Jump to content

The SuperFlex Syndicate 2022 -- DISCUSSION


squire12

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, winitall said:

1. I think it says jcrell is OTC unless I’m missing something?

2. The vote on it tied. Gonna need to get somebody else to join your side on the 4 QB max for next years vote lol

I think he tagged me first, unsure if he changed it. Just wanted to make it known I am not otc

Yea, I know its tied. I didnt feel strongly 1 way or another but I do think this draft process has shown that there is a need to expand it. Literally someone wants to give Wentz away for free but half the league cant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

I think he tagged me first, unsure if he changed it. Just wanted to make it known I am not otc

Yea, I know its tied. I didnt feel strongly 1 way or another but I do think this draft process has shown that there is a need to expand it. Literally someone wants to give Wentz away for free but half the league cant

To play devil’s advocate, doesn’t the current situation require more strategy? You really have to consider who you are keeping and how that will play out in the draft. Keeping a borderline QB means that you most likely won’t be able to take advantage of one falling. You ensure you have that QB you are okay with, but there’s a cost associated. Similarly, I knew the TE limit was 3. I had 3 no-doubt keepers in Kittle, Hockenson, and Fant. I also knew there was a chance Pitts would be far and away the best player available when I picked. So I made a move and dealt Hockenson in order to have that option available. I didn’t end up selecting Pitts, but I worked my team to keep my options open. That requires a greater amount of strategy IMO. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I was entering this off-season with Lamar Jimmy G and Brees as my QBs. There was no way you were getting me to vote for 4 QBs when I had 1.

There are only like 25 actual starting QBs. Having 30 potential keepers seems right to me, while 40 seems like it has the potential to destroy parity.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

1. It says im OTC but that isnt the case

2. I think this whole QB debacle makes me think we should just allow 4 of them to be rostered. You can only start 2, its not like having 4 is this massive positional advantage and a 4th QB wont carry the same value of RB/WR/TEs lotto tickets

As much as I hate to change dynasty stuff but this is weird

Fascinating change in viewpoint

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

I think he tagged me first, unsure if he changed it. Just wanted to make it known I am not otc

Yea, I know its tied. I didnt feel strongly 1 way or another but I do think this draft process has shown that there is a need to expand it. Literally someone wants to give Wentz away for free but half the league cant

Checks rosters, interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, winitall said:

To play devil’s advocate, doesn’t the current situation require more strategy? You really have to consider who you are keeping and how that will play out in the draft. Keeping a borderline QB means that you most likely won’t be able to take advantage of one falling. You ensure you have that QB you are okay with, but there’s a cost associated. Similarly, I knew the TE limit was 3. I had 3 no-doubt keepers in Kittle, Hockenson, and Fant. I also knew there was a chance Pitts would be far and away the best player available when I picked. So I made a move and dealt Hockenson in order to have that option available. I didn’t end up selecting Pitts, but I worked my team to keep my options open. That requires a greater amount of strategy IMO. 

Everything you said is a valid point, it’s just weird to think that in round 1 of a draft a position can already be maxed out

I dont see it as a parity issue as having 2 QBs on your bench at all times for the sake of hoarding isnt good business imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

Everything you said is a valid point, it’s just weird to think that in round 1 of a draft a position can already be maxed out

I dont see it as a parity issue as having 2 QBs on your bench at all times for the sake of hoarding isnt good business imo

It isn't maxed out right now. Half the teams only have 2 QBs and a couple have 1.

There are 3 teams that desperately need a QB starter and 1 that could potentially use the upgrade. Teams like Bigbear have 2 really elite/good young starters so might not want to invest early capital, though BB made a good move with Fields.

The need and supply are there, but it looks like Wilson just free-fell due to circumstance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...