Nacho Simulation Football League (Season 28 - Week 15 Posted)

[Kingram]

19 minutes ago, TheKillerNacho said:

Unless I'm missing something, you need to cut a player to do this (you have no open PS spots). Since Puka isn't eligible to play at DE in the first place, you need to address this before I can process the trade.

Sorry, cut HB Tyjae Spears from PS.

[TheKillerNacho]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I receive:

Matt Judon
Marshon Lattimore
Jessie Bates
S29 6th (PHO)

@Kingram receives:

Puka Nacua
Mike Hilton (roster spot/droppable)
Kamren Curl (roster spot/droppable)
S29 1st (CAM)
S30 4th (WAT)

I accept. @TheKillerNacho

Thanks for the productive talks Kingram!

 

41 minutes ago, Kingram said:

@TheKillerNacho please bench WR Puka Nacua. 

 

Please add DE Keion White. 

processed

[RuskieTitan]

15 minutes ago, Kingram said:

Sorry, cut HB Tyjae Spears from PS.

RJ Pirates cut Jedrick Wills from PS

Sign HB Tyjae Spears to PS

Thank you @TheKillerNacho

[EaglesPeteC]

6 hours ago, Kingram said:

I just do not understand how my team is so bad. Offense doesn’t move the ball at all, defense gets picked apart. I feel like my secondary on paper is significantly better than how it’s performing. 

Have you tried……drafting better players? 
 

Just an idea 😎

[Kingram]

8 minutes ago, EaglesPeteC said:

Have you tried……drafting better players? 
 

Just an idea 😎

I mean, Lattimore is a top 10 CB and Bates is a top 3 S. Dugger and Dean are both above average starting players. I just don't know why they continue to get scorched.

[LAOJoe]

@TheKillerNacho I sent you a message asking for some clarification.

[Kingram]

1 hour ago, RuskieTitan said:

RJ Pirates cut Jedrick Wills from PS

Sign HB Tyjae Spears to PS

Thank you @TheKillerNacho

Homer 

[RuskieTitan]

1 minute ago, Kingram said:

Homer 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Hey @TheKillerNacho. I know you've got a lot going on, but I wanted to clarify the rules a bit.

A few seasons ago, we discussed the wording of the tag rules, which right now read:

"Players count as the tier they spent the majority of the previous regular season as. In the event of a tie, the higher value is used."

This previously read "position" and not "tier", and that was changed to prevent someone from starting a player for 6 games at a 2-tag position (IDL), 5 games at a 3-tag position (3-4 OLB) and 5 games at a different 3-tag position (4-3 DE).

We then discussed starting a TE at both FB and WR throughout the season, and you confirmed that, should that player realistically be able to play each position, this would work:

6 games at FB (1-tag position)
5 games at TE (2-tag position)
5 games at WR (3-tag position)

I asked you if LaPorta was capable, considering his receiving ability, and you confirmed that he was, and that the above would work to keep him for 1 tag.

Just wanted us all to be on the same page.

Edited August 20 by TL-TwoWinsAway

[TheKillerNacho]

33 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Hey @TheKillerNacho. I know you've got a lot going on, but I wanted to clarify the rules a bit.

A few seasons ago, we discussed the wording of the tag rules, which right now read:

"Players count as the tier they spent the majority of the previous regular season as. In the event of a tie, the higher value is used."

This previously read "position" and not "tier", and that was changed to prevent someone from starting a player for 6 games at a 2-tag position (IDL), 5 games at a 3-tag position (3-4 OLB) and 5 games at a different 3-tag position (4-3 DE).

We then discussed starting a TE at both FB and WR throughout the season, and you confirmed that, should that player realistically be able to play each position, this would work:

6 games at FB (1-tag position)
5 games at TE (2-tag position)
5 games at WR (3-tag position)

I asked you if LaPorta was capable, considering his receiving ability, and you confirmed that he was, and that the above would work to keep him for 1 tag.

Just wanted us all to be on the same page.

I don't recall the exact conversation, but if I said anything contrary to this at any point I'm sorry. Tiers not only include listed positions, but also count towards lower tiers, as well. The cost is then the highest amount that would have majority at or above that level. In this case, the player would cost 2 tags:

• 5/16 games at a 3-tag position or higher = not majority
• 10/16 games at a 2-tag position or higher = majority

For a player to be kept at 1 tag, they must spend a great amount of time at a 1-tag position than anything higher. The purpose of this is to avoid that exact exploit (a player being played at higher tier actually causing them cost less).

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Just now, TheKillerNacho said:

I don't recall the exact conversation, but if I said anything contrary to this at any point I'm sorry. Tiers not only include listed positions, but also count towards lower tiers, as well. The cost is then the highest amount that would have majority at or above that level. In this case, the player would cost 2 tags:

• 5/16 games at a 3-tag position or higher = not majority
• 10/16 games at a 2-tag position or higher = majority

For a player to be kept at 1 tag, they must spend a great amount of time at a 1-tag position than anything higher. The purpose of this is to avoid that exact exploit (a player being played at higher tier to actually make them cost less).

This is the very first I'm reading about a "2-tag position or higher" category (it isn't mentioned anywhere in the rules and no forum search provides a reference), and the current rules don't state that at all.

If that's a change you would like to make moving forward, I understand completely, but, the way the rules are written right now, a player that plays the majority of their games at FB should cost 1 tag. That being the case, and due to the current rules, can we at least wait to make that change until next season?

[TheKillerNacho]

10 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

This is the very first I'm reading about a "2-tag position or higher" category (it isn't mentioned anywhere in the rules and no forum search provides a reference), and the current rules don't state that at all.

If that's a change you would like to make moving forward, I understand completely, but, the way the rules are written right now, a player that plays the majority of their games at FB should cost 1 tag. That being the case, and due to the current rules, can we at least wait to make that change until next season?

I've told people this standard previously already who have asked, as it was an intended part of the change to positional tiers... as I said, I don't recall the exact conversation we had but I'm inclined to put a stop from further exploitation of the FB position.

The rules on the OP definitely don't explain it well enough, I'll see what I can do. Unfortunately the whole system has gotten more convoluted than I would've liked. I've honestly been tempted to just make it "highest tier they spent even one game" just for simplicity's sake (but that's something I'd definitely disclose a season ahead of time).

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Just now, TheKillerNacho said:

I've told people this standard previously already who have asked, as it was an intended part of the change to positional tiers... as I said, I don't recall the exact conversation we had but I'm inclined to put a stop from further exploitation of the FB position.

When we spoke about LaPorta, you said it would work for him. Now you're saying that you made clear in private conversations with other owners that it wouldn't work. I understand that different information was given out at different times, but the rules themselves were not changed. They still allow for this to work.

I'm only asking that we wait to enforce new rules until they're actually changed at the start of the next season. 

[TheKillerNacho]

5 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

When we spoke about LaPorta, you said it would work for him. Now you're saying that you made clear in private conversations with other owners that it wouldn't work. I understand that different information was given out at different times, but the rules themselves were not changed. They still allow for this to work.

I'm only asking that we wait to enforce new rules until they're actually changed at the start of the next season. 

as I said I do not recall this conversation nor can I find it in my PMs but if I gave you that impression I probably got confused or you misinterpreted something I said. This isn't a new rule, though - it was a large part of why I changed them to positional tiers in the first place.

 

I'm sorry that you feel like I gave you bad information at any point, but I don't think it would be fair to allow you to do something I've told others over the last two years they couldn't do.

[Kingram]

Players still available for trade 

 

RB: Austin Ekeler (WAS), Brian Robinson (WAS)
WR: Jaxon Smith-Njigba (SEA), Tank Dell (HOU)*
OG: Tyler Smith (DAL)
C; David Andrews (NE)
DE: Leonard Floyd (SF)
DT: Christian Barmore (NE)
MLB: Pete Werner (NO)
HC: Sean Payton (DEN)