|
| Posted by: weykool
- Leader [41750315] Wed, Dec 31, 2008, 13:58
Things were very tight in TP 2.....77 points from last to first.
Still an opportunity for us to close the gap on the teams ahead of us.
We picked Soetal again from the latest waiver draft.
The current lineup is:
Senator Urine
Pica
Winston
Allhair Allstars
Heather
Gary Dotson
Soetal
Ender
Weykool
|
| | | 1 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Wed, Dec 31, 2008, 14:00
|
2 guys that need to be moved are Jefferson and Harris and I'm leaning towards moving Stuckey to avoid taking losses.
|
|
| | | 2 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Wed, Dec 31, 2008, 23:09
|
I was figuring trading Jefferson/Harris into Wade/???. I am a bit puzled as to which F to get. I'll have to recalculate how much money I have to spend, but It won't be a lot (3 mill?). Any thoughts?
|
|
| | | 3 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 10:54
|
I have Jeffries as my cheap GF, and a couple more starts at center and he'll be qualified for GFC. He could be a long term hold unless being traded. Also what about Diaw? Do you have money to get him?
It's total agony to see Camby go off both point and money wise. He's burnt me so many times before that it didn't hit me how good he could still be, especially now being the only legit inside presence for the Clippers. Oh well. It's obviously too late to get him now.
|
|
| | | 4 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 11:09
|
If I only do the 2 for 2 swap then I actually have significantly more $$$ available than I thought (it was late last night). It's more on the order of 7 mill. I'm digging through the sortibles right now.
That would involve my keeping Stuckey longer which could hurt $$$-wise. My trade situation almost necessitates it though. Either way I need to take that swap into account, but will likely move him to Duhon as that is a better option than any of the similarly priced F.
|
|
| | | 5 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 11:18
|
I suppose holding Stuckey through the 1 in 4 is an option as well.
|
|
| | | 6 | Senator Urine
ID: 011502111
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 11:26
|
I really think Stuckey is holdable. He should start gaining again on 1/6. And who knows, with Mbah completely failing and Hawes day-to-day / horrible, some people who get out tomorrow may end up going right back. I remember it happened with Biedrins a couple years back, everyone was predicting this massive sell-off and his price actually went up.
I'm planning on holding him until 1/18.
|
|
| | | 7 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 11:33
|
I am really not impressed by the $7,240 and under F or C selection. Blecch! I guess I'll have to go short term there and move whoever I pick up next with next weeks trades.
I already have Granger, Jamison, and Blatche as my other F.
|
|
| | | 8 | Fairplay
ID: 331163022
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 15:38
|
Why not consider David Lee @ 5.61? He's played very well recently, has a nice long schedule and also can be used as either a forward or center?
|
|
| | | 9 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 18:16
|
Because I have him at C :) Howard is other C. Thanks though.
|
|
| | | 11 | Fairplay
ID: 331163022
Thu, Jan 01, 2009, 23:37
|
9
LOL...No problem. How about taking a shot at Troy Murphy then? Or even Bogut?
|
|
| | | 12 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 00:16
|
Murphy did catch my eye. I'm a Pacer's homer anyway so maybe that's the ticket.
|
|
| | | 13 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 07:21
|
Really unsure about Stuckey... would love to hold the trade, but my RV has been very stagnant for about 2 weeks...
|
|
| | | 15 | Senator Urine
ID: 011502111
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 10:23
|
My guards are going to be set for awhile in Paul, Wade, Stuckey, and (tomorrow) probably Duhon.
So if I were to sell Blatche today, I'd have to take on a sub 1.7 million forward or center, none of whom I'm too thrilled about. Plus there are going to be a lot of options coming up and I'd hate to take up a valuable roster slot. So I'm thinking hold Blatche today and sadly absorb the hit, and then tomorrow once I free up the money from Harris to Duhon move him into Millsap.
|
|
| | | 16 | allhair allstars
Sustainer
ID: 50902421
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 10:33
|
I agree there are not any good looking options out of Blatche with Blatche money - we're in similar situations there... Will probably do the same or something similar. Is is too much to hope for a miraculous recovery...?
|
|
| | | 17 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 11:03
|
I am sadly in the same boat as well. Just have to suck it up (or see it as the price to obtain any additional information) and package Blatche with Jefferson and Harris after tonight's games.
|
|
| | | 18 | weykool
Leader
ID: 41750315
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 11:07
|
Unfortunately I have AZ to deal with as well.
2.8 in cash.
Any suggestions?
|
|
| | | 19 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 11:14
|
Perhaps package Azubuike with JJ tomorrow and upgrade to a combination of David Lee and cheapie? there are some 500k options out there like Jeffries and McGuire that's worth a look while also offer some flex.
BTW, no one is trading Stuckey now right?
|
|
| | | 20 | weykool
Leader
ID: 41750315
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 13:46
|
Thanks Pica.
It looks like I may just have to do that.
I will probably throw Al Jeff into the mix as well and blatche depending on news.
|
|
| | | 21 | Senator Urine
ID: 011502111
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 19:29
|
Good thing I randomly checked, looks like Harris is out so I will in fact have money to get out of Blatche tonight.
As of now I'm leaning towards:
Harris-->Duhon
Blatche-->Millsap
Leaving 2.07 in the bank
Is Duhon the preferred cheap guard? I'm tempted to take Nate instead since he's cheaper and pretty comparable, but I feel more confident in Duhon at the moment. There's also the option of going really cheap and taking Mike James in case I need the money sometime in the future, but I think Duhon/Robinson will gain a lot more and of course be more productive.
You guys think Duhon is the way to go?
|
|
| | | 22 | allhair allstars
Sustainer
ID: 50902421
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 19:51
|
That's the move that I made...
|
|
| | | 23 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 19:55
|
really hate this, woke up 5 minute late and just missed the Harris freeze.
|
|
| | | 24 | Senator Urine
ID: 011502111
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 20:02
|
I just mapped out a bunch of different rotations. I'm not thrilled about any of them, but there's one that particularly gets me to the roster I want with the fewest amount of trades. The two main downsides to it are:
1) Dwight to Amare at the end of this week (pure money move and I hate it since Dwight is so much better)
2) Holding Camby through the red (aka asking for it)
An issue with this plan (and pretty much all of them) is that when I sell Diaw on 1/11, I'd need to take a 3.1 or less front court player at current prices. At the moment, I don't like any of them, and especially on that date. But if I take Mike James instead of Duhon, then I'd be able to take Murphy on that day. Which feels kind of stupid though too, since I'm probably going to be forced to sell Granger two days later.
So in some ways, it's
A) Duhon now and ??? in a week
vs
B) Mike James now and Murphy in a week.
Plans can change so quickly though too, I wonder if I should just take best available now (Duhon, who should gain a ton of money and produce) and let the rest sort itself out. Three hours to decide...
|
|
| | | 25 | Senator Urine
ID: 011502111
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 22:09
|
I went with the Duhon option and moved Blatche to Millsap.
I could wait on Blatche, but I really want Millsap and don't want to give up Diaw (what a monster) yet. The way I see it, Blatche is top loser tonight. If he plays tomorrow, he still takes a big hit. If he plays well, I might be out of some points but still make money by avoiding the Blatche hits and getting the early Millsap gains. If he plays poorly, it could turn into a situation similar to Nene earlier this year where he bleeds out over a good schedule. If he doesn't play, not good. It seems as if selling for Millsap today is the dominant strategy for me right now.
I figured I'd take Duhon and deal with determining a Diaw replacement next week. Something will come up. I didn't want to be the guy without Duhon as he throws up near triple doubles, while watching James shoot 4 for 15 with 2 assists and 2 turnovers. Duhon's going to make a lot of money, and if I really do end up needing a cheap player in the future I can grab James later after seeing more from him. That team has been up in the air with both losing and with Butler being out.
It seems like I'm considering Murphy every week and end up going elsewhere each time. Don't know why that is.
|
|
| | | 26 | weykool
Leader
ID: 41750315
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 22:34
|
SU.....Good decision.
It really does help to talk things out here for you.
Taking a flier on Mike James has way too much downside especially since you dont really know who the player to be named later will be.
Not sure I like the DH to Amare move.
Shaq has been killing his production.
I went Harris to Rondo because I already had Duhon.
|
|
| | | 27 | Senator Urine
ID: 011502111
Sat, Jan 03, 2009, 22:40
|
Yeah I absolutely hate the Dwight to Amare move too. I'm trying to work out something differently, but that's somehow the least painful one so far. From a points standpoint, I'd be more than happy to wait an extra week on Amare and only get him for that 4 in 5. But you know he's going to gain a lot before then. Right now I'm feeling he's kind of a must-buy but also somehow someone I don't want. This is a game of horrible, horrible contradictions.
|
|
| | | 28 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sun, Jan 04, 2009, 08:26
|
Just wondering, which is more crazy: holding Jefferson for 2 more games or moving Paul?
|
|
| | | 29 | weykool
Leader
ID: 41750315
Sun, Jan 04, 2009, 10:11
|
#28
Holding Jefferson
|
|
| | | 31 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Sun, Jan 04, 2009, 21:38
|
Held Blatche (good enough). Moved Jefferson/Harris > Millsap/Wade.
|
|
| | | 33 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 07:24
|
so Blatche did play, and lost less than what I expected, sucks
|
|
| | | 34 | allhair allstars
Sustainer
ID: 50902421
Mon, Jan 05, 2009, 07:56
|
Easy come, easy go. I'm satisfied (if not overly efficiently so) with my moves.
|
|
| | | 36 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 09:31
|
Jeffries is probable... buy Blatche back? uggggh
|
|
| | | 37 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 15:24
|
I'm going to try to get a lot of planning done tonight. Just curious what everyone's thoughts are on Amare. Is he a must on 1/7? Can he wait until 1/15? Should we plan to have him beyond 1/19? Is he even a must have? I have very little confidence in his production but for some reason feel I need to take the chance.
|
|
| | | 38 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 21:04
|
Nothing in his averages leads me to believe he's a must have.
|
|
| | | 39 | allhair allstars
Sustainer
ID: 50902421
Tue, Jan 06, 2009, 23:22
|
The more I look at it the more I like the idea of having Amar'e on my team, but it would involve some pretty extreme machinations on my part. I actually have a great rotation that gets me into who I want and out of who I need to get out of pretty nicely. Unfortunately I'm almost exactly 4 million short. SU, wanna trade RVs? :)
|
|
| | | 40 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 05:57
|
Haha, this week I actually would like to, as it would prevent me from some moves that I feel I have to take a chance on and make things easier.
Crap, I have to go to work. As of now I really only have two in's for Amare. A premature selling of Howard tonight (or any time this week), or by getting him for the 4 in 5 and taking Dirk tomorrow as the transition. I may not even want him for the full 4 in 5 though. Meh. Really don't know what to do.
|
|
| | | 42 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 17:40
|
I don't think I'm making any moves tonight. Sticking with a lineup of
Paul, Wade, Duhon, Stuckey
Dwight, Diaw, Granger, Millsap
Camby, Lee
Tentative plan is hold Camby through the red, move Diaw to a mystery 3.2 or less F or C midweek, and possibly move Dwight for Dirk tomorrow. Sound good?
|
|
| | | 43 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Wed, Jan 07, 2009, 23:51
|
I like the Dwight > Dirk move and may follow suit then roll right into Amare. I'm still not convinced he's a must have but he's a dang nice fit at that point.
|
|
| | | 44 | Pica
ID: 11114995
Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 07:34
|
I like the move as well. I'd like to do something along the same line but then I realize Jeffries isn't center eligible yet. That's why I'm lobbying for it.
|
|
| | | 46 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Thu, Jan 08, 2009, 17:10
|
I'm going to be holding Diaw for two more games but then I'm in a tough spot. In order to have enough money for my rotations, I'd need to take a forward or center that is 3.25 or less at current prices.
I'm less than thrilled with pretty much every option. There are a couple that seem like they could be good, but other players are coming back from injury and will probably ruin them (for example, Bargnani). Anyone have any favorites? Right now Ariza and Tyrus Thomas late sadly seem to be the best options.
|
|
| | | 47 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 05:51
|
Well, that Dirk trade is off to a wonderful start. I can't be too upset I guess as it by far projected the other options. Blah.
|
|
| | | 48 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 06:46
|
Since Jeffries's center eligibility came just a day late for me, I jumped in early and traded Diaw, Howard to Dirk and Amare. The transition would've been much smoother if Jeffries were a center then I would be able to get Amare after Diaw's back to back games. I guess the trade off of 1 Amare plus some dollar gains through these few days looks better than 2 Diaw games, even though yea Dirk sucked the first game I had him this year.
|
|
| | | 50 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 08:10
|
Even though I am not a Granger and Camby owner, and paid oh so dearly, but just wondering what you guys plan to do with them?
|
|
| | | 51 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 15:10
|
I plan on holding Camby still. There aren't any good transitions out of him and he should start gaining again by the refresh anyway. I've tried to come up with some triangles but none come even close to making sense.
|
|
| | | 52 | weykool
ID: 2842717
Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 16:25
|
What about Camby to Paul?
|
|
| | | 53 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 17:19
|
For people who don't have Paul and have no other way of getting him, that could work. I already have him though and it doesn't look like trading out of him tomorrow to get that triangle going will work with my rotations. It's very possible Camby will start gaining again on 1/13, it's one of the reasons why I didn't plan on trading him. If his schedule on the other end was crap or just ok, it would be a different story, but everyone is going to be looking to get into him in a few days.
|
|
| | | 54 | weykool
ID: 2842717
Fri, Jan 09, 2009, 17:37
|
Im just wondering if I have the guts to go Paul to Roy tomorrow.
Someone talk me down from the ledge.
|
|
| | | 55 | soetal1
ID: 17915254
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 06:14
|
If you own Stuckey, you may be better off saving a trade or two, otherwise go for it.
|
|
| | | 56 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 08:24
|
Who wants to be responsible for never letting me buy Dirk again?
This Stuckey and Diaw situation is really bad. In order to complete my rotations, I'd need to take a forward and a fairly short term guard. I haven't run the numbers yet but I'm assuming that forward is going to be Tyrus, but I have no idea what guard to sell Diaw for tomorrow. Every cheap guard schedule is awful.
Would I be crazy to gamble on Hawes?
|
|
| | | 57 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 09:00
|
Blah, this is terrible.
I think I have to gamble on Tyrus, right? If he goes off I'm going to be kicking myself. So if I take him, in theory I'd have 3.5 or less to work with and still be able to complete my rotations. To be safe I'd like to go a bit cheaper than that.
So for a guard, it's looking like my best options are:
- Westbrook (3.21)
- Nate (2.58)
- Mardy Collins! (500k)
- Louis Williams
- or deadening that spot with a 500k GF (Simmons)
It's a shame Foye's schedule makes him unbuyable right now and that Blake is in gravity.
Westbrook is clearly the best player of the bunch but it feels weird buying him after the 4 in 5. Also, while I think the window will hold for Dirk to Amare, I'm nervous that something stupid will happen and I'll lose it. Nate's ownership is actually pretty low so he may be a fairly safe gamble, but he's been terrible lately and I wonder if he's going to end up on D'Antoni's bad side. The other options, not much to say about them.
If I buy Tyrus and Westbrook / Nate, would you guys make both moves today? As in selling Diaw and Stuckey now even though Diaw plays tonight?
|
|
| | | 58 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 10:07
|
I watched last night's Kings game and Hawes looked healthy and active. He also was on the floor during crunch time and hit some very big shots down the stretch, but that soon to come 1 in 5 would be hard to stomach.
About options for Stuckey, Westbrook is the best player but should face selling pressure very quickly. I'd also stay away from Robinson since he's been publicly criticized by D'Antoni and his minutes has been declining.
Tyrus Thomas will be the most popular straight up as most teams have some flex in Granger, and I think he'll be tonight's top gainer. I'd guess some will also package Stuckey with Camby to get Millsap if they don't have him already.
|
|
| | | 60 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 11:04
|
Yeah, I think have to gamble on Thomas.
The real issue is the guard thing. I hate every option and have no idea what to do. I already have Millsap so I'm going to be holding Camby.
|
|
| | | 61 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 11:19
|
I'll probably gamble on Thomas as well, at least he has a clear sell date.
|
|
| | | 62 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 11:33
|
I'm wondering if I should just move Stuckey to Tyrus today, and then tomorrow deal with moving Diaw to a guard. A lot could change in one night and it would suck to take an option I don't even want when something better could open up overnight. It's a shame Calderon could be back any day because Solomon would be perfect.
|
|
| | | 63 | weykool
Leader
ID: 41750315
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 12:01
|
With the injury to Stuckey it looks like I will be stuckey with Paul and Camby.
The question is to get?
Ugg.
|
|
| | | 64 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 20:19
|
I'm going to hold Stuckey now there's news he will play.
|
|
| | | 65 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 23:56
|
I didn't exactly have high expectation when I bought Jeffries but the last 2 games were clearly a new low. Is it crazy to switch to Hawes not that no one owns him anymore?
|
|
| | | 66 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 08:48
|
It could be worth it but you could probably wait a few days to be safe with that hole in Sacramento's schedule.
I really screwed up this week, both holding Diaw and I guess trading Stuckey for Tyrus. I really didn't think Diaw was going to lose and I'm usually extra paranoid about potential losses (once again, see my brilliant Salmons to Brad Miller trade earlier this year, ugh). With the Stuckey to Thomas situation it's just one game so far at least and only a 9 tsnp difference. I was around when the news that Stuckey would probably play came out but I still went ahead and didn't undo the trade. I figured A) highest owned player, gone in a week anyway, injury sign - the sell-off was going to begin no matter what, and B) back injury. One of my top rules, after learning the hard way for years, is that if a player is having a back issue I don't give him the benefit of the doubt. It would have been nice if Tyrus had a better game yesterday but what can you do.
As far as moving Diaw today, it has to be for a guard. Westbrook is my favorite of course, but I think the ship has sailed - the swing yesterday could put Dirk to Amare at risk in a few days. While he still has pretty low ownership and could probably be held for awhile, I have other plans for that guard spot. I'm thinking that either Chalmers or Nate is the way to go. Does anyone have a strong preference? I think at the moment I may be leaning towards Nate just because his schedule provides some more flexibility.
|
|
| | | 67 | Dave R
SuperDude
ID: 3010361110
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 09:26
|
** intruder **
Just out of curiosity, SU, with Dirk being more expensive at this point, how is Dirk => Amare "at risk"..
I suppose Amare could gain enough to make up the $210 difference, but you must really be cutting it close.
|
|
| | | 68 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 09:32
|
If I took Westbrook it would be really close, I'm getting worried that Amare may pass Dirk in price. It wasn't a concern at all initially but then Dirk threw up those two crap games and he actually lost last night.
|
|
| | | 70 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 11:57
|
I really hate every option the more I think about it.
A) Chalmers
Disadvantages - Gravity. Will probably break today, but with two days off coming up, could possibly slip back in.
B) Nate
Disadvantages - Aside from yesterday he has been terrible lately.
C) Ridnour
Disadvantages - Can be terrible and has a good amount of ownership already (about 400)
D) Blake
Disadvantages - He didn't lose yesterday, but I'm not sure if he's out of gravity yet and I'm not sure how many more buys he'll see.
E) Mardy Collins
Disadvantages - Schedule starts off terrible, when is Baron coming back?, Ricky Davis is coming back, blah.
F) Louis Williams
Disadvantages - Feels stupid buying someone for a short term hold who may not even crack 20 tsnp
As of now I think I'm leaning towards Nate. What do you guys think?
|
|
| | | 71 | weykool
Leader
ID: 41750315
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 13:07
|
SU....not enough money for Eric Gordon?
|
|
| | | 72 | qwert
Donor
ID: 2910242819
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 13:25
|
intruder
It's probably too painful to consider, but
G) Stuckey?
objectively, I think Chalmers for short term is your best bet...transitions into both MIN and IND schedules nicely.
|
|
| | | 73 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 19:26
|
qwert, I think you just took a year off my life.
But yeah, right now I'm leaning slightly towards Chalmers. All the NY trade talk is making me a little nervous too. He is going to break gravity though tonight, right?
|
|
| | | 74 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 20:28
|
Here's a new option - instead of taking 5 Chalmers and then transitioning into Foye, should I take 2 Murphys and then move him for the 2 Foyes? I hate this.
|
|
| | | 75 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Sun, Jan 11, 2009, 21:05
|
I took Murphy. Thoughts:
- I couldn't be certain Chalmers was breaking gravity, especially now that Stuckey did end up playing last night.
- Nate has been crap since moving to the bench with the exception of one game. There's also the trade rumors floating around.
- This isn't an exact comparison since so many things are up in the air, but assuming I'd move Nate for Foye in a week and stick to my original plan, it's 2 Murphy and 2 Foye vs. 4 Nate or 5 Chalmers. Despite the ugly-seeming nature of buying into Minnesota in a couple days, I like this much better from a points and money (and mental-health) standpoint.
- Amare has been lousy. By taking Murphy, I have the option to abandon my original plan involving Amare, and hold both him and Granger forever.
So basically, doing this gave me options and didn't cost me an extra trade (unless Nate starts averaging 40 and looks like a hold forever). Indiana vs. GSW should be good for points too.
|
|
| | | 76 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 05:42
|
Well...that was lovely. At least I didn't take Chalmers. This game, I swear.
|
|
| | | 77 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 05:54
|
I'm starting to rethink selling Granger since I want a whole team of him. Now I'm seriously considering calling Dirk a mistake and moving him for Lebron early and just hoping Murphy had an ill-timed worst game of the year for no reason.
|
|
| | | 78 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 06:43
|
Hate Dirk, hate Amare, Granger almost outscore them both by himself.
|
|
| | | 80 | Senator Urine
ID: 011402010
Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 15:30
|
I'm going away for a few days and probably won't have internet access, early tomorrow morning will possibly be my last time online until Saturday. Thinking about committing to holding Granger and cutting my losses and moving Dirk for Lebron right now for the money (1 Lebron may just equal, beat, or come near 2 Dirks at this point). If I do that, I should have no more moves until I get back.
|
|
| | | 81 | Senator Urine
ID: 011502111
Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 21:17
|
Just got home and see that Millsap is out. I'm probably leaving at like 6 am tomorrow so I probably won't hear news before I'm gone.
Some thoughts:
- Now that Millsap is up in the air, I don't really want to use any luxury trades on getting out Granger and buying into Amare.
- Assuming Millsap is a hold, I only have a 240k window for Dirk into Lebron, given I abandon my Amare plan. I'm not so sure that window holds and I don't want to mess with it. 99% sure I'm moving Dirk for Lebron tonight in a fit of rage.
- If Millsap's a sell, then I would theoretically have more. But I won't know that tonight.
- This is a terrible week to go away. Hopefully I'll find a library up there and at least get on for a half hour after skiing or something.
|
|
| | | 82 | allhair allstars
Sustainer
ID: 50902421
Mon, Jan 12, 2009, 22:50
|
Skiing??? Are you kidding??? How can you ski with all these decisions looming?! You're better off at least trying to ski for a half hour after getting your team in order! ;)
Hell, if I had any good ideas I'd share them, but I can't even come up with any good ones for my own team!
|
|
| | | 84 | allhair allstars
Sustainer
ID: 50902421
Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 07:15
|
Not much to work with but I'm currently planning on holding Millsap... You?
|
|
| | | 85 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 08:38
|
yea... he was supposedly a late scratch so I expect he'll be able to play in the next game.
|
|
| | | 86 | weykool
ID: 2842717
Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 11:14
|
Got lucky with my last trade at the last minute.
I caved on holding Camby and went to Okur.
The money was a 230K swing and 50 TSNP.
I'm tradeless at the moment so crossing my fingers on Millsap that there will be either good news or no news.
|
|
| | | 87 | Ender
ID: 55471420
Tue, Jan 13, 2009, 23:45
|
Holding Millsap. Held Dirk as well, that worked out okay :)
|
|
| | | 88 | Pica
Sustainer
ID: 161141312
Wed, Jan 14, 2009, 07:22
|
I was fed up with Dirk and moved him to LBJ, and he blew up. Figures.
|
|
| | | 89 | allhair allstars
Sustainer
ID: 50902421
Wed, Jan 14, 2009, 07:50
|
If you are unsure what the column header means, hover over it with your mouse.
A pop up will display a longer definition of the header.
GURUPATRON BONUS MATERIAL
The following columns are sartible and reverse sartible.
Click on the column header once for the default sort order.
Click a second time for the reverse sort order.
| Rank | GurupieName | LSWP0 | LSWP | LSWP5 | WWR | FV | Cash | RV | FVC | Trades | | 1 | Senator Urine-275 | 7719.5 | 138 | 2680.5 | 4 | 72.00 | 0.24 | 71.76 | -0.10 | 6 | | 2 | weykool-1750 | 7715.5 | 61 | 2552 | 169 | 66.52 | 4.36 | 62.16 | -0.21 | 4 | | 3 | Winston-301 | 7562.5 | 36 | 2438 | 68 | 65.06 | 0.89 | 64.17 | -0.38 | 5 | | 4 | Pica-125 | 7557 | 212 | 2419.5 | 127 | 66.39 | 0.59 | 65.80 | 0.31 | 5 | | 5 | allhair allstars-1708 | 7445 | 125.5 | 2475.5 | 118 | 65.22 | 2.75 | 62.47 | 0.05 | 7 | | 6 | Heather-1769 | 7256 | 146 | 2503.5 | 235 | 60.28 | 1.83 | 58.45 | 0.13 | 5 | | 7 | Ender-1720 | 7190.5 | 155 | 2415 | 220 | 60.06 | 5.85 | 54.21 | -0.16 | 8 | | 8 | Gary Dotson-1393 | 7003 | 96.5 | 2228.5 | 222 | 59.97 | 0.48 | 59.49 | -0.10 | 4 | | 9 | Soetal1-121 | 6843 | 69 | 2393.5 | 628 | 59.75 | 1.82 | 57.93 | -0.31 | 4 |
Head To Head | UNIQUE TO | UNIQUE TO | | | | COMMON TO BOTH TEAMS | |
|
|
|
|