kalel3475

Thanks, you too. I got Arkham City and Season 10 of Smallville, so all is good.

Guess we will just disagree on this point then. But to be fair to you, I am seeing the trades as they are happening and think they are too lopsided to this one team's favor at the time. Not enough that they shouldn't go through or anything. But as I said, people have left because of this. And thanks for the shot at my fantasy skills. It is a shame that I could only finish with the 2nd best record in the regular season and make the playoffs based on my draft and team management. I'll try and do better next year.

And this is just the novelization....try living it.

Actually, I think you would be diagnosed with ADHD...a subtle but importance difference.

Right, he is savvy and the other owners suck, which is basically the point I have tried to make with the other owners for two years now. I just wanted to hear it from other people. But if people make comments I will respond; that's the polite thing to do isn't it. Besides, I have nothing better to do right now anyway.

The last three years, he has finished 2nd twice including this year and won the whole thing once. I want to say he finished 2nd four years ago too, but I am not positive about that. I guess one potential problem with having only stars on your team is that they tend to get rested the last few weeks of the season, which is when fantasy playoffs are taking place. Each year his team has been statistically dominate over everyone else, with him having one or two of the top scorers for each position. Again, he is a good evaluator of talent, makes good moves on the WW, and takes full advantage of those owners less skilled than himself. He is playing by the rules, and doing it well. It's the other owners I worry about.

Well, what I said was that each trade is "fair" for the most part...with "fair" in quotations. The group that left clearly thought the trades over the last few years were fishy and not "fair." I have compared this whole thing to a Monet painting in reverse. Up close, each trade may be able to be justified; but once you step back and look at how all the teams involved ended up at the end of the season, the discrepancy is so great it calls into question all the individual actions that brought everyone to where they are. That probably sounds a bit convoluted, sorry. Not sure how else to describe it. Most of the trades with this owner could be justified, at least to the point where they won't get vetoed. For example, one owner traded this team back Welker for Colston and the Detroit TE Pettigrew because Welker was on his bye week and the guy already had Branch and needed another WR. This is where all sorts of debate about the merits of this one trade could take place. I argued with the guy who sent Welker that the one thing his team really needed was a RB, and that instead of trying to get either Rice, or McCoy, or Forte, or Foster for who at the time was the top scoring WR, he went with a much lesser WR and a TE who wasn't the best on the team he was trading with. He gave up a name-brand star for two lesser players just to fill a hole for one week in his lineup, and in the process gave this owner the player who would end up the number 2 scoring WR to go along with the top three RB in the league and, at the time, Brees and Jennings. Not to mention Hernandez as his TE. Great for this owner, but a supremely dumb move IMHO on the part of the other owner, who was more than willing to give up a stud for lesser players just to cover a hole for a week....in which he lost his matchup. And this is where the debate with these owners usually turns south. We get into discussions about individual motives for each individual trade that on the surface sound decent enough, but where I look at the big picture, they continue focus on each individual act. One owner said, "I don't give a flying f**k how good I make the other team, I only care about making my team better." I'd argue that you can't possibly be making your team better if after each trade the total number of points you score a week goes down while the team you traded with keeps scoring more and more points. Seems like simple math to me, but I could be wrong. Not only that, but with money on the line, why wouldn't you consider how much better you are making the other team since odds are you will have to beat that team in order to either make the playoffs or win money once you get there? Some here have said that this is the only way to look at trading; to judge each trade separately. I respectfully disagree, not that I believe rules should necessarily be put into place to try and account of this. But trading name-brand studs for lesser players, over the course of the season, the team with the studs is going to score more points and have the best chance of winning, especially when all of the star players end up on one team consistently. Or more accurately when one team ends up with a lineup of all star players. So I asked the question of people who know fantasy football but are obviously not familiar with the people I am speaking about. Most people seem to agree that while there shouldn't necessarily be any rules that would prevent such a team from existing--with some going so far as to voice the opinion that even talking about the trading is borderline collusion, generally speaking teams don't usually end up with THE top QB, the top 3 RBs, two of the top 10 WR and the 5th best scoring TE when there are 12 teams and 16 roster spots. There are always those owners who strike gold of course. The guy who is going to upset this Pro-Bowl team has Newton and Cruz...who would have guessed that those two would score the way the have been scoring? That is just the luck of the draw. But with one really good owner and a small group of really bad owners, such a team obviously can exist. Sorry for ranting a bit. Again, thanks for the responses. This has been informative.

Well, we had over $1200 dollars going to the top four teams in the league. When a few owners trade their name-brand studs to one team who is far and away the most dominate team statistically, it can take a bit of the fun out of the rest of the season because the chances of any other team actually winning some of the money goes down...in this case significantly. Especially when it has happened like clockwork 3 years in a row. And just to be clear, a group did leave after last year because they saw trades happen two years in a row that made no sense and since they all went to the same team, they did assume collusion. The league was basically two groups of 6, and all the trades to this one team were from "our" side of the league. In their minds, the trades only made sense if there was collusion, so after two years of seeing this trend they decided enough was enough. I know these people better than that group did, so I don't believe collusion is happening. Just stupidity. And yes, I should do a better job of "joining" them, no arguments there.

Done. They will arrive by FedEx within the week...I hope. And yeah, I know I should really do a better job of getting in on the trades early. What I think may be baffling is that it seems the answer to my question is fairly obvious....the team CAN exist in a league without overly strict trade regulations such as having League voting or an overzealous commissioner, but that a team like this probably shouldn't exist in a 12-team league because owners should be smarter about who they trade and who they trade with. But that is part of my frustration, and the frustration of some others in the league. For a small group of owners, they either can't or won't see what they are doing because they like trading more than anything else about fantasy football. They fancy themselves NFL GMs and despite all evidence to the contrary--three years of evidence to the contrary, they believe they are making good deals as they continue to decimate their teams while making one team, the same team, dominate. It actually makes me mad how much time these people spend at work making these ridiculous deals. But I digress. Sorry to take another 30 seconds of you life.

Okay, as of right now, the owner of the Pro-Bowl team is losing in the Championship Game 164-117. His opponent has had a great game from his entire roster, with the Pro-Bowl team not doing so hot. It hasn't helped him that Jennings is out. Rodgers is going tomorrow night of course, but the other team has either Moore or Meachum going Monday night, so over coming the 47 point difference that exists now plus whatever his WR puts up probably isn't going to happen. He will finish the year 14-1, pocket the $300 second place prize instead of the $600 for first, the people that didn't make the playoffs with their horrible teams won't learn anything of course and we begin the process all over again next year. They will take his losing as proof that luck has more to do with their problems that the crappy trades they made, refusing to see the big picture.....they make really trades that end up hurting themselves and making one team nearly unbeatable. I mean, if one team is outscoring the rest of the League by over 400 points and is only outscored 13 times during the regular season, those points and wins came from somewhere, and my money is on the teams that traded name-brand studs to his team. I love being in the league, and I don't like rules that limit trading....but I'm not sure I can handle the stupidity of a small group of owners that clearly want to trade more than anything else and will do so regardless of how obvious it hurts their team and how dominate it makes one team year after year after year after year. If they spread out their stupidity over a few other teams it would make it bearable. But I guess part of that is my fault for not being more aggressive with them early in the year. Thanks for all of the responses. Sorry I couldn't post the draft results. I think some of you would have found it very interesting. Hope your leagues are going well and good luck to those of you playing in your Championship games.

You are 100% correct on all accounts IMHO. He is good at evaluating talent. I tease him about selling used cars, so negotiating one of his strengths as well. The other owners are not as good as he is, even though they think they are, and he takes full advantage of them. They do it every year without fail and without learning. I have thought about leaving for this reason. Like I said, he is doing nothing wrong; nobody is technically doing anything wrong for that matter. Actually, your feedback is just about exactly what I was looking for. Thanks.

You probably won't believe this, but I just now took the time to find a fantasy football message board to ask the question. But the owner of this team and I have had this discussion several times over the last three years. Each year the same owners trade him name-brand studs for lesser players, each year he ends up with a pro-bowl team and statistically dominates everyone else. The other owners who trade with him either barely make he playoffs, or miss them all together like they did this year. I should do a better job of taking advantage of the other owners, I admit. I just wanted to hear from other fantasy owners about it. They love trading regardless of how stacked this ONE owner always ends up, and I think that they think this sort of thing is common. I don't think it is common at all for one team to be THAT much better than everyone else in league, especially three years straight.

That is probably part of it. I sent out trades that didn't work out, so I am not against trading. I will say that a lot of these trades take place during work--5 of us work together, and I've seen trades sent to me in the morning but pulled before work was done and I had a chance to look at it in depth. I get the impression they like trading as much as anything and since this owner has the time and the others are willing, he ends up with the majority of the trades. Possible, yes. Typical, not that I have seen. But as I've said, he is a good owner.

I wouldn't call it "anti-trade." But some owners are frustrated that certain owners trade primarily with this one owner and keep trading him name-brand studs. I would like to hear from someone who has a team in their 12-team league that has the top QB, the top 3 RB, two top 10 WR and the 5th top scoring TE. In my experience, leagues, especially serious money leagues like this one, don't typically have teams like this.

No, I actually didn't make a single trade all year. This isn't my team