What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

"Shares" of players (1 Viewer)

RushHour

Footballguy
We need an intervention....it's probably too late, the ship has sailed, but can people in dynasty leagues please stop referring to owning "shares" of players? "I picked up a few shares of [insert player]", "I sold a couple of shares the other day", "I got my first share of [insert player]". I just cringe every time I hear or see this, and it's become very often.

I know we like to buy low and sell high and some people even refer to having a dynasty "portfolio" (LOL - you're in too many leagues) and having too much "exposure" to certain players, necessitating the selling of some shares (again, maybe cut down your leagues), but doesn't this sound ridiculous to anyone else? You aren't actually playing the stock market here. Maybe I'm just getting old and grumpy (get off my lawn!). 

At first I didn't mind - sure, it sounded a bit silly, but whatever. I heard one or two people do this. Now EVERYONE does it to the point where it seems to be the accepted way to discuss players in a dynasty (or even redraft I suppose) context - not even just fantasy analysts, but ordinary joes on Twitter are talking about owning shares of players. 

Does this get on anyone else's nerves?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Considering that some celebs have actually tried monetizing their fame by selling stock-like shares of future earnings, it seems reasonable to me to view us as owning a “share” of a player’s production.

Certainly more respectful than talking about “owning” the actual player, which is usually the alternative.

 
I agree. It's terrible. You're in way too many leagues if you're referring to having "shares" of players. To each their own I guess, but I just don't even see the appeal of being in that many leagues. One of the guys on the FantasyPros podcast was talking about how he is in 100+ leagues. I'm not even sure how that is fun anymore or how you could feel accomplished winning anything at that point. You're going to win some just based on the odds at that point.

 
I don't like it because it sounds like work...and I use this hobby to get as far away from work as possible...

 
The stock market metaphor is actually pretty apt. When I explain dynasty fantasy football to people who don't know anything about it, sometimes that's what I start with.

 
I agree. It's terrible. You're in way too many leagues if you're referring to having "shares" of players. To each their own I guess, but I just don't even see the appeal of being in that many leagues. One of the guys on the FantasyPros podcast was talking about how he is in 100+ leagues. I'm not even sure how that is fun anymore or how you could feel accomplished winning anything at that point. You're going to win some just based on the odds at that point.
I'm in about 40 best ball leagues where I literally don't do anything after the draft. So there is no commitment. But I would still refer to players I own a lot of by how many shares I have. Or how few.

 
Considering that some celebs have actually tried monetizing their fame by selling stock-like shares of future earnings, it seems reasonable to me to view us as owning a “share” of a player’s production.

Certainly more respectful than talking about “owning” the actual player, which is usually the alternative.
That reminds me of Fantex a startup that allowed you to buy "shares" of professional athletes. I think the first, and maybe only, one to do it was Arian Foster.

Edit: Actually looks like Foster got hurt right before his IPO and next was part of it. But guys like Vernon Davis, Sanu, Kendall Wright and EJ Manuel were. http://amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2015/03/31/athlete-stock-exchange-fantex

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There was Small World sports that was similar to that. It was a salary cap game and the prices of players would increase as their value went up.
IIRC Small World Sports was the pick 3 (A QB, WR, and RB) that was purchased (and run into the ground) by Sporting News. Wall Street Sports might be the one you're thinking of...maybe?

 
I was never in more than 2 or 3 leagues prior to this year. Then I got addicted to the actual drafting and now have 5 BB teams in addition to my classic teams. So I am guilty of using the word. Doesn’t bother me in the least because I don’t know of a better way to phrase it - if you come up with a word that doesn’t piss you off I’ll use it. 

 
Agreed.  Highly tedious.  It's one of those things that sounds cool to people who need to sound cool, then catches on like wildfire.  
See, I don’t think it has anything to do with sounding cool. Like I said, it’s simply a way of reference. I always thought it made no sense to be in numerous leagues, and still do, but unfortunately I have become one of “them”. 

 
I was never in more than 2 or 3 leagues prior to this year. Then I got addicted to the actual drafting and now have 5 BB teams in addition to my classic teams. So I am guilty of using the word. Doesn’t bother me in the least because I don’t know of a better way to phrase it - if you come up with a word that doesn’t piss you off I’ll use it. 
What about something simple like "I own/have [insert player] in a few leagues" or "I just traded for [insert player] in one of my leagues"?

Clearly most people don't find this as irritating as I do - I was just curious. 

 
What about something simple like "I own/have [insert player] in a few leagues" or "I just traded for [insert player] in one of my leagues"?

Clearly most people don't find this as irritating as I do - I was just curious. 
That works for me. So “own” is better than shares? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What about something simple like "I own/have [insert player] in a few leagues" or "I just traded for [insert player] in one of my leagues"?

Clearly most people don't find this as irritating as I do - I was just curious. 
I haven't heard "shares" much but I agree it's pretty corny. Once you start doing dozens or hundreds of best ball drafts and DFS lineups, though, it becomes pointless to discuss it in the terms you're using.  I usually think of it in terms of % exposure, and I guess shares is coming from that same place - viewing a fantasy lineup as one part of a whole portfolio.

 
It's not nearly as bothersome as saying you "own" a player on one or more of your teams.

Feels yucky to say that IMO and I've started avoiding it, personally. I guess political correctness has gotten to me too.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That works for me. So “own” is better than shares? 


It's not nearly as bothersome as saying you "own" a player on one or more of your teams.

Feels yucky to say that IMO and I've started avoiding it, personally. I guess political correctness has gotten to me too.
Honestly, I think we started hearing “shares” type language right about the time some player went on a rant connecting fantasy football to slavery and condemning ESPN for “auctioning players” during a live draft.

So I suspect its sudden rise to prominence has less to do with people trying to sound cool, and more to do with professionals trying to avoid that sort of political controversy.

 
I don't see the issue. I don't think it is a politically correct thing, but I do prefer "shares" to "own."

What about something simple like "I own/have [insert player] in a few leagues" or "I just traded for [insert player] in one of my leagues"?
As for this, wtf? That's way too verbose compared to "I've got 3 shares." 

I guess some people aren't into brevity. 

----------------------

I genuinely don't think it is people trying to be cool or sound cool. It is just an easy way to discuss ownership status.

If we're going to talk about d-bags trying to be cool, I've got a few things off the top of my head we could start with:

  • flat brim caps
  • skinny legged pants
  • over the ear headphones, but particularly Beats
  • Apple fan bois
  • IPA beers
  • cars with matte paint jobs
 
I'd never really heard this before, though I have to admit it bothers me much less than "owner," which I hate, and I'm no PC smartypants or #### like that.  

 
Oh, I see FF Ninja already covered my point about ownership and PC and not being PC but still hating the idea of being "owner" of a fake football team.  

 
I don't see the issue. I don't think it is a politically correct thing, but I do prefer "shares" to "own."

As for this, wtf? That's way too verbose compared to "I've got 3 shares." 

I guess some people aren't into brevity. 

----------------------

I genuinely don't think it is people trying to be cool or sound cool. It is just an easy way to discuss ownership status.

If we're going to talk about d-bags trying to be cool, I've got a few things off the top of my head we could start with:

  • flat brim caps
  • skinny legged pants
  • over the ear headphones, but particularly Beats
  • Apple fan bois
  • IPA beers
  • cars with matte paint jobs
The two bolded items have their place at certain moods and times, IMO. The others I could definitely do without, too. 

 
The two bolded items have their place at certain moods and times, IMO. The others I could definitely do without, too. 
over the ear headphones are great for home use... but people walking around with them in public are just trying too hard, especially at the gym. 

I'll never wear skinny legged pants, though. Not because I can't pull them off, but because I've got dignity!

 
over the ear headphones are great for home use... but people walking around with them in public are just trying too hard, especially at the gym. 

I'll never wear skinny legged pants, though. Not because I can't pull them off, but because I've got dignity!
####, you seem rather sensible and I hoped you were going there with this thought in mind. OTE headphones -- especially those of the ATE variety -- are great in private. In public, they're a noise nuisance.

Today's skinny fit was yesterday's normal fit. Just keep that in mind. I'm trying to buy a dress shirt and have to get skinny fits, cuz my damn body is such a Polack's one that I have a seventeen neck and trim waist. Anyway, enough of that. 

Fitted Shirt

 
over the ear headphones are great for home use... but people walking around with them in public are just trying too hard, especially at the gym. 

I'll never wear skinny legged pants, though. Not because I can't pull them off, but because I've got dignity!
I've noticed people wearing brown shoes with a charcoal gray suit.  How dumb is that?   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Doesn't bother me. it's a concise way of saying how "all-in" you are on a player.  

"Share" is also co-operative.  I don't say I "Own" players ...  don't like that term. But a "share" of a player is being part of his success, like buying a stock. You both/all do well when that player or company does well. 

I think you have too much time on your hands and/or first-world problems if this is what you're complaining about online.  Good luck this season!

 
####, you seem rather sensible and I hoped you were going there with this thought in mind. OTE headphones -- especially those of the ATE variety -- are great in private. In public, they're a noise nuisance.

Today's skinny fit was yesterday's normal fit. Just keep that in mind. I'm trying to buy a dress shirt and have to get skinny fits, cuz my damn body is such a Polack's one that I have a seventeen neck and trim waist. Anyway, enough of that. 

Fitted Shirt
I love Spoon! And I also appreciated fitted dress shirts. I never understood non-fitted shirts. Like why do you want all that extra material around the waist? I'm not trying to wear a blouse. So maybe I'm a hypocrite in that I don't like extra material around my waist but I do like a little extra material around my ankle and calf. And finding a fitted dress shirt is difficult. I guess nobody works out anymore because shirts either seem to be made for people with a gut (baby boomers?) or people with no chest (millennials?). 

I've noticed people wearing brown shoes with a charcoal gray suit.  How dumb is that?   
Extremely.

 
My share percentages are easy....0%, 50%, and 100%.

2 leagues make it simple.  But I don't use the term.  Better for to say I own David Johnson in one league and Rob Gronkowski in both leagues.

 
I never understood non-fitted shirts. Like why do you want all that extra material around the waist? I'm not trying to wear a blouse. So maybe I'm a hypocrite in that I don't like extra material around my waist but I do like a little extra material around my ankle and calf.
I hate the blousy effect. It makes me look way more overweight than I am. 

As for the bolded part of the quote box, nah. You're no hypocrite. There's something weird about a male in extra skinny jeans vs. a slim-fit top. Must be something with evolutionary psychology that I can't nail down, but it seems that way.  

 
I'd never really heard this before, though I have to admit it bothers me much less than "owner," which I hate, and I'm no PC smartypants or #### like that.  
I prefer “manager” to “owner”. I manage a fantasy football team. 

I don’t see anything wrong with “shares” - it’s less being snobby about terninolgy and more a way to indicate how invested you are in a particular player. 

If guy gets hurt you have on several teams, it’s easier to convey “damn I have a lot of shares of that player, I hope he’s ok” than saying, “damn, I’ve got him in my two redrafts, a dynasty & a best ball, I hope he’s ok”.

Because no one cares about the details of the leagues you have that player in.

And apparently there is a PC issue here, even though a great many people of color also play FFB. 

Shaun King, a particularly volatile social justice guy was tweeting about how he’s outraged, simply  OUTRAGED by the concept of an “auction draft” - filled with righteous indignation and disgust that people were bidding on players “like a slave auction”.  :rolleyes:

Never mind there are white players too of course, and that it’s just an alternate to snake drafting.

i attempted to politely explain how the auction draft concept wasn’t akin to a slave auction, that geeks of all colors played FFB, and this it’s simply an alternate means of drafting, and he insta-blocked me on Twitter. no response, no defense of his ludicrous position. 

that said, “owner” sounds dumb to me not for any racial implication, but because it’s not accurate. We accumulate statistics from players by making decisions about draft & subsequently lineup. 

That’s managing.  :popcorn:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That’s managing.  :popcorn:
Word. That we're so indirectly involved leads me to use terminology like "I rostered him..." or "He's in my lineup today in roto." I can't even bridge my mental gap to "manager," though your mileage obviously varies in that particular aspect of this hobby.

I generally try to let people know that I know this hobby is not for everyone, but is one that my geekiness finds fun and fulfilling. 

 
Agreed.  Highly tedious.  It's one of those things that sounds cool to people who need to sound cool, then catches on like wildfire.  
This post is on fleek. Like, seriously lit. I appreciate you. 

Now if you’ll excuse me, imma get hella hyphy all up in this hizzy. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top