I guess no one is looking at drops?

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:09 pm

People in my leage (lv 6) are dropping people like Mussina instead of Zack Miner... Am I the only one to this this is nuts?

Spy

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 1:36 pm

Spy,

I scan the drops every week. I haven't seen Tom's post yet on this week's drops but I will definitely note it. I did so a few weeks ago, when Eric Byrnes was dropped and then scooped up a week later by a team in the overall contention. Byrnes, all though not a big name" has been a fantasy stud this year. He went 20/20 today as an aside.

I hope the drops are monitored, b/c alot of people spend alot of time on this and both league and overall races are so tight that every point counts.

All we can do is bring it to Greg/Tom's attention on these boards and hope they make the fairest decisions. I have faith in them, but we have to do our part and atleast bring it up. Ecspecially since we are also competing with the NFFC and Greg/Tom's families for their love and affection.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 1:26 am

We are monitoring the drops every week and as you know Greg and I do not like to step in except for cases that we believe are extreme. We'll go over the list today and if there are any issues of that nature we'll take the appropriate measures. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 am

Well, I guess it is water under the bridge because those players (in Mathis league and LV 6) have been picked up.

I am pretty pissed about the Mussina/Martinez/Pierre/Freel drops. Especially the Mussina drop because the guy KEPT Zack Miner instead. Seems like intential unbalancing to me

Spy

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:50 am

Mussina and Martinez were main event drops, correct?

#2 overall snagged Pedro. Good p-up.

Moneymaker · Post by **Moneymaker** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 6:28 am

I just don't get it. How is Pedro allowed to be picked up, and why aren't the teams that are close to this guy screaming?

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 7:06 am

Money,

I can tell you I am not that happy with it. I missed that drop in week 22, but as I look back, the team that cut him has Chan Ho Park. Park was placed on the DL 8/23/06 with intestinal bleeding. So on 8/24 the Angry Fish made the decision that his 14th place team would be better off hoping Chan Ho would come off the DL, rather than Pedro. I don't get it. This should definitely be looked at.

We are in a battle for the overall prizes, where the difference between 2nd place money (15K), and 6th place money (Free Entry) is significant. I can't see the 14th place team in our league, Zaleski, dropping Juan Pierre or Jered Weaver to help us out.

Needless to say this should be looked at. I know Greg/Tom like to stay hands off, but the Main Event deserves special attention, and it is disappointing to say the least that Pedro gets cut, and Chan Ho did not.

JEagle · Post by **JEagle** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:04 am

Unfortunately I have been on vacation and i am very limited to internet acces..but if guys like mussina & pedro are dropped they need to be pulled out the FA pool..this is completey unfair..I have put a lot of time an effort into this and while it may or may not affect me I am in the top 25 overall and dont want this nonsense to hurt my chances. I have been in a lot of leagues where nonsense is tolerated but for this kind of $$$ it shhould be unacceptable..tom & greg may wanna try and stay out if possible..but at this juncture of the season they need to do what needs to be done..case closed

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:42 am

Guys, we allowed Pedro to be cut in this main event league because Willie Randolph has already said that at most he will get three more starts before the playoffs. There is a risk/reward factor in Pedro being allowed during the last four weeks of the season. The owner who cut him obviously had other options and we would have recommended to him to cut someone else, but that's not the main reason why we would have disallowed this move. Pedro's health and status during the last four weeks is the reason we allowed him to remain in the free agent pool.

We'll admit that for whatever reason we did not discuss the Mussina cut when we posted it. Either we both missed it or we both thought he was going to be sidelined longer. He will likely get 5-6 more starts during the next four weeks as he has 27 already. It's a move we should have looked at more closely and one I am discussing with Tom right now.

The Pierre and Freel cuts were done in a private league, but still should have been looked at just as closely. I don't like stolen base guys being available late in the season even in private leagues, and even in a private league I'm questioning myself on this decision.

Moneymaker · Post by **Moneymaker** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:33 am

My fantasy season is over, so I really don't have strong feelings about this -- but Greg, I disagree with your decision. I don't see any risk in rostering Pedro, and you've taken lesser players out of the pool before just to play it safe.

There is nothing but upside in this case. The current #2 overall team likely just got a late-season freebie.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:05 am

Originally posted by Moneymaker:

My fantasy season is over, so I really don't have strong feelings about this -- but Greg, I disagree with your decision. I don't see any risk in rostering Pedro, and you've taken lesser players out of the pool before just to play it safe.

There is nothing but upside in this case. The current #2 overall team likely just got a late-season freebie. I have no problem with your assessment Brian. But we got criticized last year for taking certain players out of the free agent pool and now we're getting criticized for not taking a player out of the pool. Pedro will get three more starts this season. In his last three starts before going on the DL, he had one win and 12 strikeouts. It's possible he could get three wins and 30 strikeouts, but we just felt there was a risk/reward with this transaction. We definitely could have taken the safer route, but we have been allowing more cuts this year like Eric Byrnes, so this has been more consistent to what we've done this year rather than comparing to last year.

Mussina might be more arguable than Pedro, in my mind.

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:06 am

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Moneymaker:

[QB] My fantasy season is over, so I really don't have strong feelings about this -- but Greg, I disagree with your decision. I don't see any risk in rostering Pedro, and you've taken lesser players out of the pool before just to play it safe.

There is nothing but upside in this case.

I disagree. Pedro's first start back is just as likely to be a shellacking as not. He didn't look too good just before going on the DL and will certainly want to work on mechanics before the playoffs. I could very easily see Randolph leaving him in rather like a Spring Training game. In any case, it's not a slam dunk for the new owner to start him.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:18 pm

As a full season owner of Pedro, I don't think he is a shoe-in to put up solid numbers. At least not enough to withdraw him from the pool. Sure he will arguably have better numbers than a #6 or #7 SP, but they won't be earth shattering from a relative perspective. If the #2 guy overall had the FAAB$ to get him and no one in his league gave it an effort, then that's just the way the cookie crumbles.

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:27 pm

In Greg I trust. However, like in the Eric Byrnes situation I disagree. I think these drops need to be looked at in the context of the team, and I don't understand any owner who has the prospects of either a couple of Pedro starts or a couple of Chan Ho Park starts the last few weeks of the season would opt for Chan Ho.

I think Greg even admits that's not the cut he would have made, so I would hope, atleast that the owner cutting him justified it to Greg.

It is concerning b/c 2nd to 6th is a $13,750 difference, and cuts like this in other leagues we have no control over. I just hope that Greg/Tom don't put too much faith in every owner. Being able to compete against 329 other owners is fantastic, but that which makes the main event great, also makes it most concerning.

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:33 pm

Honestly, Wagga Wagga, have you even considered dropping Pedro this year?

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:48 pm

Greg,

Wow, when taken together (Mussina & Pedro) something does look fishy enough that perhaps some further inquiries may be required. I find it more than a coincidence that both Mussina and Pedro were dropped by the same mangaer 'Angry Fish'. At a minimum I would question this guys integrity: one drop maybe, but two drops with 5 weeks left and dangling near last...what's there to gain?

I don't know which two of the three (Fogg, Park, Neshek) were picked up in their place, and or how much FAAB$ was out there in the league at the time, but its worth looking into further.

How active was this 300+ manager before these transactions and one week after? Are they consistent with someone who is/was really competing? If so, how in God's name is Park still on his roster? How do you go from 100 MPH (competing wise) from dropping someone like these guys to 0 MPH in leaving Park on your roster? I could see if he went after some top pitchers to drop these guys, but something is seriously a miss when going after guys that you value at $1 when dropping a couple guys that have arguably 3 weeks worth of some value.

It's not out of the realm that perhaps they were put out there for someone...and that does not necessarilly mean 'Swede Crush'.

[ September 05, 2006, 07:13 PM: Message edited by: nydownunder ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:18 pm

Originally posted by Joe Sambito:

In Greg I trust. However, like in the Eric Byrnes situation I disagree. I think these drops need to be looked at in the context of the team, and I don't understand any owner who has the prospects of either a couple of Pedro starts or a couple of Chan Ho Park starts the last few weeks of the season would opt for Chan Ho.

I think Greg even admits that's not the cut he would have made, so I would hope, atleast that the owner cutting him justified it to Greg.

It is concerning b/c 2nd to 6th is a $13,750 difference, and cuts like this in other leagues we have no control over. I just hope that Greg/Tom don't put too much faith in every owner. Being able to compete against 329 other owners is fantastic, but that which makes the main event great, also makes it most concerning. Agreed, but let's remember that the second place team has moved up before making this pickup. Pedro hasn't done anything for him yet. Lupi Asch has done a great job with that team as he drafted from the 15th spot with his father. Great job guys. I will look at the team cutting these guys further and certainly take that into consideration when looking at future drops, as I've done in the past.

Moneymaker · Post by **Moneymaker** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:43 pm

Is it just me, or does controversy strike every time Greg leaves town?

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 2:50 pm

Greg,

Don't mis-read my concerns. I have the upmost respect for all the teams in the top echelon, actually for most of the 330 teams. My beef is more with the team dropping them and that is where my concerns lie. Ecspecially when there are other very obvious drops. I am sure Swede was just being opportunistic, but that doesn't necessarily make it fair. Anyhow, our only recourse is these boards, and to make our opinions heard. It is up to you to do what you think is fair, but in my opinion one league have access to Mussina and Pedro in the final month while other leagues consider the likes of Kassan Gabbard is not that fair just b/c the Angry Fish is really mad his team floundered.

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 3:17 pm

Some good points since my last reply.

Without looking into the team/league that dropped Pedro I would just add this. If that team was battling another team for first in the league and was not in position to gain much in the SP categories, AND, his opponent(s) had slim margin(s) over some other owners in those categories, then perhaps releasing a guy like Pedro makes sense. Especially if the battling teams had very little money left.

Otherwise, waiving him over some of the other options just doesn't make sense.

triple a · Post by **triple a** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:49 pm

thats why its better in my opinion not to use bids for free agents. an order each week from last to first is better with a set # of pickups per year. ron shandler agreed with me when he was on here answering questions. triple a

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:08 pm

Originally posted by triple a:

thats why its better in my opinion not to use bids for free agents. an order each week from last to first is better with a set # of pickups per year. ron shandler agreed with me when he was on here answering questions. triple a I don't agree. Why would you reward someone for starting off badly? A solid team off to a slow start could easily benifit under this system. Are saying you want the team that is lower in the standing have an edge over the leaders? We are playing for a national championship. There is not better way to equal the playing field for pick-ups. Every team starts off with a 1000 moves for the year at $1 each. Draft, Roster management, and free agent money management, all play a huge part in who wins each title. Under your suggestion, a team that got off to hot start might go weeks without being able to get a desired player. Our rules are the best format for a high stakes game. You can play your local league that why if you are trying to keep everyone interested. No matter what system you choose, you will never be able to keep every team active. It is part of the game.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 2:39 am

Originally posted by Joe Sambito:

Greg,

Don't mis-read my concerns. I have the upmost respect for all the teams in the top echelon, actually for most of the 330 teams. My beef is more with the team dropping them and that is where my concerns lie. Ecspecially when there are other very obvious drops. I am sure Swede was just being opportunistic, but that doesn't necessarily make it fair. Anyhow, our only recourse is these boards, and to make our opinions heard. It is up to you to do what you think is fair, but in my opinion one league have access to Mussina and Pedro in the final month while other leagues consider the likes of Kassan Gabbard is not that fair just b/c the Angry Fish is really mad his team floundered. Agreed on all.

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:30 am

I agree with CC and I stand by my earlier comment. Money management is too big a contributor to winning this thing. But if a contending team has a legit reason for waiving someone like Pedro, then it should be allowed.

That's why NFBC has to treat each drop on an ICB. If the Dropper is in the hunt and has a valid reason for making the waive, then it should stand. If the Dropper is out of the hunt and waives a top player over another bum, then the waived player has to be excluded from the pool.

Cooperstown · Post by **Cooperstown** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:41 am

One more thing. I'm not saying Pedro is someone worth voiding this trade over, I'm just using him in my example.