Many have asked, so here it is…….

[mattjb]

You're humiliating yourself.

[Quahogs]

I have not read through the thread but the sense I got is that everyone feels vindicated, what a joke.

Each of the lineups need to be judged on an individual basis, possibly a separate thread for each.

I will be back to you and will most likely have to read through the thread to properly respond, that is not something that I look forward too and may not happen.

YES Joe by all means make more threads, and like the emails and TWO threads prior don't bother to read the answers.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Now is it okay to move this thread to oblivion guys? Enough already.

[BK METS]

Yes please

[King of Queens]

In the immortal words of Vince Neil:

Don't go away mad. Just go away.

[Glenneration X]

Now is it okay to move this thread to oblivion guys? Enough already.

While it may feel good for a moment to delete this thread, I'm not sure that it will accomplish much. In fact, it would more than likely if anything end up being counter-productive.

After all, what did deleting the original accomplish? Absolutely nothing.

Joe has already proven once that he can just start another accusatory thread. And he's already threatened to continue his absurd crusade in his latest post last night. Then the wrongfully accused will just have to defend themselves all over again. I think he's made it clear that he's just not going to let his paranoid delusions go.

See Juprinka's post above. Private email exchanges, two threads, all the responses to Joe and Chad's questions over and over again, yet Joe still keeps coming back for more.

Leave the thread up and at least our responses in defense of the wrongful accusations are there for good for all to see, as well as the discrediting of the accusers and the accusations themselves.

Take the thread down and it gives the accusers a clean slate to start all over again and puts the onus for defending ourselves back on the wrongfully accused.

Short of accompanying the deleting of the thread with a ban of Joe from the boards, I think deleting the thread does nothing to stop the attacks or wipe this sorry episode from our consciousness.

[King of Queens]

Agree with Glenn. It's annoying -- and entering "SNAKE" territory -- but deleting the thread does nothing in the long run.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Oh boy. Two Glenns against one Greg. Not fair.

[Baseball Furies]

In light of current events and to avoid any future similar problems with this league, here is the official 2015 NFBC Platinum questionnaire to qualify eligibility for participation (which I have created and generously provided for Greg and Tom) to help prevent any potential stress associated from this league:

The 2015 NFBC Platinum Event Eligibility Questionnaire

Question #1:Do you suffer from any sort of mental illness or delusional mania that would lead you to believe that if you came close to winning this competition but lost on the final day of the season, that it must be due to others in the league plotting against you instead of your own incompetence, bad luck, or the skill of your fellow competitors? Y N


Question #2: Do you believe in aliens, Area 51, Roswell, Hangar 18, The Men in Black, Big Brother, that there was someone else on the grassy knoll, the Illuminati, Paul is dead, Chemtrails, Elvis is not dead, the moon landing was a fake, Greg and Tom are robots (okay,I made that last one up ), or conspiracy theories in general especially as they pertain to fantasy baseball? Y N


Question #3: Do you feel the need to be heavily inebriated and/or stoned to lessen the pain of your own inadequacies and drown the sorrows of your mostly unfulfilled life not only after a draft, but also far in advance of, and during a draft as well? Y N


Question #4: Are you prone to tantrums, hissie fits, going ape shit, having conniptions, hysterics or otherwise going cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs because you are a fucking sore loser? Y N


Question #5: Would at least 500 or more people on these message boards rather draft with an Ebola stricken, fantasy NASCAR player with Tourette's Syndrome than you if you were to be in this league? Y N

If you answered "yes" to any of these five simple questions, then you need not apply.

Have a pleasant 2015 NFBC Platinum Event Draft and 2015 draft season overall.

Best Regards,

The Management

[Cocktails and Dreams]

If Mike plays it is an overlay already. That is one thing this league has going for it..

[Cocktails and Dreams]

2. I did not ask you to set a lineup any certain way. I just asked if you minded setting one, since it did not appear you had recently. It did not seem like you. But since you didn't respond until after the deadline, here is exactly what I sent you.

"I wouldn't want you to make a move to help me out. Not in a million years. I would want you to play your best team. And IMO that would include Doolittle and Colmenter and probably Papelbon. I wouldn't expect you to look at the standings and see who gets screwed by what. But I do understand your thought process, even though I don't agree with it. And was uber frustrating when we got penalized twice by you not getting news quite on time on Papelbon last week the way the standings work out. As if you did take him out for Colmenter the standings would look much different".

So just like you don't appreciate certain things, I sure as hell don't appreciate you leading people to believe that I wanted you to sit your closers. I wanted you to set your best lineup, as I feel everyone should do in a 20k league.

And furthermore we had this exact conversation a couple years ago. I respect your opinion greatly and asked if it was out of line to request someone to set a lineup in a high dollar league. You said you felt it was perfectly fine. But now you take offense to it?

Interesting. You respect me greatly, yet you continue to slander me publicly. Very well, I will respond yet again to each of your points starting with the one above and then I will hopefully be able to move on from this for good. I don't think anyone involved in this drama in any capacity has benefitted in the slightest.

I also find it ironic for you to state you don't appreciate me leading people to believe something about you.
Chad, please meet kettle.

I didn't know we were posting private emails, but it doesn't surprise me that you picked a part of an email from the middle of our conversation to present a context that fits what you are trying to portray.

Instead of the email above, you could post your original email that started the conversation and allow that email to speak for itself on whether when you first asked me to set a lineup, if Collmenter for Papelbon was or was not a basis for the discussion. I'm pretty sure that the portrayal from that email might be slightly different than from the one you chose to post.

And though I'm sure it was just an innocent oversight not to provide the basic courtesy to ask if it was OK to post an email from our private conversation when you posted the one above, I'm letting you know now, it's OK to post this other one.

Lastly, I took no offense with you reaching out to me to ask if I could set a lineup... and stated as much in that email conversation. What I do have a problem with is that after I had made it clear that I had already set a lineup, instead of that being enough (since you stated that is all you were asking of me), when that lineup wasn't to your and your partner's satisfaction/liking and the lineups of others followed suit, these threads and the baseless accusations within them were continuously and publicly laid upon me and those others by you and your partner in crime.

3. The way you went about handling your lineup decisions in this league at the end had me considering how you approached something in a main event I was in with you this year. I am sure it was just random coincidence that any dealings with you in any league did not go my way, even though you were out of contention in both leagues. But it did factor into my thoughts, so I will ask. I am curious about your Schafer acquisition in the main event that I had an outside shot of winning the whole thing in. You were out of the league race there as well. I needed steals badly to make a push in the main event. I made a pretty strong bid on him(enough to win every other main event bid). Yet you acquired him, spending I believe a third or so of your 100-150 you had left if memory serves. Yet he was not so important to even insert into your lineup for 4 games right after the acquisition. Nor did he end up on any of your other main events that seemed to need steals worse. So I apologize for thinking there possibly could be a reason you didn't want me to succeed in either situation. Especially when you took a complete hands off approach in one instance which did not help, and a completely opposite approach in the other situation which also did not help. But I will chalk it up to random coincidence since you are a great champion that knows how to lose as well as win.

Chad, are you serious here? I had to look through my leagues and the various overall standings to figure out what the hell you were talking about because I had no clue from just reading your post. After looking back a bit, I'm guessing you're referring to the March 26th Online Main Event league?

If you are, you do realize that I picked up Jordan Schafer on August 10th? Yes, a whole 7 weeks before the end of the season.

You also do realize that although I was likely out of the running for winning the league at the time, that I was middle of the pack, still had an outside chance to cash, and SB's was one of the offensive categories I could move up in?

You also might realize that I was dealing with OF injuries to Cuddyer, Craig, Bourn, & Crisp around that time and could have maybe used an extra reserve at the position?

You probably don't realize that this was the team that I was chronicling for BHQ and staying relevant for that purpose alone may have seemed like a decent idea at the time?

But you do seem to recall that my "block" bid was for a mere 32 dollars in FAAB? I'm not very good at this blocking strategy obviously.

And lastly, I'll help you realize that I picked up Schafer for 10 of my 18 leagues including the Diamond, NYC Super, MLBC and other high dollar leagues, so I must have seen something in him. Yet this one bid on him was solely to block you from winning the Overall with 7 weeks left in the season?

I can't believe you find a correlation between a FAAB bid made in early August in one league that I was still breathing in and a lineup decision made the last week of the season for a completely different league where I was already dead and buried. What's next, you'll blame me for making a draft pick in March that blocked you from winning an Online Championship?

I guess I owe you an apology for costing you both the Overall and the Platinum. Or maybe you could have just bid 33 on Schafer.

1. Furthermore, I think you may recall a contest last year when you passed me the last day in football for 125k. I didn't even have your number, but I found a way to get it, and personally congratulate you no more than 10 minutes after the game ended. You can tell me if you didn't think it was from the heart.

I saved this for last because it is the point I most want to respond to that you made.

Yes, of course I recall that moment. I thought extremely highly of you for that call and have mentioned it multiple times to multiple people as an example of what a great guy you were on top of being a great champion. It is who I thought you were.

These threads and these accusations are not who I thought you were.

Been swamped with football but opted to address this fiasco one more time since FAAB is done. Needed to address it one more time for sure. Some people have tried to tarnish my reputation over it, and even resorted to lies in doing so, which is something you will never see me do.

First of all, I have not slandered you or anyone else, like you are lying about. Slander involves making false statements about someone. I have not done that. If anything, you did. You claimed that I tried to get you to sit your closers on the bench. Not true at all. When I sent the email asking if you minded setting a lineup, you were involved in serious win and k battles with a lot of teams(and wouldn't have been had you set a good lineup the prior week). Closers were not going to do much for you. The bottom line is that you showed no interest in preserving any points. Given that you would seem to be the last guy I would expect to do that in a 20k league, it certainly got my attention. That is the truth. That is not slandering anyone. As for the main event, I brought it up since I was not sure why you did that either. It was odd that my bid would have won every other league, and you didn't acquire him in your other main events, even though you needed steals even worse in those if memory serves. That is not slander either. That is true. All this went through my mind when trying to figure out what your gameplan was. You are the only one that knows what your agenda was. You admittedly set a lineup that you didn't thing was your best outfit. These things went through my mind. Right or wrong, I cannot help what goes through my mind. It doesn't make it a lie or make it slander, as much as you want to try and belittle my character. Furthermore, I would like to know what in the hell I accused you of. The worst possible thing would be not wanting me to succeed, and I didn't do that. I am used to that, just wouldn't expect it in a 20k league. I sure as hell never suggested you were colluding or doing anything of that nature. So I would be careful when using the word slander. It makes you look stupid, as if you don't know what it means or something. It simply is not anywhere near being accurate and quite frankly pisses me off. You are the only one that knows why you did what you did. I cannot possibly comprehend it, let alone accuse you of collusion. Only you know why you do what you do. But you did do what you did. And that included admitting that you set that lineup, not just leaving it behind. And I still haven't heard a good reason why you set a lineup less than optimally. To me, setting a horrific lineup intentionally is ridiculous. And that is exactly what you did. I wouldn't want people to know either if I were you. It is embarrassing.

I did not start either thread. But when my partner did opt to do so, I am not going to leave him hung out to dry, especially when I didn't agree with the lineup either. I have yet to hear one person that does agree with it. I have heard a ton of people that don't agree with it though. In a 20k league, setting any lineup that is not your best one is not right IMO. And there is no way in hell you can look anyone in the eye and say you think yours was your best. And you did admit that you set it. I have a problem with that. And the fact you admitted Joe was talking about you, and then felt the need to strike back with all of this idiotic slander nonsense etc is too much. You can try and make people think less of me and all that if it makes you feel better. I can handle it. But I did not slander you, nor did I accuse you of anything. I said what your lineup was. I didn't lie. It is public information anyway. If I set a lineup like you did, I most certainly wouldn't want anyone to know either, if I were you. But I am not you. I wouldn't have set a lineup like that.

And then you are going to try and make me look bad for posting a private email? Are you kidding me? You claim this horseshit about me wanting you to set a lineup a certain way and you damn right I will post an email that I SENT TO YOU. I didn't post anything you sent to me privately. Surely you aren't so stupid as to not understand the difference. I would never post anything you emailed me. That would be out of line. I POSTED WHAT I EMAILED YOU. Big difference. So save that nonsense. It looks really silly ,especially when it proved you were full of shit on your take of me trying to get you to take out your closers.

Unfortunately, our respect for each other is long gone. I know you have lost respect for me. And I certainly have for you as well, and it was trending that direction well before this due to a football issue I was a bit floored by. I won't get into it though or it might be "slander."


In summation, I know I have burned some bridges with at least a few people that I do have a lot of respect for. Some of them shouldn't have even been brought up by Joe IMO. I would argue that maybe none of it should have been. While I am not proud of all of my comments in these threads, I made them and won't waver from my core beliefs. We were not the only ones that felt that some of these lineups were not up to par in a 20k league. Others in the league felt the same way that we did. A surprising amount of people agree(not surprised that so many agree, just that they told me) I am far from perfect. And I am competitive to a fault, and Joe probably is as well. While I do care who respects me, I will stand up for what I believe, even if it loses some respect. I am extremely comfortable with my ethical and moral background. And when someone that knows me well believes I have compromised my ethical background, that will be the first time. I care far more about my character than my reputation. If people that set a horrific lineup on purpose want to make me out to be the bad guy, I can handle it. And I certainly am not going to worry about my reputation being ruined because of discussing a lineup being admittedly set less than optimally in a 20k league. It should not have happened, so I shouldn't have even been in this position.

A few other important thoughts.

1. First, I want to apologize to Steve. His situation actually hurts me. I have such a tremendous amount of respect for him, that this is the only reason this whole situation hurts me. I doubt it will be accepted, but it is sincere. I didn't bring up any lineups initially. And if I had, this one wouldn't have been on the list. While I certainly don't agree with his lineup that week 25 or whatever it was, I know with 100 percent certainty that he had no ill intent whatsoever, and the fact people bring up the word collusion is asinine, especially when Joe nor I went there. It is silly, especially when it comes to him. I never meant anything to come across as such. I always try to put myself in the other teams shoes. And in Steve's spot, while a one in a thousand chance of getting into the money, for me it would require a lot of innings pitched and embracing risk by double start guys with a few weeks left. 32 innings of 40k 4 win .5 whip baseball would help more than anything a couple middle relievers would do. I am just giving my thoughts on why it was surprising to me. And it wouldn't be surprising unless we had such respect for him as being the best player. But again, I completely understand not wanting Verlander to further ruin things if you don't want to drop further. I just cannot really apologize without at least giving my logic for feeling how I did in the first place. It wouldn't be as sincere or make as much sense.

2. King of Queens. Your lineup the last week seemed like a slap in the face at the time, and the mocking nature of your posts did not help my thoughts on the matter. It honestly made me wonder what I ever did to you. I would not have called you for help with something this summer if I didn't like and respect you. That being said, I think I may owe you the biggest apology of all. After reading your explanation it made some sense, if you were serious about not knowing about Keuchel being out. The fact you said you missed the memo on him made it easier to accept. I am still not sure how you did, when you were researching double start pitchers to pick up, but I can at least see how it could happen. It made no sense on the surface to take out Holland and Kimbrel while in a save race for two guys not even pitching. Hopefully, you can at least understand why we were curious, especially since we both knew it would result in ratio meltdown that would impact the standings. If you are going after mediocre double start pitching when several closers were available to gain in saves and ratios, it is still tough to comprehend not getting the memo that Keuchel was out and Gonzalez wasn't pitching either. So forgive me for wondering what your agenda was when it certainly was not going to gain you points, and could drop points to those in contention(and did). Benching your ratio lock down guys(Holland and Kimbrel) while in save battle and ratio battle for two starters not scheduled to pitch made no sense to me. We also didn't know who set the lineup, especially considering I was hard on Mark over that ridiculous Padilla situation. While I don't think there is anyway you could actually cash, the fact that it would be tough to even come up with that story if you didn't think it was possible makes me want to apologize. If you accept it awesome, if not I understand. Again, I didn't post your lineup in the first place. But I did agree that it was peculiar, so wasn't going to leave my partner hung out to dry on his own. Possibly I am a bit too loyal.

Looking back, I am not sure what I should have done. One option would have been to just let it simmer and shut my mouth. But the problem was that these issues bothered me enough that I brought them up to a couple people at least. And they said they would have a tough time understanding as well, I felt it would be better to let them explain in public than continuing on the private path. And this speaks to KOQ(who I will give the benefit of doubt) and Glenn Lowy who I will never agree with on his approach. If I am questioning them privately, they at least need to be able to explain themselves.

Possibly, I should have just brought up a discussion on what the proper method is in a high dollar league, in regard to setting lineups, knowing that whatever you opt for will impact the league standings. This is a discussion for when out of it. Here are some of the options.

1. Set your best team without looking at the standings, essentially looking at it as though it is a weekly game. This is what I do. I don't care to know what the standings look like when making calls if I am out of it. If a player is injured I will grab someone on wire if I think about it. Lean towards taking more innings to help counting stats and hoping to get lucky on ratios to gain in all 4.

2. Just quit altogether and don't switch anyone, anytime. Can't get on board with this approach in any league, let alone a 20k league.

3. Set a lineup, but only a half ass one that does not remove anyone unless they are injured. Leaving your closers and double start red hot pitchers on your bench. While you can say this won't impact the league, it actually does impact the league. Someone is going to benefit from whatever approach is taken, and someone else is not going to. So I cannot get behind this one at all. To take the time to "set" a lineup, but not actually put in your best players is not a proper option either IMO.

4. Really try and attack specific points, from specific people. One person did try to do this, even draining faab to try and accomplish this mission. I cannot fault him though, as he was trying to gain points, which is the goal in fantasy baseball. I would not be comfortable with this approach, but do understand it.

Would be curious as to what others think the best way to handle this situation.

[ALL-IN JD]

Chad,

I want to preface this by saying that I do not know Joe and you as well as I do Glenn, Glen and Steve but I certainly know enough to respect the both of you (and have you both on a few occasions). I also want to say that I have no horse in this race so just giving my opinion after following this thread (and how it looks to a casual observer:

The OVERRIDING message I got (if as you say you do not think that there was collusion) is sour grapes for not cashing in this league. I also can't help but wonder if this thread would exist if this was $150 League instead of a a 20K league?

I also think that even "remotely suggesting" that a player should possibly change his lineup (for personal gain) is WAY out of line. Not saying that was your intention but just saying how it looks.

As for how I would have handled it, that's the easy one. You and Joe HAD to know how this would be perceived once you brought this to the boards. You guys weren't just questioning the methods of three novices you were questioning three guys with impeccable character. Once again, from the outside looking in, this thread can only be looked at as an accusation that any or all three of them did something fishy to specifically hurt Joe and you. The ONLY way that this should have been handled (especially if you do not think anything like collusion was done) was privately. You may not have gotten the answers you wanted or hoped for but at least all of you guys would have been able to speak your piece. There was no way in hell anything good could have ever came from Joe's initial posting on the boards.

You wanted to know people's thoughts so I am just giving mine. I hope you and Joe take it for what it's worth which is just one persons opinion.


Jeff

[Deadheadz]

Our minds want to make sense from chaos. We all see patterns even when they are random or coincidental.

I can see where the "evidence" can be deemed suspicious. But only if you're already looking for it.


We all hope our opponents will make mistakes so why must we jump to conclusions of wrong doing when they do?

Making sense from chaos. That's my opinion.

[croakerkane]

This is none of my business, but I have been following this, and.....

This will be my fourth year in the NFBC, and it is by far the best thing going. Entries for all budgets with the chance to win quite a bit of money. I used to play in similar leagues that I loved that have all closed down due to lack of interest. I would hope that we all want to see the NFBC to continue to grow and welcome new players.

In my first ever slow draft league a veteran posted that I would love the NFBC because it has a great community of players that are knowledgeable, competitive, and love baseball.

Had I read this thread prior to that, I would have had serious doubts about that. I would have wondered if I was spending my money for a poor experience. I would hope that the NFBC's best interest is always a priority. I want MORE people to join the NFBC so it doesn't close down like the others I so much enjoyed. This seems to be counterproductive to that goal; meaning that a lot of people would second guess spending money to join a league where their every move is being scrutinized.

I have a self-proclaimed "fantasy baseball rival" that I have recruited for the NFBC. He has played two years in a row and plans on a third. I would expect that at crunch time he WOULD attempt to take points from me, and to be clear, I am in no way saying that that is what happened here. I have no way of knowing that, nor do I care. He would be very interested in this thread, but I will not direct him to it, because I think it would decrease his excitement, which is HUGE, about what goes on in the NFBC.

Bottom line, if a man pays the same money that I do, be it $150 or $20,000, he's got a right to set his lineup anyway he wants to.

Fortunately, I don't think too many new potential players read the message boards.

Good luck to all this year......

[KJ Duke]

This is a discussion for when out of it. Here are some of the options.

1. Set your best team without looking at the standings, essentially looking at it as though it is a weekly game. This is what I do. I don't care to know what the standings look like when making calls if I am out of it. If a player is injured I will grab someone on wire if I think about it. Lean towards taking more innings to help counting stats and hoping to get lucky on ratios to gain in all 4.

2. Just quit altogether and don't switch anyone, anytime. Can't get on board with this approach in any league, let alone a 20k league.

3. Set a lineup, but only a half ass one that does not remove anyone unless they are injured. Leaving your closers and double start red hot pitchers on your bench. While you can say this won't impact the league, it actually does impact the league. Someone is going to benefit from whatever approach is taken, and someone else is not going to. So I cannot get behind this one at all. To take the time to "set" a lineup, but not actually put in your best players is not a proper option either IMO.

4. Really try and attack specific points, from specific people. One person did try to do this, even draining faab to try and accomplish this mission. I cannot fault him though, as he was trying to gain points, which is the goal in fantasy baseball. I would not be comfortable with this approach, but do understand it.

Would be curious as to what others think the best way to handle this situation.

No doubt, all 4 of these options are exercised by different players, different times, different leagues.

If there is a guideline for NFBC leagues, #2 should certainly be discouraged. As for the other three, I think they are all viable options. For myself, I will generally try to maximize my points and lineups in all leagues along the lines of option #1, but the lesser money on the line and the farther out of it I am, the less attention those teams will see in the second half of the season. I could try harder to be a saint and give max effort to every single team, but time constraints and capitalism overwhelm my sainthood.

And, mistakes will be made. I'll generally screw up a couple lineups each season for teams that are IN CONTENTION, so you can be sure I'll screw up at least a few for those which are out of it. If Chad or Joe or someone else is scrutinizing my "out of it" lineups each season more than I am, as was done for the Glenns'es in this league, I'm sure they'll eventually come up with something that looks fishy (although I can assure you it would not be intended).

[Glenneration X]

Sigh.

You're pissed off Chad? Well I'm sorry to hear that. Believe it or not, when you and your partner started these ridiculous threads with these slanderous accusations (your definition of slander and mine are obviously not the same), I was a bit angry myself. When they resurfaced again and again over the couple weeks that followed, I may have gotten even a little angrier. That is no longer the case however. As time went on and with the perspective that time gives, I had moved on from those initial feelings, put them behind me, and was more than okay with burying these threads away from the front pages of our message boards and into the dark recesses of our memories where they belong .

Of course, after over 6 weeks of blissful silence on the subject, you've chosen to revisit these allegations....again. I suppose I could get angry again, but I'm not. If anything I'm just a little confused, but mostly I feel sorry for you and Joe. It must be awful living in a paranoid and cynical world of your own making, a world that makes you feel that there are people out there to get you. I am not one of those people, never was. I was not out to get you before and I am not out to get you now. If my responses to the baseless interrogations of you and your partner in crime are not to your liking, that's unfortunate. They are merely the facts as my mind sees it, merely the answers to the questions you put out there. As you claimed regarding your own thoughts, "I cannot help what goes through my mind". If that pisses you off, so be it. The one difference between your thoughts and mine of course are that yours are based solely on innuendo and conjecture. Mine on provable fact.

Although you've added nothing new in your latest post, you've revisited several accusations previously asserted and answered. Although it pains me to have to go through this process yet again, I will try one last time to answer them as clearly as possible. I hope to do so in a way this time that leaves little room for further doubt.

As for the main event, I brought it up since I was not sure why you did that either. It was odd that my bid would have won every other league, and you didn't acquire him in your other main events, even though you needed steals even worse in those if memory serves. That is not slander either. That is true. All this went through my mind when trying to figure out what your gameplan was.

Chad, your quote above is obviously in regards to the Jordan Schafer FAAB pickup I made on August 10th in our NFBC Main Event league that you stated in a previous post was the genesis of your suspicion that I was making moves just "to block you".

Jordan Schafer (Min) $32 Main Event March 26 8 pm ET League 2 Glenneration X / Baseball HQ
Jordan Schafer (Min) $70 $1300 AL Auction March 28 4 pm PT Glenneration X
Jordan Schafer (Min) $28 $2500 Auction Championship New York March 21 5 pm ET Glenneration X
Jordan Schafer (Min) $28 Diamond League Glenneration X
Jordan Schafer (Min) $39 MLBC League (PRIVATE) Glenneration X
Jordan Schafer (Min) $29 Online Championship Feb 28 9:00 pm Lg.2650 Glenneration X

These are all the leagues I bid on in FAAB and won Jordan Schafer on August 10th. Each one of these bids would have also beat your bid for Schafer in our league. You weren't in any of these leagues outside of the Main you referenced. So perhaps "my gameplan" was not to keep you from your needed SB's. Perhaps my gameplan was nothing more than to pick up Schafer, a player I obviously liked....and based on my winning bid, maybe just a little more than you did.

Where did I find all this information? These "facts"? All I did was go back 9 pages on our message boards to Tom's weekly listing of FAAB pickups for that particular week. It took all of 30 seconds.

But what about my other two Main Events where I didn't pick up Schafer on August 10th that you note as further evidence of a potential ulterior motive on my part? Well you obviously checked my FAAB pickups for that week. If you had taken just another 30 seconds and checked the pickups for those leagues for the week prior, you would have seen that Schafer was already rostered by August 10th. I couldn't have picked him up for those other Mains, he wasn't available in FAAB.

60 seconds total. 60 seconds looking into facts instead of letting your suspicions run away with you for months. Those 60 seconds may have prevented months of simmering paranoia and may have prevented these last two months of ridiculous accusations. 60 seconds and you would have realized there was no inappropriate agenda in my actions and may have saved both of us a whole lot of the wasted time that followed.

I have no idea of what the "football issue that floored you" is in regards to because you conveniently left out any specifics whatsoever, but I'm guessing it would be easily proven a misguided suspicion as well.

To me, setting a horrific lineup intentionally is ridiculous. And that is exactly what you did. I wouldn't want people to know either if I were you. It is embarrassing.

I don't believe I have anything to be embarrassed about and I have no problem with people knowing the lineup I set. After all, 14 teams in that league immediately had access to my lineup, 13 whose owners still have opinions that mean something to me.

I also disagree with your assessment of it being a horrific lineup. It was not horrific. Well as "not horrific" as any lineup for a team with a 12th place finish can be. Nonetheless it was a valid, competitive lineup.

Gomes, Yan C
Montero, Miguel C
Vargas, Kennys 1B
Rendon, Anthony 2B
Beltre, Adrian 3B
Ramirez, Hanley SS
Bruce, Jay OF
Cain, Lorenzo OF
Cespedes, Yoenis OF
Upton, Justin OF
Viciedo, Dayan OF
Bogaerts, Xander MI
Flores, Wilmer CI
Craig, Allen UTL

Eovaldi, Nathan P
Garza, Matt P
Holland, Derek P
Miller, Shelby P
Norris, Bud P
Papelbon, Jonathan P
Paxton, James P
Tillman, Chris P
Wacha, Michael P

Granted, it pales in comparison to Donn Johnson's league championship lineup. However, there are no must sits there. No bench players, no injured players, no players who've lost their roles or starting jobs.

Still, let's call a spade a spade. What you and Joe consider horrific isn't my entire lineup, but my not maximizing starts in an attempt to gain the W's and K's you both continue to state were readily available for me to obtain.

1. Set your best team without looking at the standings, essentially looking at it as though it is a weekly game. This is what I do. I don't care to know what the standings look like when making calls if I am out of it. If a player is injured I will grab someone on wire if I think about it. Lean towards taking more innings to help counting stats and hoping to get lucky on ratios to gain in all 4.

Yet right here you state that you don't care about the standings when setting your lineup for teams not in contention. So in essence, if you could gain 10 points in Saves and ratios, but none in W's and K's, you still wouldn't adjust your lineup accordingly. Isn't that just a bit hypocritical? Wouldn't that scenerio put your lineup decision under the same scrutiny and antagonism that you and Joe have done with others?

The fact is in rotisserie baseball, there is no such thing as an optimal lineup for all situations. This isn't as simple as fantasy football or a points based baseball game, where the goal is obviously to put the lineup out there that will obtain the most points. In a category based rotisserie game, if you maximize starts, you may hurt saves and ratios. If you maximize closers, you may hurt wins and K's.

And that's where we get to what you and Joe truly feel is my horrific lineup decision. My decision not to switch Josh Collmenter (Really? Since when did Collmenter become a must-start Clayton Kershaw type pitcher?) into my lineup to maximize starts and make a run at the available win & K points I wasn't even aware of, two of those points which belonged to Donn Johnson, the team you and Joe were hoping to catch. Yes, it turns out there were other W & K points available to me. But there were Saves points available too. In fact, one of those saves points was yours.

So for points that are absolutely meaningless to me and I wasn't even monitoring, do I put in the extra starter for a reliever to try and obtain those Win points and unknowingly hurt Donn? Or do I put in the extra reliever (Sean Doolittle) for a starter to chase those available Save points and unknowingly hurt you and Joe? Do I put both in and try to decide which two of the other starters in my lineup to remove? Or do I instead keep the status quo in a valid healthy lineup in lieu of making random meaningless moves to me that could have great meaning and effect for one or the other of you (or one or more of your other competitors) in your chases for serious dollars. I chose the latter. Perhaps it was the wrong decision. However, it was made for the right reason. At least in my mind.

This has all been explained to you and Joe over and over, privately and publicly, to I'm sure the complete dismay of all who are following. However, that hasn't been good enough for either of you.

You claimed that I tried to get you to sit your closers on the bench. Not true at all.

Forgive me if I "misinterpreted" that you and Joe wanted me to put in Collmenter for Papelbon, and that my not doing so is the true cause of all your issues with my lineup. Besides the fact that this move would have been solely beneficial to your and Joe's cause on two fronts and only detrimental to Donn's, maybe it's the fact that the only player "named" in Joe's initial post in this thread to switch out for Collmenter was Papelbon. If you can't find where Joe documents this, it immediately precedes his blatant lie that Collmenter had been in my lineup the weeks prior.

And if that isn't enough, perhaps you can just re-read your first email to me in the email thread where you asked me to set a lineup, the only email in that 2-day thread sent before lineups locked. Maybe if you read closely, and read all of it, you can see why I would "misinterpret" that Collmenter for Palpebon was possibly your intent. Since you have no issue asking others for their opinions, or any issue POSTING WHAT YOU EMAILED ME, feel free to post that one and let it speak for itself. I won't do it, but I already stated elsewhere I'd have no issue with you doing so. Maybe you missed it. Perfect opportunity to prove me "wrong" with facts.

I know you have lost respect for me.

Unfortunately, this is the only accurate point either you or Joe have posted in either of your attack threads. Where you've been incorrect all along is that anything prior to these threads caused that feeling.

Chad, all this ridiculous BS aside, I hope this can be the end of the public back and forth sniping between us. Honestly, it's exhausting and a waste of your and my time. We don't have to like each other. However, this dialogue diminishes us all. You and Joe, Glenn Schroter and Steve, and the contest also. All have been diminished. And I have been diminished as well. No one comes out of this untarnished to some degree. And honestly there has been no benefit to anyone at all. It's all been negative. For my part, I will no longer participate in this. I've said my piece, too many times. I can hope that the potential damage done to the contest as alluded to in Croakerkane's post is someday forgotten.

I apologize to Greg and Tom for taking part in this back and forth. I know it pains and concerns you. I also apologize to all others that have had to suffer through it.

[Yah Mule]

My apologies to everyone involved, but I also hope this will be the end of the public discourse on the topic. I believe Tom and Greg view this league as a marquee event for the NFBC and I agree it must pain them to see it used as the backdrop for this recurring argument. I'm not taking sides or blaming anybody, I'm just asking you to please let this fall off the front page and take further discussion to private communication.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Agreed. Enough is enough now. All have said their peace. We've left the thread active for those who were accused to defend their actions and to a man everyone has justified their lineups. Now let's move on.

If you want to continue this, pick up the phone and bitch at each other there. Or email each other.

This was a great league and from talking with many of the participants this has tarnished a great league. Hopefully we can pick up the pieces and continue with our Diamonds and Platinums. I've never been involved in a better draft than the NFBC Platinum. The atmosphere was FANTASTIC. The tension was UNBELIEVABLE. The participants were CORDIAL and COMPETITIVE. It was a great league with a tough finish. Time to turn the page and move onto 2015.

Thanks all if you can help us make that happen. Now let's go.

[uky]

As an outsider reading this and/or other threads on this topic, it's pitiful and a shame it had to come to this. I have no dog in the hunt, and never will, so hopefully, everybody will agree to disagree and move on to compete again....

[BK METS]

As I said at the start and I will end with this. All of this was baseless paranoia. I was not in this league and was able to view every move made and not one was in any way unjustified from owners trying to stay in it or be competitive. The plain truth, if you want it Chad and Joe, from an outsiders perspective is, you both should be ashamed for your accusations. They were uncalled for against 3 very respected players and should have been dealt with privately. As far as outsiders reading this thread, the NFBC is the most respected and legitimate fantasy baseball competition in the world and the accusations of 2 paranoid, sore losers should not be used as a reason why you shouldn't join these contests. Greg and Tom are simply the best and the competition is the greatest anywhere.

[Money]

I agree it's time to move on. Alan as an outsider you've had your say numerous times. You or any of the other outsiders were not part of the eb and flow of this league. The NFBC decided not to pull the thread back, this was decided because glenn thought others would learn not to enter these waters. What a joke, the vindication that is felt is only viewed by the few who visit here and they are sympathetic without the benefit of knowledge.

I stand behind my thoughts and beliefs and know that Chad is a great human being who isn't intimidated by a small mob type mentality. He simply had the unfortunate luck to have teamed up with me. This is on me, but I do not regret the conversation, some of emotional comments, yes, the topic? Absolutely not. This league went wrong with a number of weeks to go. I made the initial post while solidly in second place because I knew it needed to be addressed.

It's time to move past it and suggest it be taken down or it will probably flourish. For BK to have the final say with his prejudiced, deluted attitude is simply wrong.

The game won't be the same to me, but so what, it's fantasy sports, not life and death.

[CC's Desperados]

Your posts (Yellow Ledbetters) have devalued the event just as much as the original allegations. The bottom line of the story is:

Team A was in great position to win, but unfortunately, their team didn't play well over the last 3 weeks.

Last 3 weeks; Team Money

Week 27: At bats: 256, .230 with 22 runs, 4 HR's, 27 RBI, and 3 SB's
>>>>>>>> IP: 83, W: 7, ERA: 3.578, Whip: 1.113, 76 K's, and 2 SV's

Left on the bench 4 runs, 2 HR's, 9 RBI, 1 W, 2 SV's

Week 26: At bats: 301, .256 with 34 runs, 11 HR's, 38 RBI, and 4 SB's
>>>>>>>> IP: 54.1, W: 2, ERA: 3.975, Whip: 1.270, 49 K's, and 2 SV''s

Left on the bench 3 runs, 1 RBI, 2 SB's, and 2 SV's

Week 25: At Bats: 303, .257 with 31 runs, 7 HR's, 28 RBI, and 7 SB's
>>>>>>>> IP: 51.3, W: 2, ERA: 2.455, Whip: 1.013, 43 K's and 1 SV

Left on the bench 7 run, 4 RBI, 1 SB, 1 W, and 23 K"s

His team didn't have any points lost in BA or ERA.

The top 4 teams finished 3rd through 6th in batting average.

Team Johnson won ERA with Money and Bama finished 3rd and 4th.

The Last Resort had these pitching stats for the last 3 weeks:

Week 27: IP: 67, W: 4, ERA: 1.612, Whip: 0.955, 56 K's, and 4 SV's

Week 26: IP: 66.2, W: 7, ERA: 2.430, Whip 1.170, 58 K's, and 1 SV

Week 25: IP: 71, W: 4, ERA: 4.056, Whip 1.324, 55 K's, and 2 SV's.

His success is wins led to him finishing only 13th in weeks - 5 ahead of King of Queens (12 wins in the last 3 weeks). Team Philby's only had 5 wins over the last 3 weeks to lose one point. Just a case of a team in the hunt and one that is not.

The Last Resort also picked one point in whip over KJ/Stadts over the last 3 weeks; Week 27: 0.893 >> 1.192, Week 26: 1.170 >> 1.346, Week 25: 1.324 << 1.219.

The Last Resort also may have picked one point in ERA over King of Queens over the last 3 weeks: Week 27: 1.162 >> 4.309, Week 26: 2.430 >> 2.835, Week 25: 4.056 << 1.475. Close call with doing further math.

Over the last 3 weeks, Team Money scored 87 runs, which is well below the goal for each week (about 43 per week). This team finished with 950 runs. Four teams finished about them in runs by 15 >> The Last Resort (3rd place team) - Week 27 - 32 runs, Week 26 - 43 runs, and Week 25 - 26 runs: 91 runs
>> Pale Hogs - Week 27 - 39 runs, Week 26 - 40 runs, and Week 25 - 27 runs: 106 runs = 1 lost point - finished at 960.
>>Upton or Hawkins - Week 27 - 23 runs, Week 26 - 36 runs, and Week 25 - 39 runs: 98 runs >> no change finished at 958
>>Going Number Two - Week 27 - 31 runs, Week 26 - 29 runs, and Week 25 - 36 runs: 96 runs >> no change finished at 957.

In week 27, Upton or Hawkins took a zero from one OF spot with no players to replace on the bench (In Favor of team Money).

In HR's, Team Money finished at 233. They hit 22 HR's over the last 3 weeks, but they finished 1 HR short of The Last Resort (19 HR's). No lost points - 2 HR's left on the bench in the last week by Team Money would have moved them to 3rd overall.

In RBI, Team Money finished with 957. They had 93 over the last 3 weeks falling 2 RBI behind 3rd place team Last Resort (102 in the last 3 weeks) = 1 lost double swing points (959 RBI). Bama had 104 RBI score to pull away - 974 RBI. Plus, Team Money left 9 RBI on the bench.

In SB's, Team Money finished with 135 SB's (14 over the last 3 weeks) to finish one SB behind KJ/Stadts (16 over the last 3 weeks - 9 of which were in week 25). Team Money had 3 missed SB's over the 3 weeks.

In Wins, Team Money finished with 93 tied with Palehogs. Team Money lost ground to the pack in weeks 25 and 26 in wins (only 2 in each week) while making a late rush in week 27 with 7. Palehogs only had 11 wins as well only 43.2 innings in week 25, 56,2 in week 26, and 61.1 in week 27. So there was no extra effort to chase wins by this team. KJ/Stadts finished with 95 wins (10 wins over the last 3 weeks). The door was wide open for Team Money to gain points in this category. Those 2 missed wins over the last 2 weeks would have made an impact. Team Bama finished 2nd in wins with 129. Team Johnson won the league by 5 overall points finished with 84 wins tied with 2 other teams.

In K's, Team Money finished 1396 strikeouts - 168 over the last 3 week (76 in week 27) while finishing 5 behind King of Queens (54 K's in week 27 with one zero, which was in favor of team Money, 62 in week 26, 53 in week 25). King of Queens beat team Money in K's in week 25 and 26 to gain the edge. His last week of managing wasn't against team Money especially with a zero in one pitching spot.

Bama finished 1st in K's (1573). The Last Resort finished 2nd in K's (1455 - 169 over the last 3 weeks) five ahead of Plataeans (85.1 innings pitched in week 27 with 58 K's - 46 in week 26, 56 in week 25 = 160 over 3 weeks). Team Johnson finished 10th in K's (1298) - 21 ahead of PaleHogs.

In SV's, team Money finished 8th in SV's (73) - 1 save ahead of KJ/Stadts. Team Johnson ran away with saves (112). The Last Resort finished in 2nd with 95. Bama finished in 14th with 10 beating Plataeans by 5 saves.

I looked at this last October when Joe was posting on the boards. His team was outplayed by The Last Resort over the last 3 weeks. The Last Resort won a some key points by playing well. Team Money was looking for a life raft over the last couple of days to save his franchise. It was a complete joke. It's almost like he wanted some teams to try to help him and the some other teams not to try.

This is a great group of owners and the winners/losers in this league shouldn't be tied to one bullshit sob story.

[King of Queens]

Tough to dispute these findings. When you break down each category, it's pretty clear to see what happened over the final few weeks.

I would also add that in a league this competitive, every good (or bad) roster move is magnified in importance.

[ALL-IN JD]

Well said Shawn and I couldn't agree more.

[Yellow Ledbetters]

I haven't devalued anything.

I asked a fair question and instead of an answer got bombarded with vitriol from some people of questionable character.

All i wanted to know is if there was truly something shady going on why would the person who was the victim want to play again? In a sense I was defending the accused in a sense because it seemed disingenuous to accuse somebody of something and then agree to play with them again.

Play or don't play, but please leave my name out of it.