- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: TDBA Offseason
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:34 pm to GynoSandberg
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:34 pm to GynoSandberg
I like the idea of cutting games... quality over quantity
0
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:39 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
Id say 4 for a dynasty league would be nice
Why be for more IR spots but not additonal roster spots?
If someone is injured you can stash? But if they are rookie with no playing time you can't?
Just curious
This post was edited on 4/9/15 at 2:40 pm
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:39 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
cutting down on max games players seems to be a better solution
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:41 pm to Toula
I
to prevent this we dont need more roster spots, just less bench and more active spots
quote:
You lost at least 10 games because everyone on your team played the same night.
to prevent this we dont need more roster spots, just less bench and more active spots
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:41 pm to fratmonster
Agreed.
Cutting max games is the best move IMO.
Cutting max games is the best move IMO.
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:51 pm to Toula
Any rookie worth AF is already being stashed.. especially with these teams tanking. Even most competitive teams have a guy or two stashed without hindering their competitiveness.
As for IR spots, I'd say it's nice to have 4 because that leaves you two spots for guys who could be lost for the year, at the worst, and then two spots for guys with minor injuries. Most of the time the injuries are only temporary. If you're lucky you wont need any of them.
As for IR spots, I'd say it's nice to have 4 because that leaves you two spots for guys who could be lost for the year, at the worst, and then two spots for guys with minor injuries. Most of the time the injuries are only temporary. If you're lucky you wont need any of them.
Posted on 4/9/15 at 2:51 pm to MattyV
45 max starts
2 less bench spots
2 more Util spots.
IMO
2 less bench spots
2 more Util spots.
IMO
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:01 pm to fratmonster
I like.
45 seems like a fair number. Having 2 extra utility spots will allow you to get extra starts on nights with a full slate of games and will make it a lot easier to get to 45.
45 seems like a fair number. Having 2 extra utility spots will allow you to get extra starts on nights with a full slate of games and will make it a lot easier to get to 45.
This post was edited on 4/9/15 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:02 pm to MattyV
I like one more UTIL spot. But won't fuss if it's two more.
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:05 pm to MrWiseGuy
i dont mind an extra starting spot or two
expanding rosters as a whole will basically force everyone to play with what you got. the player pool would be bare
expanding rosters as a whole will basically force everyone to play with what you got. the player pool would be bare
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:10 pm to MrWiseGuy
Id like to see some sort of decision making involved in setting a lineup, rather than blindly starting everyone who is active.
that alone will knock 21 out of the playoffs
that alone will knock 21 out of the playoffs
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:11 pm to MrPappagiorgio
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:14 pm to MrPappagiorgio
Yup, as it sits right now. League is fuuuuuucked.
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:18 pm to MrPappagiorgio
quote:
Id like to see some sort of decision making involved in setting a lineup, rather than blindly starting everyone who is active.
Likewise. Which is why I'd prefer just the additional one UTIL spot.
The max starts number definitely needs to come down
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:24 pm to MrWiseGuy
quote:
Likewise. Which is why I'd prefer just the additional one UTIL spot.
Help me understand this. You want strategy and around lineup decisions, but then want to restrict the strategy by setting daily lineup limits. Doesn't make sense to me.
If your 14 best players are up on a Tuesday, you should be able to start them all. Why limit someone to only getting 11 and having to backfill those 3 games with weaker players?
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:25 pm to Toula
you could just make the scoring roto and let every player on your roster contribute to the scoring cats
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:30 pm to Toula
I don't want teams to blindly just start everyone that is available that night.
Do I start Tim Duncan and play for boards and blocks, or do I go with Khris Middleton and go after 3s and steals?
I think there should be decisions made on who to start and who not to start
Do I start Tim Duncan and play for boards and blocks, or do I go with Khris Middleton and go after 3s and steals?
I think there should be decisions made on who to start and who not to start
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:35 pm to MrWiseGuy
I completely agree with all that.
I just went and looked at our playoff matchup. You had a potential of 59 games played --this includes your streams. .
If we had a 45 game limit and you had zero restriction on how you could start, you would have had lineup decisions to make.
But the lineup restrictions cost you 11 games. 11!
You could have hit the 45 game limit easily with the team you built. But you lost those 11 games and had to pickup 10 games played from the wire.
I just went and looked at our playoff matchup. You had a potential of 59 games played --this includes your streams. .
If we had a 45 game limit and you had zero restriction on how you could start, you would have had lineup decisions to make.
But the lineup restrictions cost you 11 games. 11!
You could have hit the 45 game limit easily with the team you built. But you lost those 11 games and had to pickup 10 games played from the wire.
This post was edited on 4/9/15 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:41 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
you could just make the scoring roto and let every player on your roster contribute to the scoring cats
Thanks for contributing to the discussion.
I'm mind blown on all the contradictions in people's thoughts.
"I don't want to expand rosters to take players out the pool, but let's go to 4 IRs which will take 25 players out of the pool!"
"I want people to have to think and strategize around line-up decisions, but let's restrict who they can start each day!"
Posted on 4/9/15 at 3:47 pm to Toula
I rhink the roster size and IR don't need any tinkering.
I like how there are still enough decent players to where you can uncover some gems. This is certainly a plus for league parity as a whole
I like how there are still enough decent players to where you can uncover some gems. This is certainly a plus for league parity as a whole
Page 5 of 24
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News