Urgent! Last Chance For Honesty and Common sense to prevail!!!

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 1:44 am

There have been a lot of bizarre things said about Greg and I the past few months but are we now being accused of colluding with someone in our own event?

I think we may have a winner for the most ridiculous statement posted on these or any message boards so far. That one may be tough to top - although I know there will be folks who will try.

In any event, Bob is free to scream at the heavens all he wants but that isn't going to change the fact his accusations are groundless. Greg and I have made our ruling and it stands. We consider it to be a common sense ruling for all of the reasons we have listed both here and via email to Robert which he has been kind enough to post. We're sorry if it's not the ruling he wants to hear but it's clear that nothing untoward is occurring either with our ruling or with the original drop by the owner involved.

ESPN8 THE OCHO · Post by **ESPN8 THE OCHO** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 2:38 am

Greg, I am unsure why you are so defensive. My feeling is that if one was to take decision making out of the drops it would lead to no debate.(Unless there is collusion where a case for a player dropped not on the list to be pulled would be OK, however supporting evidence must be presented. In this Byrd case I think collusion is far from the truth) I think that is a totally fair point of view.

You may have recieved emails supporting your decision but on the boards it was overwhelming that the player should be left in the pool. The only posts that said otherwise were very much (I don't think he should be pulled but I undertsand) At least how I remember it. I will go back and read again.

In any event I don't spin anything. I discussed the facts of the Grady drop and he being pulled and that players who are way more productive that were dropped and were allowed to stay. There was discussion regarding those facts. Just because I didn't agree with the ruling doesn't mean I am spinning the issue, or that I dislike the contest, or that I think you and Tom and all involved are not very capable and fair.

From day one I have been a huge supporter of this event. I am sure I have steered people to join and have discouraged very very few if any.

ESPN8 THE OCHO · Post by **ESPN8 THE OCHO** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:37 am

I had a chance to go back over the post of Grady being pulled out of the mix. It looks like there were 73 posts. In reviewing the post I broke it down by: Posts Supporting his being pulled, Posts against his being pulled and benign. Benign were posts offering solutions, making jokes or on the fence one way or the other.

For fairness I subtracted my 6 posts of being against the drop and Greg's 11 posts for supporting the drop.

17 posts were against the drop

3 posts supported the drop

36 posts were benign

Obviously many of the same people were posting. However while 17 of 20 posts being being against the drop when taking a stand one way or another is not 95%, it is 85% and still an overwhelming majority.

It can also be argued that I miscalculated or drew a conclusion from a post that someone else would view differently.

I did not start this post, and there were numerous posts before I gave my opinion. That is not spin.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:56 am

Originally posted by ESPN8 THE OCHO:

I had a chance to go back over the post of Grady being pulled out of the mix. It looks like there were 73 posts. In reviewing the post I broke it down by: Posts Supporting his being pulled, Posts against his being pulled and benign. Benign were posts offering solutions, making jokes or on the fence one way or the other.

For fairness I subtracted my 6 posts of being against the drop and Greg's 11 posts for supporting the drop.

17 posts were against the drop

3 posts supported the drop

36 posts were benign

Obviously many of the same people were posting. However while 17 of 20 posts being being against the drop when taking a stand one way or another is not 95%, it is 85% and still an overwhelming majority.

It can also be argued that I miscalculated or drew a conclusion from a post that someone else would view differently.

I did not start this post, and there were numerous posts before I gave my opinion. That is not spin. These are Message Boards, not a polling place.

Message Boards, inevitably, bring more negative comments to the table than positive.

Gekko gets more responses than anybody on the Boards. His posts, for the most part, go against the grain, and will render more emotions than other posts. It is just the way of the Message Boards.

I didn't respond to the Sizemore or Byrd threads. I thought they were non-issues that were blown out of proportion. I agree with Chesty about this thread just being stupid.

[ June 30, 2010, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: DOUGHBOYS ]

ESPN8 THE OCHO · Post by **ESPN8 THE OCHO** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:58 am

I am OK with that. I was just told that I misread the tone of a certain post. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't mistaken.

Also the overwhelming feel of this post is positive.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:10 am

Originally posted by ESPN8 THE OCHO:

Also the overwhelming feel of this post is positive.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 6:18 am

Originally posted by ESPN8 THE OCHO:

I had a chance to go back over the post of Grady being pulled out of the mix. It looks like there were 73 posts. In reviewing the post I broke it down by: Posts Supporting his being pulled, Posts against his being pulled and benign. Benign were posts offering solutions, making jokes or on the fence one way or the other.

For fairness I subtracted my 6 posts of being against the drop and Greg's 11 posts for supporting the drop.

17 posts were against the drop

3 posts supported the drop

36 posts were benign

Obviously many of the same people were posting. However while 17 of 20 posts being being against the drop when taking a stand one way or another is not 95%, it is 85% and still an overwhelming majority.

It can also be argued that I miscalculated or drew a conclusion from a post that someone else would view differently.

I did not start this post, and there were numerous posts before I gave my opinion. That is not spin. Did you ever stop to think that you are much, much less likely to post if you agreed with the decision? The guy saved you from a bad pickup you should send him naked pictures of Stephanie Mcmahon not call him Vince Mcmahon.

Obviously it was a tough and controversial call that many disagreed with. I do not think you should start sending your resume to Gallup just yet.

Money · Post by **Money** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 6:50 am

This thread has ran its course. It's time to move on.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:52 am

No one has even hit on the most ridiculous aspect of this thread, which is that it is a $157 bid. If we were talking about $400 here it would make more sense. The psychologist in me says this is a classic case of displaced anger. Untouchables whittled away all of his money and could not afford a player he likes so now he is trying to take out his anger on everyone else. Lesson: if you want to pick up players you like all year, don't spend all your money in April.

Also, as a Byrd owner, dude, he's not that good. He is on pace for a combination of 26 homers and stolen bases. If he hits .270 in the second half, his average will be .290. Pretty average.

I think Tom wrote the one post saying there are no grounds for the accusation and there didn't need to be any more discussion from him or Greg. The multiple posts are making the discussion continue. Drop it and let this guy argue with himself.

E · Post by E » Wed Jun 30, 2010 11:50 am

I do find this topic mildly amusing and helpful to take my mind off the fact that my pitching ERA has gone from 3.80 to 4.22 in about two weeks (Hughes, Oswalt, Qualls, Bonderman, etc).

Scott Boras · Post by **Scott Boras** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:55 pm

The moral of this story is never spend $397 on a prospect who whiffs a fraction as much as Stanton in a 12 team league. There will always be better OF's available for less.

It is an interesting story as the team who won Byrd is currently in second place and the accuser is in 3rd only a couple points back. Guess Who's in first? Pun Intended.

Mark, what is it with you and controversy? Even when you're not involved, it's chasing you!

[ June 30, 2010, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: Scott Boras ]

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 1:32 pm

Originally posted by Scott Boras:

The moral of this story is never spend $397 on a prospect who whiffs a fraction as much as Stanton in a 12 team league. There will always be better OF's available for less.

It is an interesting story as the team who won Byrd is currently in second place and the accuser is in 3rd only a couple points back. Guess Who's in first? Pun Intended.

Mark, what is it with you and controversy? Even when you're not involved, it's chasing you! stanton with a crappy batting avg and a 50/50 shot to be demoted is one of the easier calls this year.

controversy? what controversy? looks like my team lost utley for a while. will likely impact my team quite a bit.

as for byrd, i didn't even bid on him. HE WAS THAT VALUABLE!

Red Sox Nation · Post by **Red Sox Nation** » Wed Jun 30, 2010 2:03 pm

I also find this thread thoroughly entertaining. I mean of course collusion is involved when Marlon Byrd gets dropped in a 12 team league.

Byrd-man last 19 games -- 0 Hr's 1 RBI 6 runs 0 Sb's

Last 42 games 2 HRs 1 SB

This guy is a difference maker.

[ June 30, 2010, 08:06 PM: Message edited by: Red Sox Nation ]

converge241 · Post by **converge241** » Thu Jul 01, 2010 3:59 am

All in..Max bid on Marlon Byrd LOL

team z · Post by **team z** » Thu Jul 01, 2010 3:38 pm

Originally posted by Red Sox Nation:

I also find this thread thoroughly entertaining. I mean of course collusion is involved when Marlon Byrd gets dropped in a 12 team league.

Byrd-man last 19 games -- 0 Hr's 1 RBI 6 runs 0 Sb's

Last 42 games 2 HRs 1 SB

This guy is a difference maker. Yet the "sharks" found it quite inviting enough to spend more on Byrd than any other player. It makes me laugh when I'm told how worthless Byrd is yet it took 157 dollars in a run down Faab budget league to get him. Compared to what was on the OF FA list Byrd looked like Bonds.

Look bottom line is I saw it coming. I alerted the commissioners of this league three days early. It went down just like I said.

team z · Post by **team z** » Thu Jul 01, 2010 3:51 pm

Originally posted by Gekko:

also, why didn't you complain when these players were dropped and then picked up...

Troy Glaus

Scott Rolen

Miguel Montero

Jose Bautista Just wanted to make sure I answered this question. The Montero cut did alarm me. However a catcher with a busted up knee is pretty risky so it's hard to call some one out for that cut.

The rest of those names where available fairly early on when all Faab budgets where well stocked. Also, some of those players were available for multiple weeks.

team z · Post by **team z** » Thu Jul 01, 2010 4:01 pm

Originally posted by Scott Boras:

The moral of this story is never spend $397 on a prospect who whiffs a fraction as much as Stanton in a 12 team league. There will always be better OF's available for less.

Well as a amateur I feel a lot better about my 397 dollar bid for Stanton then the highly regarded professional expert bid of 258 dollars on Hank Waiver Wire.

team z · Post by **team z** » Thu Jul 01, 2010 4:03 pm

[ July 01, 2010, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: the untouchables ]

team z · Post by **team z** » Sat Jul 03, 2010 7:11 am

Digging back for as much time as I have to spare at the moment I can only find 2 other leagues where Byrd was cut. Both 12 team leagues.

March 26 1pm - he was not picked up the next week. With three part time OF's picked up the next week I can only guess that no one thought they had enough FAAB to bid on Byrd.

March 20 4pm - he was picked up for 390 faab dollars with a runner up bid of 124.

Any drafted player worth that kind of money should not be added to the player pool. That player obviously has impact potential on the standings.

[ July 03, 2010, 01:11 PM: Message edited by: the untouchables ]

Gekko · Post by **Gekko** » Sat Jul 03, 2010 9:11 am

untouch - u still don't get it. you are in the less than 5% of the baseball population who thinks byrd is actually good enough to be pulled from FAAB. the other 95%+ know that the ruling is correct. byrd already started his decent from fantasy relevance a few weeks ago. i wouldn't be surprised to see him dropped in more leagues moving forward. sorry.

The Franchise · Post by **The Franchise** » Sat Jul 03, 2010 10:15 am

Just for the record, I'm in this league and I saw nothing wrong with the Byrd drop. Although my team is struggling I always grind it out no matter what.

Based on all that I bid $5 on him. I'm also in the camp that feels he is not a difference maker.

Thanks

rkulaski · Post by **rkulaski** » Sat Jul 03, 2010 3:03 pm

Originally posted by E:

I do find this topic mildly amusing and helpful to take my mind off the fact that my pitching ERA has gone from 3.80 to 4.22 in about two weeks (Hughes, Oswalt, Qualls, Bonderman, etc). Yep I thank this thread for taking my mind off of Ubaldo's collapse today in the 3rd inning - 7 earned !! ugghh.

TOXIC ASSETS · Post by **TOXIC ASSETS** » Sat Jul 03, 2010 3:18 pm

Bjoak's post hit the nail on the head. If Byrd was that big of a difference maker he would have gone for a lot more $$$ than $157. This is also a good example of why you don't waste your free agent money in April. Fantasy baseball is unpredictable and you better have some reserve money there, in case you want to bid on a player like this....for your own team, or just to keep a player away from another team like apparently is the case here. BTW---I have Byrd on one of my two satelite teams and he's done absolutely nothing in the past month. He's an average OF playing on a bad team.