Disagree.

I think it’s absurd to reduce the waiver pool down to four, then two teams. It rewards shite planning. If you didn’t roster your handcuff or plan ahead for defensive matchups, why should you now have practically zero competition for waiver claims? And if you’re the lower seed in the finals, you just get unfettered access to the top waiver claim?

I agree that non playoff teams shouldn’t be allowed to stack their benches to spite playoff teams, but if they pick up someone to start? No issue whatsoever.

This post was edited on 12/12/17 at 3:25 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by GynoSandberg

Member since Jan 2006

72114 posts

Posted on 12/12/17 at 3:38 pm to Joshjrn

I will refrain from adding anyone on waivers if im eliminated, but after that, it's free game. I want to hang Ls on contending teams

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Mr. Hangover

New Orleans

Member since Sep 2003

34525 posts

Posted on 12/12/17 at 4:40 pm to Joshjrn

quote:
I think it’s absurd to reduce the waiver pool down to four, then two teams. It rewards shite planning. If you didn’t roster your handcuff or plan ahead for defensive matchups, why should you now have practically zero competition for waiver claims? And if you’re the lower seed in the finals, you just get unfettered access to the top waiver claim?

I understand that this is a subjective situation, but it’s absolutely pointless for someone to scoop up a player when they have nothing to play for, just to spite another team that’s in the playoffs

same thing with trades, teams that are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, or out of the playoffs have no business making transactions

2 ...

Report Post

Fantasy Sports Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board