RotoGuru Basketball Leagues & Standings View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread Self-edit this thread Index of Forum Topics Baseball Forum   Baseball Leagues   Baseball Standings   Grand Slam Baseball Golf Forum Soccer Forum Football Forum   Football Leagues   Football Standings   Aussie Rules Basketball Forum   Basketball Leagues   Basketball Standings   Market Madness Hockey Forum   Hockey Leagues   Hockey Standings Auto Racing Forum General Fantasy Sports Politics Gaming and Entertainment Simulation Sports Horse Racing Computer Forum Developments Forum Standards Other Hoops Pages Support a Sponsor RotoGuru Store RotoGuru Hall of Fame Self-Edit GuruPatron Validation RotoGuru Blurbs     Sortable Stats     Player Lookup     Yesterday's Points     Sched-O-Matic     4 week NBA Sched     Assimilator     RSF's GuruPatron Player Info Old Message Forum Matt G's Gurupie Chat Room NBA News     Kafenatid.net     Inside Hoops     RealGM     RotoTimes     RotoWire     RotoWorld     Sporting News Scoreboards     NBA.com     ESPN     CBS Sportsline     Yahoo! Game sites:     TSN Hoops     Progressive Sports Challenge     Sandbox     Yahoo! Basketball 0 Subject: AAA#2 Discussion Xmas and beyond Posted by: WonderB - [419161513] Mon, Dec 10, 2007, 21:26 things are going to be OK for me as long as Outlaw keeps up the 20 and 6 with a block. . . . That was a joke. 1 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Thu, Dec 13, 2007, 08:28 Still a lot of good movement on the leaderboard night in and night out. Personally, it baffles me how my whole team can shoot great %'s one night and be absolutely horrendous the next. Still looking to deal boards and assists for most anything else. 2 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Fri, Dec 21, 2007, 06:08 I see Chucky is back, so today I face the difficult task of dropping another player, I will need to think about that, but will do it soon. 3 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Wed, Dec 26, 2007, 14:04 Looks like T.J. is going to be out for a while. http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Basketball/NBA/Toronto/2007/12/22/4737322-sun.html Any takers for Calderon? His assist numbers are very nice, not to mention his %s. His 8 cat rankings for per game averages are top 50 for season, month, and week, and his rankings for TOTALS, including all the games T.J. has played in, are TOP 40 for season, last month, and last week. I'm sure some of you could use what he brings, which is pretty strong numbers across the board - but not blocks of course. If T.J. is out - and there is no timetable for his return in Toronto - Calderon's numbers could get ridiculous over the course of the season. I would probably be looking for strong steals and 3's in exchange, without terrible %'s. It would be tough, if not impossible to match Calderon's %s, but I don't want to get hurt too badly there. Boards I couldn't care less about and points are good but not a must. Likewise blocks are good but not a must. Just throwing him out there. I'd also consider a nice Calderon/Bynum 2 for 2 package deal if I could not lose too badly on Blocks and would pick up steals, and 3's esp. and probably would need good FT% to make that deal work. I might consider a single player for that package if they were top quality and had what I'm looking for. I can give Calderon's assists and Bynum's boards. Actually Odom is a good player for me to deal as well because he is strong on boards and assists for a big, both of which I have a surplus of at the moment. He appears to be turning his season around as of late, by the way. The main drawback with him is FT%, as FG% is pretty solid. Scoring is going to improve for him, they say, and boards appear to be very solid now. I hope all are having good holidays. 4 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sun, Dec 30, 2007, 11:10 DOUG as far as i can tell you don't have anyone IS eligible anymore. whether it was cassel or diogu on your IS they have both played. please slim down your roster. more importantly, stop playing whomever you intend to drop. email sent a couple days ago as well. 5 Slowhand       SuperDude       ID: 056744223       Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 17:38 I need a ruling on Tmac...Yahoo and Rotoworld say he may be out for up to 3 weeks but is only listed as day to day. Is he eligible for IS ? 6 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Mon, Dec 31, 2007, 18:53 this is the grey area that is always tough to take. last game played was dec 23. missed 2 games since. may miss 3rd tonight. my thinking/question is - would the rockets have put him on their injured list and on it for the 10 day minimum.(the old system we are trying to emulate.) lets see what happens tonight(game starting in a few mins as i write) and/if there is any more news after the game. 7 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Tue, Jan 01, 2008, 06:53 Although listed as "day-to-day" and out Monday against the Warriors, McGrady said his time away to rehabilitate a sore left knee likely will be measured in weeks rather than days, the Houston Chronicle reports. McGrady said Sunday he was told after his exam early last week that he could miss as much as three weeks because of a "deep bone bruise." He doubts he will play Wednesday against the Celtics or Friday against the Magic. "I'm the same," McGrady said. "They told me three weeks. I don't have a timetable. I can't do anything about it. It's not tendinitis. It's a deep bone bruise. I'm just doing therapy every day. I lost the strength in my leg. I'll see how I feel toward the end of the week, but Boston, doubtful, Orlando, doubtful." If McGrady is out two more weeks, he could miss as many as seven additional games. Keep him on your bench until further notice. ROTOWIRE the Rockets were positioned to win their third straight game without Tracy McGrady, who's out indefinitely with a sore left knee. RECAP LAST NIGHT i think some of the right things are said. If you post it on the "RIHC Injury Slot (IS) Designations" i won't challege it myself. find as much helpfull evidence as you can and make your case. can't promiss what others will do. rule check for everyone. you can't insert players currently useing an IS in the hopes he will play that night. the IS must be cleared before said player can be activated. 8 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sat, Jan 05, 2008, 01:14 LOL, WonderB. Did you see what McCants did tonight? 9 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sat, Jan 05, 2008, 21:57 mccants is a tease. i finally got sick of him. i think i missed one of his best games of the season because i decided to sit him that game after a run of crap, what do you know he goes off. same thing this time. someone else is free to ride this coaster. 10 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sat, Jan 05, 2008, 23:08 i've seen a web site with a list of the number of remaining games for each team. can't seem to search it though. anyone have something like this. 11 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sun, Jan 06, 2008, 23:07 Ian, here's an alternative, if you have kids, esp. boys. Just tell them they have a new math homework assignment every night. Tell them you want them to learn their subtraction facts, esp. when taking away from 82. 12 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Mon, Jan 07, 2008, 00:49 hmm one girl. 9 months old. this is gonna take a while to train her. 13 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Mon, Jan 07, 2008, 01:01 there is interest in my dropped players. mason and mccants snagged with waiver moves. daniels came back making mason useless. foye sounds like he is almost back and his minutes will come at someones expence. i already mentioned i was tired of mccants inconsistency. i like to think i dump players for good reason. making me wonder here. 14 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Jan 07, 2008, 01:34 If only you wouldn't keep dropping these studs, you'd probably be in first about now. tee hee. One of my favorite things is seeing players I dropped that were picked up again dropped again after a week or so. Every once in a while you realize you quit on someone too soon or something changes in their situation and someone else catches it before you do- but since we don't play this game 24/7 I guess that's bound to happen when there are 11 other birds out there hunting for worms.... Then again, maybe someone really needs a cat and your ex-player shines there, so to them, they're worth a play. And....maybe someone just had someone even worse on their team! Feel better now? ! :-) 15 xpdurmind       ID: 2410323020       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 03:37 Hey PR, You are going to have to let me in on your secret. I mean how can you get WB to accept you trades? You need to teach a class on selling. I mean he wanted Crawford or Mo Will for Nazr from me, yet he gave you Battier for who again? :) 16 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 07:14 Funny you should ask! I've been touting assists and rebounds for sale for weeks, resulting in a grand total of ZERO offers. I was starting to wonder if I had the plague or something. Seems people are either too busy to put in time to evaluate trades or are just hesitant to make changes. Rebounds are a very close race with many teams within less of a tenth of a rebound per game from those above and below them, yet no one seems interested in picking up a player like Lamar Odom who is finally over his shoulder injury and has per game averages in the top 40 in the past month and top 25 in the past week. He averaged 6.8 rebounds in November, and 10.6 in December, and so far is averaging 14 boards in 3 January games. Assists went from 1.6 to 3.0 to 4.5 over the same periods. Yet, all is quiet on the western front.... I guess I'm more willing to put in time looking at rosters to try to find trades that work for both teams when the managers show a willingness to pull the trigger on a deal they like. It wouldn't hurt my feelings a bit though if someone scanned my roster and made ME an offer! Actually on this deal - which Wonder B suggested, in fact - I had to debate whether I could afford to lose Carter's beefy steals for Battier's 3's, since now I will need steals even worse than before. I will say that WonderB did successfully fend off my bids for Billups. :-) I guess he feels a little badly for fleecing me on the Arenas deal, but not THAT badly! 17 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 07:46 i seem to remember you suggesting crawford. 18 xpdurmind       ID: 2410323020       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 10:17 #16 PR, LMAO... You're still selling! WB, I actually like this trade. Particularly, if Carter keeps the same rate of production. 19 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 12:18 well i have to hope that he keeps it up. his season avgs will do in a pinch. 20 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 17:49 thanks for nothing mr Atkins. 21 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 18:59 i assume there are no objections judging by the quietness. i'll run the trade through tonight when i get back. 22 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 21:35 So you say. Truth of the matter, XP, is when you've got a great product, it sells itself. For example... It may surprise some to know that the #6 player in the league in assists- both in averages and totals- is also shooting an impressive 51% from the floor on double digit scoring. He's also most of the way to a steal and a three a game. He does have his downsides, though, such as that he doesn't block shots, he gets a PG-like 3 boards a game, and perhaps worst of all, he shoots an abysmal 89.5% from the line! He's done this in 20 starts and 14 games as a sixth man. He has more assists and assists/game than the top assist man on 8 of our 12 teams. Oh well. I doubt that anyone out there could use a new #1 assists guy on their team. Calderon's only real competition for minutes has missed 18 of 35 games so far this season, and is currently out indefinitely, with no time table for even a return to practice, though he says he will return this season, though he admits he has considered retiring instead. He continues to visit specialists to better understand his condition and neck and arm injuries and seek the ever-elusive timetable for return, which he admits is out of his control. T.J. has missed a whole season due to his spinal condition which makes him susceptible to this type of injury. With Calderon playing the way he is and handling 40+ minutes a game as of late, there are no real reasons for the Raps to pressure T.J. to return before his body is ready. Even when/if T.J. does return, Calderon will continue to shoot his high percentages and be very productive, since his per minute production goes up in fewer minutes. He's still averaging about 7 dimes a game in which T.J. is playing. But while the cat's away, this mouse plays to the tune of nearly 10 dimes a game, which is Nash, Kidd, and Paul territory. Like I said....some players simply sell themselves. :-) Then again, with 2 steals and 3 trey's tonight, maybe I'll just keep him. Stomo.....if you get enough time to look at those players, you know where to find me. WonderB, go ahead, now that Carter's numbers are going to go through the roof. When did news about Atkins break? Talk about timing....next thing you know, Fisher will go down and Farmar's minutes will double. Good for you, congrats. Just stay healthy, Shane, that's all I ask. 23 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Wed, Jan 09, 2008, 22:08 i don't know about though the roof. as far as i could tell not much changed with or without atkins for carter. 25 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Thu, Jan 10, 2008, 18:54 If anything, it further solidifies his role - but he was doing a pretty good job of that on his own as of late. He seems like one of those upside guys that is actually starting to fill those shoes to an extent. He'll probably average 2 steals from here on out and I'll be cursing this trade. Yet better to have traded and lost, than never to have traded at all! 26 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sat, Jan 12, 2008, 05:11 i can't remember the last time battier scored double digits for me. let alone come close to a double double. Oh well carter acctually got a double double tonight so i'm not complaining. 27 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Sat, Jan 12, 2008, 06:45 I am aware K.Martin has been cleared to play, as soon as I see him play(which should be tonight) then I will drop someone, just need to make up my mind up who exactly. 28 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Sat, Jan 12, 2008, 06:46 K.Martin will stay on my bench tonight no matter, so can do it tomorrow. 29 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Jan 14, 2008, 00:36 Dang, DJ....after that first game back you are going to want him in your lineup ASAP 30 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Mon, Jan 14, 2008, 07:43 thats more like the battier that i knew. 31 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Mon, Jan 14, 2008, 17:25 29 Yes hes in already.:) Got me Kwame too today. Lets see what he brings without Bynum. 32 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Jan 14, 2008, 21:10 Hey, considering I just lost a total stud, I hope Kwame is a total dud. 33 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Jan 14, 2008, 21:12 #30 Turns out his Blocks are going to come in REAL handy at this point. Now I'm SO GLAD I didn't trade away Collison in some boards for 3's deal. Now, if only Odom can start blocking 2 shots a game i think I'll be fine. 34 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Mon, Jan 14, 2008, 23:49 i'm pretty sure this is the big chance kwame has been looking for. 35 weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Tue, Jan 15, 2008, 00:10 Kwame cant shoot FT's.....30% on the year. Whatever you get from blocks say goodbye to twice that from your FT% 36 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Tue, Jan 15, 2008, 06:04 anyway not sure if he will really play on my team, but none of you can get him now, heh. :) 37 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Tue, Jan 15, 2008, 08:22 yaa....welll.....i got boone...can't believe you guys missed that deal. 39 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Jan 15, 2008, 23:33 Another 7 cat line from Battier. THIS is what we're used to on Team Indy Dream. Get well soon, Andrew. Play lots of playstation. Easy on the Wii. 40 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Fri, Jan 18, 2008, 16:29 Out of town for a few days. Not sure what kind of internet access I'll have. Be home Monday night. 41 Slowhand       SuperDude       ID: 056744223       Sun, Jan 20, 2008, 00:47 Tmac played tonight so I dropped James Posey and am activating McGrady. I'm never drafting him again ( I had him last year too) but since I've got him this year I may as well play him...... 42 Tequila       ID: 47111456       Mon, Jan 21, 2008, 05:26 i was just considering that from the 15 players i drafted, just 9 are still on my team, 6 of them are already gone. I don't know what to think, but sure is something i should think about it for the next season. For example i drafted Scola so early ! 43 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Mon, Jan 21, 2008, 06:31 i have 10 original members plus 3 players traded for originals but... 2 of those haven't played a game for me. one, outlaw, i dumped and picked back up.h 44 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Jan 21, 2008, 22:58 Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing- about how my top 11 or 12 picks were pretty decent but after that it was pretty much a random stab in the dark. In fact, I had thought about completing my draft recap with this kind of update just for a mid-season retrospective on my draft as much as anything else. But since others are reflecting here, I'll go ahead and forgo the more detailed draft recap and summarize here. As of tonight, I still have the top 11 players I drafted and they've all been regular contributors. Bynum is now in an Injury Slot but before he went down was ranked like 24 overall on the season. #12 Brevin Knight was just a total mistake. Even when he was healthy he wasn't worth much, and went Cassell went down, he still wasn't worth much. #13 Jason Maxiell was a flier and a reasonable one, but I wasn't patient enough with him or he wasn't consistent enough. Right now he's on XPD's roster from the FA pool and I'd say he's been on a roster more than off one this season- just not on mine. His FT% is abhorrent. #14 J.R. Smith seemed like a good bet to become more consistent this year and shore up the 3-point cat but he went and got suspended and has basically been a one good game in four kind of player this season. Junk. #15 Wally World. I felt he would pay off if I was patient enough and sure enough, I wasn't. He's on Tequila's team now averaging double figures and over a 3 a game and shooting 84% FT's. Still no defense, but I knew that when I drafted him. It just took Seattle longer than I expected to take advantage of his skills. I gave up on him too soon. My mistake. In my defense of cutting a couple of these guys early, though, I've been pretty active on the pickups (well, I've had the most roster churn anyway) in looking for who's hot, and I was able to turn Anthony Carter into a nice FA pickup and eventually into a trade for Battier, who was drafted (8th round, no less), and Jordan Farmar into Gilbert Arenas, who may or may not come back depending on if you believe what he says in his blog or what he says to the papers. I remember from years past it seems like hanging onto my top 11 is unusual, as someone always seemed to dog out on me. This year, I definitely guessed right on Bynum, Kaman and Calderon, and Collison and Maggette and Jamison are working out relatively well also for where they were drafted. Nash has been a little subpar for overall rank as a #6 pick, but mostly because guys like like Chris Paul are having unbelievable years. I can't say I'm unhappy with him. He has me on top in assists and remains reliable. Iguodala seems to be coming on better as of late for a mid second rounder - and Melo has been up and down a bit but overall is playing about right. Should have taken Billups though. Odom is finally getting it very together after a slow start back from injury. Prince has been disappointing after a very nice November. Well, that's more than you ever wanted to know about my team, but it was fun to put it together. :-) I wouldn't mind reading your thoughts on your draft and team at this point. 45 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Tue, Jan 22, 2008, 08:18 I have 11 left, these 4 are gone... Frye(10): cant believe I wasted my 10th round pick on him. Sucky Atkins(11): even worse played one game for me Garbajosa(15): see previous 2 Millsap(13): thought he would see more PT, but Kirilenko decided against it. Still think hes gonna be very good. 46 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Tue, Jan 22, 2008, 08:20 and I am not happy with Ricky Davis either. Camby has been huge for me though, fingers crossed. 47 Slowhand       SuperDude       ID: 056744223       Tue, Jan 22, 2008, 22:38 ESPN is reporting Shaq is out for at least 2 weeks (I'll be surprised if he's back that soon) with inflammation in the hip. I've moved him to IS and picked up Blount. 49 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sat, Jan 26, 2008, 16:50 Needed a little roster tweak. 50 too cool for school       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sun, Jan 27, 2008, 21:32 Hey, look at me everybody, I'm so cool, I'm just letting you know how cool I really am. If only you could be as cool as me. 51 xpdurmind       ID: 2410323020       Tue, Jan 29, 2008, 00:44 So cool It's chilly in here... 52 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Wed, Jan 30, 2008, 01:39 brrrrr..... Dang XP, what a see-saw battle right now! We're next to each other in several cats and seems we're switching spots almost on a nightly basis. Amazing Stomo that you can be in the #4 spot and be so many games off the pace! If you ever catch up in games played, I think we better lookout. The really scary part is your percentages are not where you are making your points, so if you can get those moving in the right direction as your GP catches up, we could be in for a wild ride at the top of the standings. Weykool, give Diener a look if you are looking to pick up one of the awesome Pacers. He's getting nice run right now with Tinsley hobbled and he's even seeing more minutes than Marquis Daniels right now. Andre Owens is almost a non factor. Once Tinsley returns, Diener will return to a fantasy footnote. 53 Pacers Suck Balls       Leader       ID: 41750315       Wed, Jan 30, 2008, 01:56 What makes you think I want another Pacer on my team? I already have to hold my nose when I look at my team and see that Jermo pansy. You want me to add another one and make me throw up every time I need to set my roster? No thanks. 54 too cool for school       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Wed, Jan 30, 2008, 12:00 LOL so....what? What I said about the Clips wasn't true? If Sterling finally has his head out of his a**, then good for them. They have players - though they could use backcourt help. It's a leadership problem. 56 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Thu, Jan 31, 2008, 16:53 Dang, XP....quick on the draw there with Thorton. Playing to win, I see. 57 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Thu, Jan 31, 2008, 17:11 Very active league. 6 of 12 managers have logged into the league page today, and 4 of the remaining six have checked it within 3 days ago. The other two slackers...you know who you are!! :-) Funny how one is in fourth place, even with a huge games deficit. That was one strong draft. 58 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Sat, Feb 02, 2008, 12:01 I would like to hear from Aggy as to why he is making this trade. Not sure what the proceedures are. I'm not saying I am prosting the trade just yet as it might depend on Aggy's response. 59 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sat, Feb 02, 2008, 23:00 fisher has better FG%. hughes gets more steals. the rest of the numbers are pretty much the same on the season and the month. this does not look like a big difference maker in any peticular direction to me, unless there is some "potential" i don't know about. i was going to let it go though tomorrow. any reason i shouldn't? 60 Tree       ID: 3126222       Sat, Feb 02, 2008, 23:47 well, i mean, a manager called the trade into question and is waiting for a response from one of the owners involved. i think that's reason enough to not let it go through yet. 61 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sat, Feb 02, 2008, 23:48 I think the procedures basically are: 1. I make a killer trade 2. Everybody bitches 3. The trade goes through LMAO 62 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 00:09 The premise of teams making a trade is that it improves each of THEIR teams. When I see a trade that involves the 1st place team with the last place team my suspicions are raised. Pacers obviously knows what he is doing and it is assumed this trade improves his team. When I ask for a reason from Aggy as to why he is making this trade and he is not engaged enough to post a reason, I have to assume that he has no vested interest in improving his team. Without a decent reason from Aggy for this trade I feel compelled to call for a league vote and regester my vote to overturn this trade. 63 Tree       ID: 3126222       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 02:09 fisher has better FG%. hughes gets more steals. the rest of the numbers are pretty much the same on the season and the month. over the course of the season, Fisher's FG% is 120 points higher. hughes has *SIX* more steals. Fisher also: is 20 points higher in FT% has nearly double the amount of 3s has nearly 250 more points has nearly double the number of steals the numbers are hardly "pretty much the same"... even just for the month, Fisher *dominates* in most categories. and even in PR is joking in post #61, i think it's kind of an arrogant post. i'm with weykool. this trade raises red flags... 64 xpdurmind       ID: 2410323020       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 02:49 I third that sentiment.... 65 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 08:31 i'm looking at averages. we can hardly talk about totals when there is a difference of 13 games to fishers credit. when we talk along this line and consider the future, all we can refer to is who is more injury prone. the latest blurb " Larry Hughes had 10 points on 3-of-10 shooting and three rebounds in Saturday's win over the reeling Clippers. Those of you hoping for consistently improved play from Hughes will be consistently disappointed. He is shooting a ridiculous 35% from the field this season, and is a headache to own in most fantasy leagues. " says nothing about any lingering injuries and tells us what we already know. but for averages, when i first saw this trade it felt more like a non trade, the points, reb and asst looked similar with only small trade offs. sorted on yahoo by month avg, hughes beats fisher in reb, asst, stl and blk, each by only small amounts. fisher takes hughes in points, 3's and both %'s. the only large diferences to me are the %'s. fisher however only takes less than 10 FG/g and less than 3 FT/g, thus muting his real value in these cats compared to the real drivers of them that take 20 FG and 10 FT attempts /g. hughes does have a robust injury history, even this year but, that has only an implied effect on future numbers and is difficult to quantify. anyway that was the point i was trying to make in my earlyer post. i'm not meaning to defend the trade as thats not my job, i'm just trying to look objectively at the numbers. there are 3 people questioning the trade and would like to hear from aggy. i'll send him an email, let him give reason and we can vote. 66 Tequila       ID: 47111456       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 08:50 i completely agree with post #62 and #63. About Hughes : i drafted from the beginning, he was so bad in fg% and very very inconsintent that i dropped him after he came back from his injury. If you compare last week numbers for fisher and hughes they are pretty much the same but you have to consider that LBJ didn't play also and over a longer period of time fisher is more consistent. So basically i really don't know why Aggy thought hughes is going to improve his team.... To make things worse, hughes was available til jan 26, if he was so good why didn't everyone picked him up or why aggy didn't drop fisher for hughes last week ? No i think that a trade involving the first and the last of the ranking should have offered an advantage in some categories for Aggy and i'm not seeing it. 67 xpdurmind       ID: 2410323020       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 09:52 Will not be around, but if a vote does transpire, I vote against. 68 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 10:20 Can someone post the trade review rules as in how many votes are required to overturn a trade? 69 Tree       ID: 912339       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 10:46 i have similar issues for this trade as i did for the Farmar/Arenas deal (and i think i was right on that. despite playing 25 or so more games for Ian's team, Farmar's numbers are BARELY above Arenas', and he played only 8 games before his injury)... it's an unbalanced trade, it really doesn't help one of the teams at all, and it's not good for the league... 70 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 10:49 from the last vote we had, Trade review is set for Commissioner approval. After a trade is announced, managers have 24 hours to register an objection by either posting here or by sending me an email (or both). If at least 3 objections are received during that period, then all managers will be surveyed for a vote. 6 negative votes within the next 24 hours would be required to overturn a trade. If a vote is not required, the trade will be processed as soon after the initial 24 hour period as possible. If a vote is required, the trade will be processed (if not disapproved) as soon as possible after the voting period ends. If those 24 hour windows end late at night, it is possible that a trade may not be processed until the following morning. (I will do my best to be prompt, but I'm not staying up until 1am to process a trade.) this was posted from RIHC 2005-06 thread i will disallow the trade tonight as it will be automatically processed tomorrow morning. if the trade goes though i will move the players myself. 71 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 11:14 It takes 6 votes to overturn a trade? Assuming the two involved in the trade dont vote that means 60% need to vote no. Add to this that we probably wont get full participation in the vote it may take 75-100% to overturn the trade. This may work for RIHC where lack of participation usually isnt an issue, but it can be for the qualifying leagues. A public Yahoo league only requires 3 no votes to overturn a trade. 3 is probably too few but 6 seems a bit much. That being said I vote to overturn this trade. My guess is this trade offer was not made by Aggy and was probably accepted with a shug of the shoulders. I can see the thought process being: "I'm in lst place and have no chance to make a decent showing, what do I care about this trade"? 72 Tree       ID: 912339       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 11:44 i'm voting against as well, although still waiting for Aggy's response. so far, that's three against, and at least one other who has spoken out questioning it... 73 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 12:19 i thought about the '6 negative votes' number as well. everyone but two have checked their team in the last 3 days. the two that haven't are doug and stomo however i'm sure they are still active given their standing in the league. so i think we still have good participation and should stick to the current rule. what i was willing to let slide a little was the 24 hour rules but only enough to make sure everyone at least knows and has the chance to wheigh in. i have not emailed the whole group yet and was not going to untill we heard from aggy or untill a day had passed and we had to take the vote regaurdless. 74 Tree       ID: 912339       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 12:27 do they check their teams AND the boards? that's important. if they're not checking the boards, they're not seeing this discussion... 75 WonderB       ID: 419161513       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 12:30 that would be what the email is for that i've already said i would send. 76 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 13:29 I'd recommend emailing the group now since we are taking a vote, though once again I'm shocked there is a need for a vote. My post above that some are finding 'arrogant' was really tongue-in-cheek and meant in good fun, though there was also an element of feedback intended for those who continue to misunderstand, communicate cynicism, and misrepresent the facts. Evaulating Hughes on stats he's generated while missing games? Unbelievable. Some of you obviously do not understand the concept of 'upside' which clearly Hughes has. Just check his occasional breakout games to see what he is capable of. He's been out, that's why he was a FA, and frankly when he came back I was shocked to see him sitting there and snatched him immediately. A player like Aggy needs to take some calculated risks to have a chance to better his team. With Fisher, you know exactly what you are going to get. There's really no upside there. In fact, if anything, there's downside as Farmar continues to come on. It just shocks me that this low-level of a trade is enough for folks to get up in arms about. I'm not sure if I was Aggy, I'd read this board very often either, after all the negative Karma that was going around in here early in the season. XPD, I can see how you wouldn't like this trade since it ought to help me versus you, but voting to block it as if it represents an unbalanced, unfair trade with the potential for collusion? Sorry, that seems a huge stretch. I was happy when we got this done that finally I had made a trade that no one should feel a need to complain about, but unfortunately, that turned out to be wrong. 77 Tree       ID: 912339       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 14:06 what upside does Hughes have?!?!?! he's played 70+ games once in the past 5 years. his FG% has dropped every year over the last 5, to where he's shooting .350 now. his steals are not even anything spectacular. A player like Aggy needs to take some calculated risks to have a chance to better his team. no question. but trading for someone who hasn't been anything special for a few seasons now isn't a calculated risk. it's a moronic move. 78 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 18:10 Tree, are you seriously asking me to explain my comments in light of yours in post 63? You are shameless in your negative spin. First, looking at ranks makes no statistical sense whatsoever. And Fisher *dominates* categories? Are you kidding me? His assist total for a PG is anemic, and his boards are pretty weak as well. What I like about him are his %'s, and that's about it. If only he was more involved with the offense, he would be more valuable, but he's really not. With Gasol now in the mix, he may shoot the ball even less. Hughes is averaging 2 steals a game in January. And you say he doesn't help "that much?" What is his upside? Look at his contract and that will tip you to his upside. In his contract year he was a fantasy monster, and who knows when he could turn that on again. If you feel that I am getting the better of the trade, I would tend to agree with you. Obviously, otherwise why would I make this deal? However, to claim that this is somewhat "suspicious" and so imbalanced it warrants protests and votes to overturn is an affront to the game. Tree, when did you send me ONE serious trade offer all season? Is your idea of a fun fantasy season that everyone drafts their teams and then works the waiver wire all season with no trades? It seems to be, based on your attempt to bad mouth every trade you seem to feel slightly favors one team - typically mine. You can't seriously look at these lines over the last month or shorter and use reasonable arguments to show why this warrants protests and vetos. That's why you have to resort to grasping at straws, like comparing the stats Fisher was earning while Hughes was injured. Well, that's all I can figure anyway. Weykool, 3 anonymous veto votes to block any trade is a ridiculous anti-trade bias which helps set RIHC apart from the more pedestrian leagues. Seriously, XPD, if you want to win, then why don't you work the stats and other teams' needs to create your own trades, instead of trying to kill one I have worked on and successfully executed? Sorry guys, I just could not disagree more with the philosophy and supposed rationalization you are trying to use to put the kabosh on legitimate fantasy activity. That's what's "not good for the league." Now, enjoy the Patriots making history. Even though the Colts (my team) aren't winning, I don't need to spit in the Patriots' soup. 79 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 19:19 Tequila, I didn't mean to ignore your post. You ask some good and reasonable questions. I may have been wrong about the timeline on Hughes' injury. You obviously know more about him than me. I saw his stats jumping out at me, saw that he'd been out with an injury and figured that folks either missed he was back or that he's finally getting it together this year after not being worth a roster spot earlier. To clarify that using ranks makes no sense, I meant in isolation as in post 63 "he's 20 points higher in such and such". Obviously overall ranks do mean something. For example, click on the ranks for the 2 players to compare the trade, and you'll see that Hughes is definitely trending up while Fisher is trending down. Fisher wasn't even in the top 150 for per game averages the last week, and he's not hurt. Meanwhile Hughes was ranked in the 50's. Over the past month, Hughes is actually ranked 20 players higher *overall* than Fisher. I'm not saying I'd rather have Hughes. Obviously, I'd rather have Fisher. But to say that this trade warrants overturning - regardless of which teams are involved - (because of the obvious disparity) - I think the numbers clearly show there's not a lot of ground to stand on there. 80 tree on the treo       ID: 40842210       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 20:29 Tree, when did you send me ONE serious trade offer all season? so because I don't make you a trade offer I'm not allowes to speak up when I think a trade is bogus? 81 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 22:40 Weykool, 3 anonymous veto votes to block any trade is a ridiculous anti-trade bias which helps set RIHC apart from the more pedestrian leagues. Isnt that what I said? A public Yahoo league only requires 3 no votes to overturn a trade. 3 is probably too few but 6 seems a bit much. Perhaps I should not have used the word perhaps. I agree with your assesment on trades getting vetoed in those "pedestrian leagues". You also see trades in those leagues with managers who are no longer engaged in managing their teams and managers trying to take advantage of trades with those managers. Keep in mind I supported the trade you made for Arenas when it obviously was a trade that favored one team. I had made a better offer and it was rejected, but the manager was engaged and he made the decision. While I disagreed with his assesment I supported his right to make the trade. This situation is different. The other manager in this trade is barely engaged enough to put his players in the lineup and beyond that appears to have thrown in the towel. Trades with teams that have thrown in the towel should not be allowed to make trades....especially in a "Non-pedestrian" league like RIHC. This trade should not be allowed and you should try to make your lopsided trades with teams that are actively engaged. 83 Tree       ID: 8113322       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 23:41 First, looking at ranks makes no statistical sense whatsoever. i'd like to know what that means. i was talking strictly numbers, not rankings at all. i think something that really bothers me is just how defensive PR is about this deal. he's lashing out at people, saying some not particularly nice things, and generally being kind of a jerk about the whole deal. part of a league like this is that it is generally filled with some talented owners - and if more than one is calling a certain deal into question, it bears looking into, not name calling. and the accusations PR is making toward XP absolutely disgusts me. if he were the only one expressing concerns about the deal, there might be a tiny bit of merit to those accusations. but he's not, and i think those accusations are WAY out of line. 84 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 23:42 TRADE IS larry hughes(pacer's rule) traded for derek fisher(aggy). trade has been disallowed for the duration of the vote. if it goes through i will switch the players manually as soon as possible. emails have been sent to the league. i still hold hope that AGGY will state his case in the morning and/however everyone should vote reguardless monday afternoon and evening. if you can't vote late by all means post earlyer. i do hope to hear from everyone but will be forced to shut down the vote by tuesday late afternoon. this is as much leeway time that i think is fair to grant as effected teams will be able to still insert these players for any of tuesdays games. 85 xpd       ID: 2710372615       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 23:44 PR,   What is wrong with you bro?   #76 ``XPD, I can see how you wouldn't like this trade since it ought to help me versus you, but voting to block it as if it represents an unbalanced, unfair trade with the potential for collusion? Sorry, that seems a huge stretch.``   #78 ``Seriously, XPD, if you want to win, then why don't you work the stats and other teams' needs to create your own trades, instead of trying to kill one I have worked on and successfully executed?``   It was ok when I agreed with you and supported your past trades (I didn`t like them either, but they made sense!). I even ran interference when Weykool was yanking your chain, but when I disagree with you, you attack me? You call me out? I never said much except that I didn`t like this trade and that I`m voting against it.   I am exercising my right within the rules. I never accused you of collusion, but I`m accusing you of not telling us how old you really are.   FYI, I play this game to have fun and for the competition with you guys. I`m happy to finish in the top half. This is the only league I`m playing in this year.  I don`t play to win at all cost.  I`m not willing to spend hours crunching numbers and stats beyond the draft. It becomes more like work for me. And I am not willing to make such a trade. Give me a bleeping break! Have you looked at their stat averages? I don`t want to hear your BS about potential and trend and whatever sales word you like to use. What I would like to hear is Aggy`s take on this.     86 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Sun, Feb 03, 2008, 23:59 interesting blurb from steve alexander/rotoworld in his latest waiver wired column. Trade Veto? Mitch Kupchak should be thankful he doesn't play in your fantasy league, right? Someone in your league would have vetoed his trade for Pau Gasol. This is exactly why I hate "veto-happy" leagues. Yes, the Lakers gave up very little to get Gasol (although we won't know for sure until we find out who those first-round picks turn out to be 10 years from now). I get endless emails from guys asking if they should veto Rudy Gay for Carmelo Anthony. Why? I have no idea. Stop vetoing trades in your league. It does nothing but frustrate active owners, breed negativity and discourage guys from trying to make deals. Yes, rookies will be taken advantage of. Someone will probably come out on the better end of every deal, and someone might even win your league because they ripped someone off. But that's life. But you can't predict the future and injuries happen. And penalizing a good salesman for wheeling, dealing and ripping people off makes no sense to me. Unless it's collusion, or something stupid like, ahem, Kwame Brown for Pau Gasol (in a fantasy league), just let the trade go and see what happens. 87 Tree       ID: 8113322       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 00:14 that made no sense. he rambles on about not vetoing trades, then says to veto them if they're collusion or unfair. which is the whole point. 88 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 00:19 pretty sure he doesn't use the word 'unfair'. in fact he comes close to saying let the unfair trades go. it made sense to me. 89 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 00:25 Actually, XPD, you've been very cool this whole season, so that's why it surprised me that you would vote to prohibit this trade. What's up with me is I'm actually quite frustrated, because like you this is my only league, but unlike you, I am willing to put in the work to try to win, at least as long as I have a chance. It is unbelievably frustrating to work and find something that works, only to have other managers whine and gripe because I'm actually executing a trade that MAY help my team. But I could stomach a little grousing as simple trash talk if it wasn't converted into active attempts to block my efforts to improve my team. At some point, a player like me who is working to better his team and consistently finds people campaigning to block those trades is going to find that it's just not worth it to keep trying because working to win apparently is not appreciated by the other managers, but resented. Or at least that's the feeling I'm getting. I mean it's unbelievable to me that I am still hearing Tree or anyone say that the Farmar/Arenas trade was one-sided, when Arenas has come out already and said that he may shut it down for the season. I could conceivably get absolutely nothing for Farmar, who in total production is ranked in the top 100 on the season, the past month, and the past week. For averages, he's 111 on the season, 85 the past month. Divide by 12 and that's an 8th to 10th round pick to this point, and still some claim that he was worthless and no better than anyone on the waiver wire. I understand they are trying to save face but it gets old. Maybe Arenas will come back as he now says and continue to play like he did at the beginning of the season, or maybe worse, or maybe better. No one really knows, not even him. That's why no one can say the trade was inappropriate, because there's too much unknown and it involves a risk assessment on both sides. Yeah, if I was WonderB I probably would have taken Peja over Farmar, but you know what, I'm not WonderB. Just like you said, I disagreed with his assessment, but affirmed his right as a manager to make his own assessment. He obviously was hurting for games played and I completely understand him not wanting to take on Peja's awful injury history. Now on this trade, I don't know why Aggy hasn't posted a rationale yet, since it was asked for, but if he didn't make this trade in good faith, then I don't want it to go through either. That's not the kind of win I want. To tell you the truth, when I got the email that the trade had been accepted, I'm like "oh crap, what did I do. Hughes is probably going to be a top 70 player the rest of the way and in the top 10 in steals (he's top 16 per game right now) and I'll be kicking myself for this." Then I come on here and find that a few managers are accusing me of one-sided deals and basically being a shady manager and I'm sick of that. I've been a stand-up guy since I've been on these boards and I don't care to be accused of activity that is bad for the league when I feel I've been as positive a member of this league as anyone. Well apologies XPD if I am improperly called you out, but I don't get you here. You have every right to say you don't like the trade. You may even have a 'right' to vote against it. But I also believe you have a responsibility to exercise that right in a way that benefits the league, and voting to block minor trades made in good faith that may benefit your competition does not seem like you. It's inconsistent with what you said before. Now what's up with this piece about how old I am? That was totally lost on me. Have I looked at their stat averages? Are you serious? I have been posting about exactly those things and why this is not a one-sided deal, but no one will deal in specifics. I have played RIHC now for 3 or 4 years and that has ranged from AA to the main league. This year's experience has been a marked deviation from the typical decorum and sportsmanship that has characterized these leagues, from as early on as the draft, when gurupies who weren't even part of this league felt compelled to post on our thread a plea for some of us to show respect for our fellow managers. WonderB was right when he said he felt like he had to send children to their corners. It's unfortunate that behavior has persisted to some degree, with the name-calling continuing, with I believe "moronic" the latest insult of choice. Most unfortunate. 90 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 00:36 Interesting. I was working on this post while you were quoting Dr. A. and he seems to have said much better and much more succinctly exactly what I was trying to say. Tree you're saying his whole argument is internally inconsistent, but I think that's only because you can't seem to acknowledge his point. His example of a trade to veto is Kwame for Gasol, which is obviously ridiculously unfair. None of the trades you have tried to vote down in this league are even remotely in that category. Yet you persist. I think you just enjoy the debate and must not even mean what you are saying. If you are trying to be a rationale, positive contributor, go back and read your posts and read mine and try to come up with something coherent on why your sit on your hands approach and veto everyone else's deals that seem to have a slightly favorable side makes any sense whatsoever. You have not made one post of substance on these issues. Ok, that may be an exaggeration, but on the whole, you sidestep issues that are brought to your attention that demonstrate nonsense behavior, and persist in anything that remotely supports your position. I figure you're just in it for the sport of debate, but you know, why don't you exert your energies in a positive direction. I think it would make for a more enjoyable experience for all. 91 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 00:56 #81 Weykool I think I've addressed most of your comments already but I would add that if people feel Aggy has thrown in the towel on the season and is now seeking to sabotage the league, that is a separate issue that should be addressed. That would need to be resolved before this trade could go through, of course. I would say he has been less active on the boards than I would prefer, and obviously his season is not going to his liking, but I haven't seen anything he's done as indicating his team should be locked or remotely close to that. He's made 17 roster moves on the season already, including one just Saturday. Not responding to a request for a trade rationale within 24 hours is hardly a reason to draw conclusions, esp. the way he was pitbulled on these boards early in the season. I don't see anyone calling for Doug or Stomo to be locked or booted, but neither of them have logged into the league page in 2 weeks. Aggy was there Saturday trying to improve his roster. So why the implication that his participation should be restricted? You're right you did concede that three vetos was too few for a healthy league, but some calling for the trade veto rules to be revised mid-season b/c they might not be successful in their attempt to block a legitimate trade sounds like bad faith to me. 92 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 00:57 Tree, I totally missed post 83. Sorry about that. I'll check in on that in a minute. 93 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 01:13 So you're saying I'm being a 'jerk' an 'name-calling' compared to your use of the words 'moronic' and 'disgusting'? I explained my 'defensiveness' already above and it's more of just an exasperation with the amount of grief that is given over the trades that have been resulting from the work I've put into my team. Weykool and you have been on Aggy's case ever since the start of this league, and now Weykool is even calling for his trading privileges to be revoked when he's been more active on waiver wire transactions than either of you and only four less than the two of you combined. I have made twice as many roster moves as you and over four times as many as Weykool, yet you both act as if I'm somehow manipulating and exploiting others either ignorance or disregard for the league, and frankly, that's insulting both to me and to the other managers, one of whom is our commissioner and probably is thinking about now that he will never commish another league of this type again. That's a sad thing for an RIHC commish to feel, if he does, and does not speak well for the managers he has attempted to commish. I'm not quite sure how to turn things around at this point to a more positive tone, but I'd like to see us move in that direction. I think your part could be reducing the negativity and putting more work into making your team more successful as opposed to calling into question the motives and activities of other managers. 94 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 01:30 For my part, I'd also like to apologize for getting so torqued. Fantasy BB is not a life or death issue. Just trying to have some fun and seems like there are some killjoys out there. Actually, up until now, the thought of potentially offending someone with something I've posted on here has been so disconcerting that I have sent personal emails if I sensed that someone might be seriously mad or upset about anything. I guess this whole trade veto crap just sent me over the edge a bit, and for that I do apologize. I still couldn't disagree more, but there's no need to get personal about it. 95 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 04:16 I'm not quite sure how to turn things around at this point to a more positive tone, but I'd like to see us move in that direction. For me we can start with stopping all the false accusations and misquotes. I can understand your frustrations but resorting to reading into things that are not posted is frankly a little dishonest. but some calling for the trade veto rules to be revised mid-season b/c they might not be successful in their attempt to block a legitimate trade sounds like bad faith to me. Who called for the rules to be changed? I dont recall reading that. I would add that if people feel Aggy has thrown in the towel on the season and is now seeking to sabotage the league, As I was the one who suggested that perhaps he had "thrown in the towel" please explain where I said he was trying to sabotage the league. I never thought that nor tried to imply it. I don't see anyone calling for Doug or Stomo to be locked or booted, but neither of them have logged into the league page in 2 weeks. Aggy was there Saturday trying to improve his roster. So why the implication that his participation should be restricted? Where did I call for Aggy to be locked or booted? My point was very simple.....we should not be allowing trades IF that manager has "thrown in the towel". If aggy proposes a trade that is accepted and posts a reason when one is requested....I dont see the need to restrict his trading priveleges. Since when are the number of roster moves the indication at how active a person is? I check my roster and the waiver wire everyday. My top 12 picks are still on my team (Baron was traded).....am I now to be penalized because I drafted well? I commish another league and thus far I have made one waiver/FA pickup. I assure you I am quite active in that league as well. As I said I can understand your frustrations. It was not my intent to cause anyone any hard feelings. I called for a rational and didnt get one. When the commish said he was prepared to push the trade thru I called for a vote. Beyond that we need to stop reading into what people are posting. It is had enough to get your thoughts in written form and frustrating when people misquote what you intended to write. 96 Urmas       ID: 44411285       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 04:27 I checked Yahoo during the weekend but not RotoGuru boards. Looks like I missed a lot of fun. :-) Anyway. I will not vote against this trade. I'm 100% with what WonderB posted in #86. That, among other things, means I'm very unlikely to veto any trade unless one party involved is about to do something really stupid. I have no idea what that means, but I'm pretty sure I'll know it when I see it. However I would propose a little tweak in veto rule. By current rule if 50% of all managers vote against a trade it is vetoed. I propose lets make it so that if 50% managers not involved in the trade vote against, it's vetoed. That is 5 "no" votes and the trade is off. 97 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 05:41 So I go on holiday for 4 days, and nobody can say Im not an active member :)...And it seems I missed some (as in a Lot of) action in here. Would somebody be willing to update me? Is my vote still of any importance? 98 Tree       ID: 3612245       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 06:44 it's the attitude of PR that pisses me off... only to have other managers whine and gripe... thinking a trade isn't fair is not whining and griping. it's speaking our minds on something we see as potentially damaging to the league. I mean it's unbelievable to me that I am still hearing Tree or anyone say that the Farmar/Arenas trade was one-sided, when Arenas has come out already and said that he may shut it down for the season. i've not seen this anywhere. in fact, just the opposite. Arenas has set a date for his return...March 2, against the Hornets... Farmar, who in total production is ranked in the top 100 on the season, the past month, and the past week did you not say in an earlier post that rankings don't mean anything???? This year's experience has been a marked deviation from the typical decorum and sportsmanship that has characterized these leagues... i feel the same way. never have i seen the kind of whiny "why are you picking on me???" type of protestations because some managers questioned a trade. questioning a trade and asking for rationales is not something new. If you are trying to be a rationale, positive contributor, go back and read your posts and read mine and try to come up with something coherent on why your sit on your hands approach and veto everyone else's deals that seem to have a slightly favorable side makes any sense whatsoever. i check my team every day. i was on vacation in western canada for 10 days in december and january, and i set my line ups ahead of time just in case i didn't have access. i have NEVER abandoned a team, no matter where i was in the standings, so how DARE you accuse me of sitting on my hands. again however - how *I* manage my team in regards to the number of transactions i've made, and how you manage your team - are not related. but even if it did, i've made a reasonable number of moves in relation to the league - in fact, more moves than two of the teams in front of me in the standings. there have been a total of FIVE trades in this league - involving a total of SIX teams. which means half the teams in this league haven't made trades. so, tell me again, how my decision not to make a trade (so far) has anything to do with my decision to make my thoughts known on when i feel a trade is unjust. i'm still waiting for that response from you. in fact, you're using that as a reason why other managers shouldn't be protesting as well. so, please, explain why that is relevant in any way, shape, or form? I think your part could be reducing the negativity and putting more work into making your team more successful as opposed to calling into question the motives and activities of other managers. and i think you shouldn't tell me how to manage my f*cking team. that may be the single least constructive, and single most negative thing in this thread - that you have the audacity to call into question how i manage my team, simply because i'm protesting a trade - that is why i called your reaction disgusting, and i'll maintain that. most trades in most leagues go through. but, there are sometimes trades that bring out protests, and require some rationale from both owners. and then, once that happens, the vast majority of protests are dropped. there's nothing wrong with getting input from owners making a trade, and quite honestly, if you feel there is, maybe you shouldn't be playing fantasy sports. 99 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 09:41 Fisher/Hughes Trade by: jeffaggy8 (Aggy's Miracles) Feb 4 9:32am I am surprised this trade has gotten so much attention. Was it the best trade I have ever made, of course not.... I was trying to look for ways to kick start my team and Hughes has been playing a lot better lately and I was worried that Fisher might digress as the Lakers make more trades. After reflecing on it, I might not agree to the trade again, but I also have to take responsiblity for my actions. Honestly, I have never finished in last place in a league and I am doing my best to get towards the top half. this was posted by AGGY on our league page. 100 Aggy's Miracles       ID: 599443112       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 09:42 I just posted my rationale on Yahoo. I was checking my team over the weekend, however, as PR mentioned I do not check the Rotoguru Boards much, probably once a week. I love Fantasy BB, except I can say I do not enjoy this league with the mean spirited people here. I have absolutely not thrown in the towel and in fact, I am trying to get to the top half of the league. As I mentioned, this was risky, however, I feel I need to make some risky moves to move up considering the hole I have dug myself. I am not going to pick fights with anyone, but guys, get a life!! 101 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 10:09 please vote now and/or express any changes. i vote to allow the trade. this will not come as a surprise given my previeous posts. frankly i'm a little surprised this got so much attention. anyway i was going to write more but i'll save it untill after the vote. 102 tree on the treo       ID: 40842210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 10:20 I'm still against it, and probably more so after the blow off type of arrogant responses from the two owners in the league... 103 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 11:00 What does "get a life" mean? My wife tells me the same thing but she means I have no life because I like fantasy sports. Are you suggesting we all drop out of the league? With Aggy's post I am in a real dilema now. My normal feelings on trades could be summed up in post #86 by WonderB. That is my Normal take. That is why I defended the Arenas trade depsite the fact I didnt like it and thought it was and still is one sided. If Aggy is trying to improve his team I dont feel any of us should stand in the way. BUT...what are we to make of a statement like this? After reflecing on it, I might not agree to the trade again, but I also have to take responsiblity for my actions. In my book taking resposibilities for your actions means looking over your trades to make sure it is helping your team and not upsetting the competetiveness of the league. I am going to hold my nose and change my vote to approve. But I will ask Aggy in the future to excercise the due dilegence required when accepting any future trades. 104 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 11:33 My take: After reflecing on it, I might not agree to the trade again, but I also have to take responsiblity for my actions. Well I updated a little. Not gonna veto, but Aggy you might consider trying to make a move that in fact helps you. Hughes is pretty horrible in this format. And Aggy, No need to call out the whole league, I wasnt even part of this, and did know anything about this trade till some hours ago. And I do have a life. 105 Aggy's Miracles       ID: 599443112       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 16:01 DJ - Sorry, I was not calling out you, just a selected few. I do take these trades seriously, however, you need to take some chances.... After self analyzing it, the trade might have been risky, however, I do not make excuses. If you guys want to veto it, I am not going to stop you, however, I am willing to accept it. I am doing everything I can to make my team better and I feel confident I will move up in the standings. 106 Pacers Rule       ID: 347172821       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 17:15 Tree, no time to respond just yet - got to prepare a little league presentation - but I will try to muster up a response. Funny you find me arrogant. Actually, I enjoy a little healthy trash talk and that's what I've been up to try to spur on a little actual interaction between our managers, which makes the league much more fun. This obviously was not what I had in mind and I have already apologized for my tone which was not called for as XPD and Weykool have pointed out. I have yet to see anything remotely resembling any self-evaluation on your part or intention to move things in a more positive direction, which is unfortunate. Anyway, apologies again to all for any perceived arrogance. Obviously I complete agree with Dr. A's point of view on trades and I believe the trade veto system that Guru set up shows that he is of the same mindset, as some managers have pointed out how it would take 6 of 10 non-involved managers (in the trade) voting against to overturn it. Urmas- you're a good competitor and I have years of good experiences under my belt, but I can't say I agree with the suggestion that we change the rules mid-season. Already the rules have been bent to allow more time for less active managers to realize there is a vote going on (which I'm ok with, except that it delays the trade that obviously I feel should already be in the books). One exception to changing the rules mid-season I suppose is if there is a critical mass feeling a change is needed which is sensed by the commish and it is put to a vote and it is the will of the league. But I think in those cases, it must be examined very carefully to make sure that anyone negatively impacted by the decision is not penalized for strategy moves based on the previous/original rules. Ok, gotta go...dang too much time on this just now! 107 Slowhand       SuperDude       ID: 056744223       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 17:26 Sorry I missed this discussion but i've been sick the last couple of days..I'll respond to this debate the as I did to the earlier trade....not a trade I'd make but I can't veto it either. 108 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 22:34 Hey, race fans....we've got a three-way tie for the lead: XP, PR, & Tequila all knotted up at 68. 109 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Mon, Feb 04, 2008, 23:57 For me we can start with stopping all the false accusations and misquotes. I can understand your frustrations but resorting to reading into things that are not posted is frankly a little dishonest. Can you help me out here? For one, I'm a psychologist. I can't help but read into things. It's what I do ;-) If you're referring to me saying that you were calling for Aggy's trading privileges to be revoked.... As I was the one who suggested that perhaps he had "thrown in the towel" please explain where I said he was trying to sabotage the league. I never thought that nor tried to imply it. Ok, let's look at what else you said, right after that, Weykool, in post 81: The other manager in this trade is barely engaged enough to put his players in the lineup and beyond that appears to have thrown in the towel. Trades with teams that have thrown in the towel should not be allowed to make trades....especially in a "Non-pedestrian" league like RIHC. I think you can see where I reasonably concluded you were suggesting that Aggy's team be locked so he can't make trades. However, then from post 95 a subtle clarification: Where did I call for Aggy to be locked or booted? My point was very simple.....we should not be allowing trades IF that manager has "thrown in the towel". If aggy proposes a trade that is accepted and posts a reason when one is requested....I dont see the need to restrict his trading priveleges. Since you clarified your meaning here, I understand what you meant. Hopefully you can see that what you seemed to be suggesting that Aggy most likely did not care about the league and was willing to make trades willy nilly. Reread post 71. I won't quote the whole thing here, but in that post you suggest that Aggy no longer cares about the league and this is why he is making this trade. Who called for the rules to be changed? I dont recall reading that. Also re-read post 71. You describe our six vote requirement for overturning a trade as a bit much. If that isn't a suggestion for reconsidering our trade overturn guidelines, I don't know what is. In fact, Urmas picked up on it in post 96: However I would propose a little tweak in veto rule. By current rule if 50% of all managers vote against a trade it is vetoed. I propose lets make it so that if 50% managers not involved in the trade vote against, it's vetoed. That is 5 "no" votes and the trade is off. By the way, Urmas, if you think about it, the net effect of your suggestion would be your "no veto" vote turning into a net veto vote under our current rules, since your suggestion would require only 5 more "veto" votes to overturn the trade. Kind of weird for you to vote to allow this trade but then suggest that we should require less vetos to overturn it. Personally, I think Guru's 50% of the league guideline, which requires a majority of non-involved owners, is a good one. It prevents the capricious blocking of trades when there is not a clear sense of the need to overturn the trade. It' a beautiful standard. Weykool, help me out with this from post 81: This trade should not be allowed and you should try to make your lopsided trades with teams that are actively engaged. I mean is this a compliment or an insult? It felt like an insult and an insinuation that I was a sleazy or annoying fantasy player who is peppering people with one-sided trade proposals. Was this your intended meaning? Or are you more along the vein of XPD who chuckles in wonder at how, from his perspective, I am consistently getting the better of WonderB in two trades? He laughs later because I am "still selling." In other words, a little teasing but still a degree of respect and most of all, fun. Your remarks feel more disparaging, wouldn't you agree? Ultimately you seem to feel satisfied with Aggy's stated intentions and therefore have changed your vote. I certainly respect that. Obviously you think the trade still stinks but you can acknowledge it is a legitimate fantasy trade, even if you feel one side is getting the clear better of the deal. Obviously Aggy is rolling the dice here and you can acknowledge that. Weykool- I hope I've clarified where I was coming from on some of your posts and some of your questions re: my posts. No hard feelings on my end. 110 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 00:24 Tree, bottom line is I don't have the energy at the moment to go through all your posts and address all your questions/comments. You seem to feel no obligation to respond to substantive questions I've asked you about your conclusions or intentions. Why should I bust my can to do what you are not wiling to do? As far as waiting for your answer on why you don't have a right to question a trade when you are not making any- I don't question your right to question a trade that deserves to be questioned. However, you are not only questioning trades but are trying to block trades that have no business being blocked. Meanwhile, you have shown a lack of positive involvement here both on the boards and in terms of trading. If there is something to complain about, you are quick to speak your mind, but as far as friendly banter, you're pretty much not in the picture if you look through our threads. After the way you started out in this league on our boards, I would think you might be interested in changing how you are perceived by other managers by being involved in a positive way in ongoing chats/discussion. But obviously you have better things to do or don't really care what others think. That's my beef with you. Why not use your wit for enhancing the enjoyment of the league instead of breeding negativity with insults and trying to block trades? If you could begin to explain what post 63 even means, that might help. Fisher's FG% is 120 points higher. What does that mean exactly? Then you claim that Hughes has *SIX* more steals, but later claim that Fisher has "nearly double the number of steals." With regard to FT%, Aggy has clearly punted that category, so that cat really doesn't figure into his equation, though of course it figures into mine. This was one reason I targeted his team, as wanted to gain FT% and figured he would not mind losing it. Funny how I ended up trading him a player who shoots over 80% from the stripe. The small increment in FT% between Fisher and Hughes, esp. for as few FT's as Fisher takes is really not going to be a difference maker, I don't think. I suggest Odom and Bibby in my trade comments to further illustrate my point of seeking FT% from Aggy as a trade-off for other stats, such as rebounds and assists, which Odom has in spades. I did not seek him out for a trade offer because I figured he was tanking his season and might give me a gift. To say that it raises suspicions is really what pissed me off. There really was no call for that remark, from whomever made it. I already explained what I meant by quoting ranks in one post and saying they don't matter in another. If you can't read them for yourself and understand what I am saying, you are just proving my point that you are simply looking to stir the pot without contributing anything substantial to the dialogue. Well, I will say Tree that at times you have moments of lucidity and sportsmanship, such as in post 60, where you simply state your point without the negativity. If only that was your pattern. You say my attitude pisses you off, yet you don't see the way you communicate with other managers? you don't think that telling me to stop telling you how to manage your f*cking team doesn't show a poor attitude? I mean you are unreal in your self-ignorance if you think that on the whole you are contributing to this being a fun and positive league. Rather it is you who is arrogant about what should and should not happen in a fantasy league - including goading other managers into drafting faster than the agreed upon pace because of your personal time conflicts with the draft period, and doing so repeatedly. I mean you act like you are better than the rest of us and if only we had a clue about fantasy sports then we would think like you and stop being such idiots, or wait, was it morons? Come on Tree, wake up and smell the coffee. 111 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 00:35 Tree, re: Arenas- from the Rotoworld Daily Dose on January 11: Gilbert Arenas blogged Thursday that if he's not back by March, he'll "see you next season." I have been telling those of you who email me about Arenas to dump him because he's going to be so cautious with the knee even if he returns. Of course, everyone else on the Wizards is convinced he's going to come back and finish the year, but I just don't see much point in hanging onto him. Just my opinion. I read about this at the time in a Washington Newspaper but don't feel like tracking it down at the moment. Read through the archives on Rotoworld for Arenas and you'll find an entry on about that date pertaining to this. Now Arenas is changing his tune and claiming he would like to target that game to return. Still, who knows whether it will happen or not, and who knows how he'll play. He has said he doesn't want to come back until he's "right" nor come back "limpy." He's a bigmouth. He says whatever he wants whenever he wants to. Only time will tell if he comes back or not, and if he does, at what level he will contribute. If he continues to jack up 20some shots at 40%, I may be looking to trade him to someone who doesn't care about that and just needs his scoring and 3's. 113 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 01:09 PR: Any psychologist should know that most of what we communicate in person is never spoken but conveyed thru non-verbal means. Since we cant see each other's non-verbal communications it is all the more important that we dont read into what people post. As for why I changed my vote is was not because of what Aggy wrote it was in spite of what he wrote. His response only confirmed in my mind the we were 100% right to call this trade into question. After self analyzing it, the trade might have been risky, however, I do not make excuses. If you guys want to veto it, I am not going to stop you, however, I am willing to accept it. That statement does not give me any assurance that he really analyzed the trade or put much thought into it. The clincher for me was his post on Yahoo that WonderB copied for us here: After reflecing on it, I might not agree to the trade again, but I also have to take responsiblity for my actions. Let me give you a hypothitical: My team is in last place. I decide to trade Chris Paul for Kwame Brown. You protest. And then in my defense I post this little GEM: After reflecing on it, I might not agree to the trade again, but I also have to take responsiblity for my actions. Do you see the problem? I made a bad trade. I'm already in last place so I got nowhere to go but further down. But I am "willing to live with it" at the expense of the league????? In the end I am not all that concerned about this particular trade, but I feel the groundwork for future trades has been laid. I have no problem with Aggy trying to improve his team. But any future trades need to actually improve his team and hopefully he will analyze them before he clicks that accept button. 114 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 01:42 Weykool, I can see your point that Aggy seems to have not put adequate thought into his trade. I don't know however how much of his comments are intended to save face since all seem to be telling him he has made a horrible mistake, which is a bit harsh. I certainly wouldn't want to "read into" his comments. If so, then perhaps he deserves some censure from the group if he made the trade lightly. However, a poor trade is certainly not the same as a bogus trade, which is what some seem to be concluding or suggesting. Well, at least, that is what some were originally questioning, and i think Aggy has satisfied those concerns. I can't say I "see the problem" when your comparison/analogy is trading a fantasy irrelevant player (Kwame) for the #1 overall player this year, CP3. To remotely compare that trade with this one just does not past muster. That was the exactly situation that Dr. A suggested should be vetoed and I would agree. No one in their right mind would do that deal you suggested in good faith, at least on the losing end of it. But Hughes/Fisher??? These players are not that dissimilar and each have strengths and weaknesses. I would think RIHC managers are allowed to make mistakes and trades based on those judgments without questioning whether an active manager has 'thrown in the towel.' I mean it's just a huge exaggeration, which has been my main point of contention with this whole scenario. The rationales provided as to why this is a lopsided trade or whatever were ridiculous exaggerations. I actually quoted statistical facts as opposed to Tree's phantom stats. And you're use of Kwame vs. Paul to illustrate your point of how this trade paves the way to that disastrous conclusion....sorry, I don't get it. It's one thing to make a little too hasty of a deal, if he did. It's completely another to trade a total stud for a total dud. That was what folks said about the Farmar/Arenas deal, but a very significant injury was involved which totally changed everything. 115 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 02:05 Ok, couldn't resist. Here you go. Arenas claims he'll shut it down if they're not in contention 116 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 05:53 My point was to compare Aggy's "rationale" using a rediculous trade to show how rediculous his rationale was. Basically saying "I may have made a mistake but I am willing to live with it" (par) doesnt do the memebers of the league much good. 117 Tree       ID: 4013455       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 06:54 However, you are not only questioning trades but are trying to block trades that have no business being blocked. YOU made the trade. of course you don't think it should be blocked. that's entirely subjective. Meanwhile, you have shown a lack of positive involvement here both on the boards and in terms of trading. that's absurd. i am very active on these boards. and again, this hasn't been a league heavy in trades. i'm not going to go back and double check again, but i'm pretty sure at least half the managers in this league haven't made a trade. i find it ridiculous you're being critical of me not trading, when this league simply hasn't been one heavy on trades in the first place. Fisher's FG% is 120 points higher. What does that mean exactly? that requires explanation? it means Fisher is shooting .470 or whatever, and Hughes is shooting .350. 120 points higher. has nearly double the number of steals typo. should have been assists. you don't think that telling me to stop telling you how to manage your f*cking team doesn't show a poor attitude? no, i don't. it's *my* team. you are not in charge of it. you run your team your way, i'll run my team my way. as long as the way i run my team doesn't affect the integrity of the league, why should it matter to do you how much or how little i trade in this league? I mean you act like you are better than the rest of us and if only we had a clue about fantasy sports then we would think like you and stop being such idiots, or wait, was it morons? Come on Tree, wake up and smell the coffee. um, no. you're the one posting how foolish it is that we protest your trade. i realize i tend to be a lightening rod for these sort of things because i do speak my mind, but i'll remind you there were several other owners with concerns about this trade. ead through the archives on Rotoworld for Arenas and you'll find an entry on about that date pertaining to this. Now Arenas is changing his tune and claiming he would like to target that game to return. that's my point. you were using news from a month ago, not a few days ago. things change day-to-day. I can see your point that Aggy seems to have not put adequate thought into his trade. and you still question why people question this trade???? 118 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 08:01 so we are agreed, to disagree i guess. everyone would do well to just state their oun case right in the beggining in a short, to the point, well thought out and self edited manner. we are voteing now so it is like campaining right outside the voting booth - illegal in canada. debate is fine but its degenerated into picking apart lines of text. 119 Tequila       ID: 47111456       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 09:14 I'm not voting against the trade. If Aggy is trying to improve his team it's okay with me, i thought this was not the case, also there were no rationales from him and honestly i thought he "threw the towel". It's up to him now to decide what to do with this trade. 120 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 09:20 larry hughes(Pacer's) goes to Aggy for derek fisher. veto tree XPD allow weykool DJ slowhand wonderb urmas pacer's (assumed) aggy (assumed) tequila agreed with post 62 and 63 calling for a vote but didn't acctually register one. there are not enough voters left to overturn. the trade goes though. 121 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 09:23 doh. tequila votes. 123 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 09:33 Thanks for bringing some closure to this process, WonderB, and handling it with patience and fairness. Tree, I realize Arenas' status changes day to day with what he says or how his rehab goes. That's what makes trying to block that deal ludicrous - because he may play or he may not play. There's no way to say, and it was a calculated risk taken by both managers. How you can not 'get' that I frankly have no clue. You seem to feel any trade that seems to favor one team is bad for the league or upsets the competitive balance of the league. No, my friend (well, maybe we'll get there one day) that IS the competitive balance of the league. If one manager is more skilled at getting the better of trades because he is better at selling high and buying low, or finding teams with natural statistical complements to make a trade that helps both teams while somehow snagging the player that most would prefer, THAT is fantasy basketball, imo. Some seem to feel that if you had a bad draft or had some bad injury breaks, you might as well suck it up and deal with your lot in life because we're going to block any trades you can work to gain some ground. As I have said, no one is going to trade Kwame for Gasol or Kwame for Chris Paul in this league. We all agree if it happened, it would be blocked and there would be scuttlebutt. That manager (who tried to trade the stud) would probably never play RIHC again. But low level players like Fisher and Hughes, or severely injured star players and whomever that manager can get for them when he is looking at his best offers and wants to make a trade NOW? I mean that's just senseless to try to block those trades. That's counter to the whole enterprise of what we're doing here in this league with trying to work trades and improve your team. In each case, all managers have explained that they were trying to improve their teams, even if you feel they may have messed up. Trying to block that is like trying to block fantasy basketball, imo. I don't see this rationale as arrogant on my part in the least. I just can't figure out how you don't see it. 124 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 10:34 not another trade.;) 125 deejay       Sustainer       ID: 501182710       Tue, Feb 05, 2008, 14:03 105 Fair enough. 126 Aggy's Miracles       ID: 599443112       Fri, Feb 08, 2008, 08:52 So much for me not caring, how about moving up 3 spots in the past 2-3 days. Larry Hughes has given us the edge!!! :) 127 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Fri, Feb 08, 2008, 09:14 So much for me not caring, how about moving up 3 spots in the past 2-3 days. Larry Hughes has given us the edge!!! :) Seriously Aggy here is the stat line from Hughes contribution to your team: .375 .500 0 13 4 1 1 0 Might I suggest in addition to looking at your trades before you accept you also think before you post? 128 Weykool       Leader       ID: 41750315       Fri, Feb 08, 2008, 09:22 Here is the stat line you lost from Fisher: .545 .500 4 17 3 3 0 0 Seems those who protested knew what they were talking about. 129 Tree       ID: 3533298       Fri, Feb 08, 2008, 10:26 at this point in his career, Hughes couldn't throw the ball in the ocean from a pier... 130 Aggy's Miracles       ID: 599443112       Fri, Feb 08, 2008, 10:38 You know what guys, you will just look for anyway to attack me... I'm not being literal, however, maybe both of you are not smart enough to figure it out. I was just joking that Hughes gave us inspiration.... Bottom line is I do care and the pickups I am making are paying off, hopefully to get at least to the middle of the pack. Weykool (aka wannabe fantasy genius) I remember you being a few leagues with me that you weren't exactly tearing it up either..... Since you guys want to give pot shots, there is one for you. 131 weykool       ID: 2842717       Fri, Feb 08, 2008, 11:36 Aggy this was a dead issue but for some reason you decided to keep it going. I freely admit that when it comes to baseball and football I may not be the best fantasy player. However, for hoops this is my second year for RIHC and so far so good. Last year I was 2nd in AA and hope to make a run at the top spot this year despite Jermo being a crybaby. I did find a RIBC league that we were in together where you really smoked me by finishing 5th to my 6th (out of 16 teams)by a monsterous half a point. Perhaps there was another league you were thinking of or perhaps you were thinking of someone else? 132 Tree       ID: 3533298       Fri, Feb 08, 2008, 11:59 You know what guys, you will just look for anyway to attack me... i attacked Larry Hughes, and not the owner who wanted to acquire him and his lackluster skills... 133 xpdurmind       ID: 2410323020       Sat, Feb 09, 2008, 16:20 PR, #89,apologie accepted. You caught me on a bad day. You're a competitor and I respect that. As I had said in previous posts, I was on the other side and I know how it's like. I had a reason for objecting to that particular trade and it isn't only about stats. I didn't care to give my reason, or try to convince other managers to vote against the trade. The point is mute now. But hopefully we all learned something from all of this. 134 WonderB       Sustainer       ID: 241053812       Sun, Feb 10, 2008, 01:02 gettin long. new thread time,, 135 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Feb 12, 2008, 01:45 Aggy, sorry to hear about Hughes' line tonight .632 .923 4 40 6 3 2 0 Oh Well, at least Fisher came through for me with .125 1.000 0 6 3 2 1 0 That's +.507 FG%, Fisher's 4-4 FT's, plus an extra 8-9 FTs, +4 3's, +34 pts, +3 rbs, +1 ast, +1 stl. I guess Tree was right. Hughes clearly has no upside. 136 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Tue, Feb 12, 2008, 02:36 Oh, that's right, Hughes was only showing a gain in his stats because Lebron was out. Things that make you go hmmmm. 137 Tree       ID: 14136125       Tue, Feb 12, 2008, 06:43 LOL. do you really want to continue to beat that dead horse? a guy has his secpmd game over 30 points and just his FIFTH ALL SEASON OVER 20, and you act like he's the second coming of Michael Jordan??? he basically had the game of his career in that he pretty much couldn't miss when he threw the ball anywhere near the basket, and you're touting that as if he's suddenly some stud who's going to do that every night. he'll cool down, go back to 38 percent from the floor, 75 percent from the line, and 30 percent behind the arc. 138 Pacers Rule       ID: 46946127       Tue, Feb 12, 2008, 16:29 I know, I should have left it alone. But I simply couldn't resist. Fisher went off for 28 points when he should have been on my team - but wasn't - and now that Hughes is gone he goes off for 40. At least i put it on the old thread :-) 139 Pacers Rule       Sustainer       ID: 910311210       Fri, Mar 07, 2008, 23:28 Aggy, It appears that it was I who apparently failed to really think the Hughes - Fisher trade through. Since our trade, Hughes has presumably been all you hoped he would be, with averages ranking him 75th over the past month. I think Fisher has hit his wall or something, and is not even in the top 150 for averages the past month. In fact, I'm not even playing him anymore. I would suspect that this trade is one reason you have climbed up the rankings. While I leave myself open to Tree's "beating the dead horse" charge by pointing this out - I do think it is worth that risk just to further illustrate how misguided it was to attempt to block this trade in the first place - on the grounds that it was a one-sided rip-off in my favor, as well as a trade between the first place team and an owner in last - who was being questioned as to whether he had thrown in the towel on the season as a motivation for this one-sided trade. You have acquitted yourself well on both counts, Aggy. For the past month, Hughes is averaging 18 points, 1.5 threes, 4 boards, 3 assists, and a steal. %'s aren't stellar, but they're respectable (43% and 73%). This is exactly the kind of upside I'm sure you traded for, and while Fisher seemed like the safe play at the time - he's been fading into oblivion. Kudos. RotoGuru Basketball Leagues & Standings View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread Self-edit this thread Index of Forum Topics Baseball Forum   Baseball Leagues   Baseball Standings   Grand Slam Baseball Golf Forum Soccer Forum Football Forum   Football Leagues   Football Standings   Aussie Rules Basketball Forum   Basketball Leagues   Basketball Standings   Market Madness Hockey Forum   Hockey Leagues   Hockey Standings Auto Racing Forum General Fantasy Sports Politics Gaming and Entertainment Simulation Sports Horse Racing Computer Forum Developments Forum Standards Other Hoops Pages Support a Sponsor RotoGuru Store RotoGuru Hall of Fame Self-Edit GuruPatron Validation RotoGuru Blurbs     Sortable Stats     Player Lookup     Yesterday's Points     Sched-O-Matic     4 week NBA Sched     Assimilator     RSF's GuruPatron Player Info Old Message Forum Matt G's Gurupie Chat Room NBA News     Kafenatid.net     Inside Hoops     RealGM     RotoTimes     RotoWire     RotoWorld     Sporting News Scoreboards     NBA.com     ESPN     CBS Sportsline     Yahoo! Game sites:     TSN Hoops     Progressive Sports Challenge     Sandbox     Yahoo! Basketball Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?) Name: Email: Message: Click here to create and insert a link Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)

---

Viewing statistics for this thread
Period	# Views	# Users
Last hour	1	1
Last 24 hours	2	2
Last 7 days	3	3
Last 30 days	5	4
Since Mar 1, 2007	3106	843