The odds of consequential news breaking during the draft is essentially zero (and even if it did, most owners would be too preoccupied with the draft to hear about it, anyway).

By slow draft, I'm talking about drafts that take several weeks or even a month to finish, where each pick has a 24-hour timer instead of a 90-second timer. In those drafts, it is an absolute certainty that news will be breaking throughout the entire draft, and everyone will have plenty of time to hear about it, analyze it, and integrate it into their rankings.

The idea that people should just roll the dice and grab him before the suspension is handed down is nice, but it misses the reality of the situation. If I think there's a 20% chance that Gordon will play, I will value him at one level (say, pick #100 overall). If I think there is a 100% chance that Gordon will play, I will value him at another level (say, pick #10 overall). If pick #50 is on the clock, it's way too early to draft Gordon based on our current understanding of the situation... but if that understanding changes, Gordon immediately shifts from a massive reach to a massive steal, and I reap the benefit just because by dumb luck I happened to be the schlub sitting on the clock (most likely because I was taking too long to pick). Not only is this random and arbitrary, it's also exceedingly unfair. If the guy who picked before me picked in 10 seconds, while I waited 10 hours, why should I be rewarded with a huge value in Josh Gordon while the other guy gets punished for his promptness? I've seen guys who were on the clock on days with preseason games deliberately sit around for 12 hours just in case someone got injured during the night games. It's legal, but if everyone took the full 24 hours to pick, slow drafts would never get done in time for the season kickoff. I don't want to incentivize owners taking as long as they possibly can to get their pick in, just in case.

Like I said, slow drafts are inherently unfair, and a little bit of unfairness is always tolerated (and often celebrated!) because the fun factor outweighs the minor impact it has on competitive balance. The Josh Gordon situation is fundamentally different, though, because we aren't looking at a minor impact on competitive balance. If Gordon wins his appeal, we're looking at a massive impact on competitive balance, on par with randomly handing one team an extra first round draft pick.

 

[Penguin]

If Gordon gets the year, is it possible the suspension start date is when it was told to Gordon, before any appeal process? So maybe it would be until may 2015?

If it's for a year I highly doubt it as he's been practicing with the team.

I found this in an ESPN article on Von Miller's suspension http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9828393/hot-read-von-miller-benefited-little-known-rule-suspensions

"Before 2004, suspended players weren't allowed anywhere near the stadium, the practice facility or, most especially, the sanctity of the team's locker room. But thanks to a little-known provision in the league's drug policy, players who have been suspended for less than a year for substance-abuse infractions are permitted to continue working closely with their teams. (The same does not apply to PED violators like Seahawks linebacker Bruce Irvin, who was banished from Seattle's facility during his four-game suspension to start this season.) Short of attending practice or games, players suspended for substance abuse can do everything that eligible players can. That includes lifting weights, watching film, receiving treatment, sitting in on team meetings -- and chilling in the locker room."

If it's less than a year then it sounds like it could possibly be negotiated as his earlier practices would be allowed.

 

[Adam Harstad]

If Gordon gets the year, is it possible the suspension start date is when it was told to Gordon, before any appeal process? So maybe it would be until may 2015?

My understanding is that the timer starts the minute his appeal is concluded and his suspension is handed down.

 

[Monsters of the Midway]

Shifting gears a bit...

I'm a big fan of slow drafts, but they always create situations where new information comes out when someone is on the clock and that person has an unfair advantage in that he is the first who gets to act upon that information. The advantage is doubly-unfair because the quicker an owner makes his picks, the less likely he is to receive this advantage; basically, the worst (or, at the very least, least diligent) owners gain an advantage over the best (or most diligent).

Despite being unfair, I've always thought this was a fun little quirk of the slow draft. Usually these bits of news wind up being blurbs about 3rd string WRs moving up to the 2nd string, or guys forcing an RBBC. In over a decade of running slow drafts, the biggest case of a piece of news breaking and everyone scrambling to draft the player was... Mike Bell in 2006. Very rarely does one of these advantages wind up proving consequential when it comes to determining the competitive balance of the league. But the Josh Gordon situation has the potential to be just that; if Gordon's appeal gets overturned, it's very possible that some guy who is sitting on the clock in the 11th round is going to get himself a proven top-5 wide receiver for free, just because he was dragging his feet and taking forever to pick.

Is anyone else running any slow drafts right now? If so, what are you doing to combat this effect? I've personally told my league that they are free to draft Gordon before the results of his appeal are announced, but the second the announcement is made Gordon becomes undraftable and cannot be rostered through the first four weeks of the season. After four weeks, the worst team in the league will have the choice to add Gordon if they want. I think it solves the capriciousness problem (and makes sure that owners aren't feeling incentivized to drag their feet a bit until the ruling is handed down). Anyone else have any better ideas?

I'm in the middle of a FantasyTaz Draftmaster slow draft, someone took Mark Ingram in the middle of is good game last night. Can't blame the guy as I was rustling around for him on my predraft list

 

[GregR]

By slow draft, I'm talking about drafts that take several weeks or even a month to finish, where each pick has a 24-hour timer instead of a 90-second timer. In those drafts, it is an absolute certainty that news will be breaking throughout the entire draft, and everyone will have plenty of time to hear about it, analyze it, and integrate it into their rankings.

I've seen a fair amount of conflict over the length of the slow draft timer in multiple leagues. In every situation it was a problem, it came down to 11 owners wanting the draft to move as quickly as possible and 1 owner milking his timer.

Because of those issues, the leagues I run that have slow drafts decrease the timer as the draft goes on, so there is less chance you miss the really important picks at the top. Like rounds 1-6 have a 4 hour timer, 7-10 have a 3 hour timer, 11-15 have a 2 hour timer, and 16-32 have a 1 hour timer, or something along those lines. A group of college students drafting together might feel different, but most people I play with have jobs and kids, and while they enjoy the draft, it's also a disruption of their lives that they don't want to run so long.

I think the information breaking angle is another good reason to keep the timers shorter. But, if a group wants 24 hours, more power to them. I'm kind of on the fence about your solution for Gordon though, having that kind of rule in place for just the one player, while other big impact breaking news doesn't have a similar rule cover it.

 

[Adam Harstad]

By slow draft, I'm talking about drafts that take several weeks or even a month to finish, where each pick has a 24-hour timer instead of a 90-second timer. In those drafts, it is an absolute certainty that news will be breaking throughout the entire draft, and everyone will have plenty of time to hear about it, analyze it, and integrate it into their rankings.

I've seen a fair amount of conflict over the length of the slow draft timer in multiple leagues. In every situation it was a problem, it came down to 11 owners wanting the draft to move as quickly as possible and 1 owner milking his timer.

Because of those issues, the leagues I run that have slow drafts decrease the timer as the draft goes on, so there is less chance you miss the really important picks at the top. Like rounds 1-6 have a 4 hour timer, 7-10 have a 3 hour timer, 11-15 have a 2 hour timer, and 16-32 have a 1 hour timer, or something along those lines. A group of college students drafting together might feel different, but most people I play with have jobs and kids, and while they enjoy the draft, it's also a disruption of their lives that they don't want to run so long.

I think the information breaking angle is another good reason to keep the timers shorter. But, if a group wants 24 hours, more power to them. I'm kind of on the fence about your solution for Gordon though, having that kind of rule in place for just the one player, while other big impact breaking news doesn't have a similar rule cover it.

The first part essentially boils down to "different strokes for different folks". I love slow, leisurely drafts that take up an entire month. The draft is the most fun part of the entire season, in my opinion, and I love drawing it out and savoring it. I also like the promise of a 24-hour timer- it says that if you check in every day at the same time, you will not miss anything. Even a 12-hour timer carries with it a certain promise. If you're drafting on a 12-hour timer and you check in every morning before work and every evening after dinner, you're not going to miss anything regardless of what happens. With a 1-hour timer or a 2-hour timer, it's possible that I go out to a movie when my pick is nowhere near, everyone else makes their picks in a hurry, and I get skipped without realizing it. The only way to guarantee you're not going to get skipped with a 2-hour timer is to guarantee you have computer access every two hours at a minimum (or making heavy use of pre-drafting, which kind of defeats the purpose of a slow draft in my mind- the purpose is to have the time to consider every decision with the best information available at the time).

I get that there's a bit of time pressure in that you need to get everything done prior to the season kickoff (which won't happen if everyone milks their full 24-hour clock), but beyond that one time limitation, I like drafts that meander around. I like drafts that I can analyze and savor for weeks or a month or sometimes even longer. They're not for everyone, but they are definitely for me.

The biggest argument for treating Josh Gordon differently than everyone else is because we know about Josh Gordon in advance. Everyone else is a comparable risk- some players might get injured in preseason, but without foreknowledge we have to assume that every player is an equal (or, at the very least, comparable) risk for that injury. If you told me that on August 15th, there's an 80% chance Jamaal Charles would tear his ACL and a 20% chance that he wouldn't, I'd make similar exceptions for Jamaal Charles. Josh Gordon is a fundamentally different class of asset than everyone else, one where we know in advance that there's a certain percent chance he's going to carry 1st/2nd round redraft value, and a certain percent chance he's going to carry no value whatsoever, and it is beyond our ability to know in advance which way it will wind up going. Basically, he's Schroedinger's Cat, and all I'm doing is attempting to institute a blanket "no peeking" policy.

I'm not sure my method is the best way to address this particular issue, but I'm quite sure that this issue needs to be addressed in advance for slow redraft leagues, because the potential (and entirely foreseeable) impact has the ability to seismically shift the competitive balance of the league.

 

[BoltNlava]

By slow draft, I'm talking about drafts that take several weeks or even a month to finish, where each pick has a 24-hour timer instead of a 90-second timer. In those drafts, it is an absolute certainty that news will be breaking throughout the entire draft, and everyone will have plenty of time to hear about it, analyze it, and integrate it into their rankings.

I've seen a fair amount of conflict over the length of the slow draft timer in multiple leagues. In every situation it was a problem, it came down to 11 owners wanting the draft to move as quickly as possible and 1 owner milking his timer.

Because of those issues, the leagues I run that have slow drafts decrease the timer as the draft goes on, so there is less chance you miss the really important picks at the top. Like rounds 1-6 have a 4 hour timer, 7-10 have a 3 hour timer, 11-15 have a 2 hour timer, and 16-32 have a 1 hour timer, or something along those lines. A group of college students drafting together might feel different, but most people I play with have jobs and kids, and while they enjoy the draft, it's also a disruption of their lives that they don't want to run so long.

I think the information breaking angle is another good reason to keep the timers shorter. But, if a group wants 24 hours, more power to them. I'm kind of on the fence about your solution for Gordon though, having that kind of rule in place for just the one player, while other big impact breaking news doesn't have a similar rule cover it.

The first part essentially boils down to "different strokes for different folks". I love slow, leisurely drafts that take up an entire month. The draft is the most fun part of the entire season, in my opinion, and I love drawing it out and savoring it. I also like the promise of a 24-hour timer- it says that if you check in every day at the same time, you will not miss anything. Even a 12-hour timer carries with it a certain promise. If you're drafting on a 12-hour timer and you check in every morning before work and every evening after dinner, you're not going to miss anything regardless of what happens. With a 1-hour timer or a 2-hour timer, it's possible that I go out to a movie when my pick is nowhere near, everyone else makes their picks in a hurry, and I get skipped without realizing it. The only way to guarantee you're not going to get skipped with a 2-hour timer is to guarantee you have computer access every two hours at a minimum (or making heavy use of pre-drafting, which kind of defeats the purpose of a slow draft in my mind- the purpose is to have the time to consider every decision with the best information available at the time).

I get that there's a bit of time pressure in that you need to get everything done prior to the season kickoff (which won't happen if everyone milks their full 24-hour clock), but beyond that one time limitation, I like drafts that meander around. I like drafts that I can analyze and savor for weeks or a month or sometimes even longer. They're not for everyone, but they are definitely for me.

The biggest argument for treating Josh Gordon differently than everyone else is because we know about Josh Gordon in advance. Everyone else is a comparable risk- some players might get injured in preseason, but without foreknowledge we have to assume that every player is an equal (or, at the very least, comparable) risk for that injury. If you told me that on August 15th, there's an 80% chance Jamaal Charles would tear his ACL and a 20% chance that he wouldn't, I'd make similar exceptions for Jamaal Charles. Josh Gordon is a fundamentally different class of asset than everyone else, one where we know in advance that there's a certain percent chance he's going to carry 1st/2nd round redraft value, and a certain percent chance he's going to carry no value whatsoever, and it is beyond our ability to know in advance which way it will wind up going. Basically, he's Schroedinger's Cat, and all I'm doing is attempting to institute a blanket "no peeking" policy.

I'm not sure my method is the best way to address this particular issue, but I'm quite sure that this issue needs to be addressed in advance for slow redraft leagues, because the potential (and entirely foreseeable) impact has the ability to seismically shift the competitive balance of the league.

This is as I feel except that MOST drafting in your leagues are not idiots and someone "blowing" a 1-5 pick is rare...after that it's a crap shoot anyway, Hell, it's all a crap shoot really. Why not let all who have activities in life join the fun? Sunday used to be a day when you could ignore everything except football and magic football but now? It is 7 day's week for most (hello dads) and they want to play too. Slow draft is the answer no matter how annoyed you get.

I think that the slow draft vs live draft is a subject deserving of it's own thread. There are arguments for both sides. Has been done before I'm sure, but in light of the JG situation it might be worth revisiting.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

 

[hammerva]

The more I see Gordon playing, the more I am getting bothered/worried about my decision not to keep him as a dynasty pick. Come on NFL make a decision.

 

[Gordang]

The more I see Gordon playing, the more I am getting bothered/worried about my decision not to keep him as a dynasty pick. Come on NFL make a decision.

not watching the game but he has 0 catches so far, what did he do to wow you ?

 

[Penguin]

The more I see Gordon playing, the more I am getting bothered/worried about my decision not to keep him as a dynasty pick. Come on NFL make a decision.

not watching the game but he has 0 catches so far, what did he do to wow you ?

I think he's referring to the fact that Gordon started, which takes away reps for the others.

 

[hammerva]

And that he has 2 or 3 catches now. And Hoyer is going to him in the end zone in this series

What "wows" me is that even with the questionable QB issues on the Browns he is a top 10 WR.

 

[KellysHeroes]

If Gordon gets the year, is it possible the suspension start date is when it was told to Gordon, before any appeal process? So maybe it would be until may 2015?

no, hes been allowed to be with the team during his appeal

 

[Ghost Rider]

By slow draft, I'm talking about drafts that take several weeks or even a month to finish, where each pick has a 24-hour timer instead of a 90-second timer. In those drafts, it is an absolute certainty that news will be breaking throughout the entire draft, and everyone will have plenty of time to hear about it, analyze it, and integrate it into their rankings.

I've seen a fair amount of conflict over the length of the slow draft timer in multiple leagues. In every situation it was a problem, it came down to 11 owners wanting the draft to move as quickly as possible and 1 owner milking his timer.

Because of those issues, the leagues I run that have slow drafts decrease the timer as the draft goes on, so there is less chance you miss the really important picks at the top. Like rounds 1-6 have a 4 hour timer, 7-10 have a 3 hour timer, 11-15 have a 2 hour timer, and 16-32 have a 1 hour timer, or something along those lines. A group of college students drafting together might feel different, but most people I play with have jobs and kids, and while they enjoy the draft, it's also a disruption of their lives that they don't want to run so long.

I think the information breaking angle is another good reason to keep the timers shorter. But, if a group wants 24 hours, more power to them. I'm kind of on the fence about your solution for Gordon though, having that kind of rule in place for just the one player, while other big impact breaking news doesn't have a similar rule cover it.

The first part essentially boils down to "different strokes for different folks". I love slow, leisurely drafts that take up an entire month. The draft is the most fun part of the entire season, in my opinion, and I love drawing it out and savoring it. I also like the promise of a 24-hour timer- it says that if you check in every day at the same time, you will not miss anything. Even a 12-hour timer carries with it a certain promise. If you're drafting on a 12-hour timer and you check in every morning before work and every evening after dinner, you're not going to miss anything regardless of what happens. With a 1-hour timer or a 2-hour timer, it's possible that I go out to a movie when my pick is nowhere near, everyone else makes their picks in a hurry, and I get skipped without realizing it. The only way to guarantee you're not going to get skipped with a 2-hour timer is to guarantee you have computer access every two hours at a minimum (or making heavy use of pre-drafting, which kind of defeats the purpose of a slow draft in my mind- the purpose is to have the time to consider every decision with the best information available at the time).

I get that there's a bit of time pressure in that you need to get everything done prior to the season kickoff (which won't happen if everyone milks their full 24-hour clock), but beyond that one time limitation, I like drafts that meander around. I like drafts that I can analyze and savor for weeks or a month or sometimes even longer. They're not for everyone, but they are definitely for me.

Personally, I am not always a fan of slow drafts, especially when people take their entire allotted time to make their picks. What is the point in taking a full 24, or even 8, hours to make a pick if you are already at your computer or on your phone and you know what player you want? Let's face it, you are picking one of 17+ players that will be on your fantasy football team; you aren't picking what kind of carpet you want in your house for the next 10 years. I always think to myself that these are the same people in regular drafts online who take the entire 90 seconds on their 1st round pick when they have the 1st pick. I mean, are you so unprepared that you have to think about it for that long? So yeah, generally, slow drafts are not for me, which is why I rarely do them. I do like slow auctions, as I like the strategy involved there, but slow drafts tend to be more tedious than anything IMO.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

The more I see Gordon playing, the more I am getting bothered/worried about my decision not to keep him as a dynasty pick. Come on NFL make a decision.

not watching the game but he has 0 catches so far, what did he do to wow you ?

maybe it was his drop of a perfectly thrown ball in the back of the end zone.

 

[ROYALWITCHEESE]

The more I see Gordon playing, the more I am getting bothered/worried about my decision not to keep him as a dynasty pick. Come on NFL make a decision.

not watching the game but he has 0 catches so far, what did he do to wow you ?

maybe it was his drop of a perfectly thrown ball in the back of the end zone.

Haha are we critiquing preseason drops now? First target of the season?

I thought he looked like his normal self out there. 2-32.

 

[Shawn]

Can we stop talking about slow drafts and start talking about Josh Gordon again?

 

[LittlePhatty]

Can we stop talking about slow drafts and start talking about Josh Gordon again?

We'll hear the suspension verdict this coming Friday. Mark it down. (Because my keeper selections are due Thursday)

 

[LawFitz]

I don't think the Browns would be playing Gordon with the 1's unless they thought there is a decent chance he'll get less than 16 games.

 

[Ditka Butkus]

I don't think the Browns would be playing Gordon with the 1's unless they thought there is a decent chance he'll get less than 16 games.

I don't know. When your other receivers would be considered a #4 receiver on any other team, I think his start is by default.

 

[cstu]

I don't think the Browns would be playing Gordon with the 1's unless they thought there is a decent chance he'll get less than 16 games.

I don't know. When your other receivers would be considered a #4 receiver on any other team, I think his start is by default.

If you're trying to get a judge to be lenient then you want to show off what a great player he'd be suspending.

 

[LawFitz]

I don't think the Browns would be playing Gordon with the 1's unless they thought there is a decent chance he'll get less than 16 games.

I don't know. When your other receivers would be considered a #4 receiver on any other team, I think his start is by default.

Reps with the starters are extremely valuable. Especially with a new crop of WRs, however good or bad they might be. Gordon starting and getting a good amount of PT spoke volumes to me about how the Browns perceive his chances for playing this year. They may be way off base in their assessment, but make no mistake, they are MUCH more informed and have A LOT more at stake than any of the armchair sleuths littering this thread.

 

[rct]

I don't think the Browns would be playing Gordon with the 1's unless they thought there is a decent chance he'll get less than 16 games.

I don't know. When your other receivers would be considered a #4 receiver on any other team, I think his start is by default.

Reps with the starters are extremely valuable. Especially with a new crop of WRs, however good or bad they might be. Gordon starting and getting a good amount of PT spoke volumes to me about how the Browns perceive his chances for playing this year. They may be way off base in their assessment, but make no mistake, they are MUCH more informed and have A LOT more at stake than any of the armchair sleuths littering this thread.

Yes they have a lot more at stake and may be more informed but IMO that is not a very persuasive argument as there may be other factors influencing their decision making: Perhaps they are hedging their bets so Gordon is prepared to start the season Week 1 if the suspension is completely overturned. Or if it is a partial suspension it won't take him as long to get up to speed. Or maybe this is another public vote of confidence that they still believe in him.

Just another opinion from an armchair sleuth littering this thread.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I don't think the Browns would be playing Gordon with the 1's unless they thought there is a decent chance he'll get less than 16 games.

I don't know. When your other receivers would be considered a #4 receiver on any other team, I think his start is by default.

Reps with the starters are extremely valuable. Especially with a new crop of WRs, however good or bad they might be. Gordon starting and getting a good amount of PT spoke volumes to me about how the Browns perceive his chances for playing this year. They may be way off base in their assessment, but make no mistake, they are MUCH more informed and have A LOT more at stake than any of the armchair sleuths littering this thread.

What other option do they have? If they don't play him and the suspension is overturned then he'd be missing out on valuable reps, as you put it.

I don't think they have any more or less information than the rest of us. I think they have to act like he's still available, because right now he is. Once they find out there's still plenty of preseason left either way.

 

[Sabertooth]

Hope we hear something this week.

 

[ghostguy123]

lol, people are critiquing Gordon's play yesterday. Jesus. I waste a lot of time on this site when I am bored, but I couldnt possibly be bored to enough to pick out guys like Gordon and talk about their play in week 1 of preseason.

Cmon son.

I think it is pretty clear that Gordon played yesterday because the team thinks there is a reasonable chance he plays this year. If they knew for sure he would be out, I would bet anything he wouldnt have played.

That really doesnt mean anything and is certainly not "telling" though.

It just means the team doesnt know, just like we dont know

 

[mvereb]

Hope we hear something this week.

If anything, we'll hear that the appeal is successful. Cleveland plays Washington on MNF next week. There's an ESPN report circulating that Manziel will start. ESPN will eat up the 'battle' between two Heisman trophy winning QBs squaring off in 'prime time' even though it's the pre-season.

Ultimately, the owners (and commissioner) will do whatever it takes to boost their bottom line. Giving Manziel a full deck to play with is good for business.

 

[Routilla]

8 weeks. Grabbing him as my WR4.

 

[Routilla]

That's just my hunch.

 

[Chaka]

Hey guys. Anything interesting happening in here?

 

[Ditka Butkus]

Hey guys. Anything interesting happening in here?

Apparently Gordon may get suspended for a year or not at all or somewhere in between.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

so if beats the suspension where do you grab him? Is he worth a first or second rd pick knowing his history of screwing up?

 

[mvereb]

so if beats the suspension where do you grab him? Is he worth a first or second rd pick knowing his history of screwing up?

If he wins his appeal, he's probably WR #8 for me behind Demaryius, Calvin, Dez Bryant, AJ Green, Julio, Jordy, and Brandon Marshall. Somewhere in the early-to-mid 2nd round.