Wild Wombat

Is there any facility to download the projections, preferably in excel format, but comma separated would do to? Using MyHuddle personalized scoring, fyi. It would be really helpful.

Well, no way would I take your offer (obviously), especially since the other guy has Conner. If this is a long-term league, meaning that you actually know the other guy, I would not make the offer: he ,ay remember the low ball offer. If you don't know the other guy, go for it. All he can do is say, "No".

This is really about trading an every week starter for another every week starter. Your relative strengths at RB vs WR really don't matter because you will never leave Hill or Hunt sitting on the bench, if you ask me. So, forget about complimenting Zeke with another RB, it just comes down to whether you think Hunt will outscore Hill in the long term. Me, I think they will be about the same, with Hill having a bit more of the boom/bust to him. Then again, if you think Hill is the better option, I sure won't say you are wrong.

If the Bell owner offered this to you, stop reading and accept. Gordon is no sure thing. Neither is Bell, but the potential of Bell so far outweighs Gordon's I'd make the trade immediately and then worry about what comes next. IMO, making this trade has no bearing on making the Howard for Hopkins trade (but I'd also do that, if you want to know, lol)

From Breaking News: " ... Enunwa now resides in WR2 company." From Rest of Season Rankings: 52 72 130 Quincy Enunwa NYJ 11 Well, since I snagged Enunwa off waivers last week, I sure hope that he is closer to WR2 company than to the 52nd ranked WR for the rest of the season! I know that these two sources are produced by different people, but this is a a bit extreme, no? I suppose that the number 52 ranked WR could be a WR2 in leagues with 52 owners, but C'mon man!

Did anybody see the game and figure out why Vilma only had 1 unassisted tackle? Was it just a function of playing against a pass-happy team? Not that I am going to drop him... I'd only do that if he does the same in his next 5 games: SF, MIN, OAK, CAR, SD. Ya think the MLB might be heavily used against those 5 teams?

Not sure about the ice sickle (are they used for harvesting snow flakes?) but I echo what Henry said: Sproles for sure, and even if somebody else snags Sporles before you do, drop Rudi: there are so many better alternatives than Rudi!

Pick one and trade the other now. You don't need two QBs that are that good when you can only start one. If anybody in the league is hurting at QB, se if you can improve either your RB or WR position.

I would do it. Grant will probably be okay, but hamstrings are funny things. Addai is a versatile back in a versatile offense and is bound to put up points (yes, the Colts' O has problems, but there is too much talent for it not to be successful). Gates is a gamble, but he is doing okay so far. Not like he was two years ago, but serviceable. And unless I misread, you are unbelievably thin at receiver.

Stewart, no question. His number of carries per game will in all liklihood just keep increasing and have you looked at their schedule in terms of the running game? Hint: it's very nice.

Sheesh. I wouldn't heistate to do that only getting LT. Randal El is just window dressing. Why in the world would somebody be willing to get rid of LT for McFadden? Oh, well, not my problem. Take the deal and laugh.

Since it is a PPR league this is an even deal. Since MJD is disappointing so far, making this trade would help your depth for week 4 when Addai is out and you have to start a RB. But then again, MJD gets to go against the Texan's defense in week 4, which is a great matchup. My brain says toss up. My gut says don't do it (but what does my gut know?)

If you can trade him Maroney for Rodgers, do it and don't look back! If you want to throw McFadden in for Grant, it's probably a good idea, but the hamstring thing is a bit troublesome. But definitely Maroney for Rodgers. Maroney is already hurt and Rodgers is doing really well.

Lineup rules: Instead of the traditional 2RB, 2WR, 1TE starting lineup, for those 5 starting slots, we can start up to 4 WRs, up to 2 RBs and up to 2TEs (for a total of 5). We also get 1 PPR for TEs, 1/5 PPR for WRs and 0 PPR for RBs. I basically have no RBS: Slaton, Fargas and Pierre Thomas. I am loaded at WR/TE: Moss, A.Johnson, L.Fitzgerald, E.Royal, K.Walter, J.Witten and A.Gates He is strong at RB (but remember can only start 2): J.Jones, T.Jones, D.McFadden, R.Mendenhall, J.Stewart and M.Turner (no studs, but strong nevertheless) He is not weak at WR either, but has a bad bye week issue with his WRs in week 4 (Burress, R.Wayne and R.Williams all off) So, this trade is not essential for either one of us. I proposed a Royal for Jonathan Stewart trade. He countered by offering me Julius Jones. I said I wasn't at all interested, and he then offered Thomas Jones. Now, I personally don't feel the "juice" from Thomas Jones, but I'm willing to admit that that may just be because Stewart is new and shiny. However, the fact that the Jones couldn't get in the End Zone (at home) with three tries from within the 3 yard line concerns me. But then he is a starting RB and Royal is a #2 WR. I am muddled over this one. Help me find clarity!

I would ask the two teams which of the following two options they would go for: 1) Coin toss. 2) They both submit lineups. Their opponent in the Superbowl only has to beat one of them to win the Superbowl (to put it another way, they both have to beat the opponent or they lose). Regardless of who wins the Superbowl, the share of the two tied teams (i.e. 1t place or 2nd place) can be split 50/50 or high score between them in the superbowl gets a greater share (all of it if they want, 70/30 ... whatever they want). If they both don't agree with 2, then it has to be a coin toss. Hope that makes sense.