FF2010: Keeper League discussion thread

I like the IR idea.
One thing we have to watch out for is realizing you aren't making the playoffs, and then just IRing some players to hold then cheap for next year.

My gut reaction is to be against it. The 20 man roster gives people enough room to hold onto injured players if they really want. That being said... there is almost no reason to hold onto a player who is out for the season due to injury because of the uncertainty of them coming back strong next year. The IR would give us at least the possibility of waiting to see without penalizing you the roster spot.

I like the IR idea, provided it's sufficiently restrictive. Maybe something like the player must be on PUP or IR in the NFL and once placed on the list, the player cannot be reactivated for the season or for at least x number of weeks.

If nothing else, it will keep things like Grant being picked up cheaply and stashed from happening often.

My thoughts: 1 IR slot. Must be on IR in the NFL. Basically, so you have the option of keeping, for example, Ryan Grant for next year. Interest accrues same as a bench player.

A medical redshirt. Works for me.

In my non-keeper, non-Goodjer league it's a 16 man team with 6 transactions allowed during the season (waiver wire, not trades, those are unlimited), but it allows 4 players to be placed on IR.

So, why just one slot? I mean, a limit makes some sense, but one slot seems like then you'd have to gamble a bit. Maybe I don't want to put Ryan Grant in there because I'm afraid that someone more important to me gets hit with an injury later in the season. Just doesn't seem to be a game I'd want to play.

Also, are you going to "give" Ryan Grant back to Jolly if he wants to put Grant on IR? I'm assuming you have the power to do that.

I agree with the 1 IR slot, because if you go any more than that people will be penalized for not scouring the league for hurt guys to place on IR. 24 IR spots across a keeper league could be a dangerous thing.

To garion's other point... will we be able to swap or drop players on IR the same as normal roster spots, or will it be locked?

garion333 wrote:

Also, are you going to "give" Ryan Grant back to Jolly if he wants to put Grant on IR? I'm assuming you have the power to do that.

*sad puppy dog eyes*

The way IR slots work is dictated by Fleaflicker's implementation of them, so what I describe here isn't "how we think it should go", but rather "how it's gonna be if we turn this on".

IR is in effect a roster slot with two restrictions:
1) A player in that slot must have an injury rating equal or more severe than the setting for that slot (IR slots can be set from anywhere to Healthy down to IR and PUP, with all the injury report designations like Questionable and Doubtful in-between)
2) A player in that slot can't be put in the starting lineup

Save for those two restrictions, IR is a roster slot like any other, which should answer most questions (can we swap, etc).

Because this is an in-season addition, I would definitely say using commish powers to add Grant back to Bill's lineup is in order.

As for my opinion of the IR slot settings, I think the slot should be set to "Out". Players that are out for multiple weeks but will return can be stashed in the IR slot. It's not uncommon for someone to be held off of IR but kept "Out" for long periods of time.

*Legion* wrote:

Because this is an in-season addition, I would definitely say using commish powers to add Grant back to Bill's lineup is in order.

Yeah, that pretty much went without saying. I'm not seeing any opposition so I guess I'll turn it on a little later today.

I'm also going to give Elliottx the opportunity to request Montario Hardesty even though ukickmydog sniped him about two hours ago.

Edit: Done. IR added. Ryan Grant added to Jolly's roster and put on IR. Montario added to Elliottx's roster and put on IR. DHB put back on ukick's roster. If you previously owned someone on IR, go ahead and grab him from the free agent pool. If you did not previously have a player on your roster (and he's currently on IR), please do not try to claim him until Monday. At that point you can put a bid (even $0) on him through the normal claims process.

But in the NFL, an "Out" player still counts against your 53, right? If so, then I think an "Out" player should count against your 20 in GWJFFL. Now if PUP doesn't count against the roster limit, I can get behind lowering the GWJFFL restriction to PUP, but I don't see "Out" in our future.

Edit: Reserve/PUP (e.g. Sidney Rice) doesn't count against the 53-man roster. As such, I'll consider allowing this as the minimum to be eligible for the IR slot. Let me hear your feedback. (I don't see this as an immediate concern currently since the big PUP player is already on a team with his IR slot full. Heh.)

ukickmydog wrote:
EvilHomer3k wrote:

Did anyone else bid on B. Jackson? I assume they did but I was wondering if anyone would mind sharing their bid. I really, really wanted Jackson so I bid what I thought would be a pretty high amount. I'm just wondering if anyone bid anything close to what I payed.

I bid $50.

Thanks. So I payed a bit much for him but I'm okay with that. If the highest was $25 I'd be disappointed but I suppose I'd still rather have him for $63 than not have him for $24.

I like the IR stuff. If a player doesn't count towards the 53 man roster that works for me.

Interestingly, PUP is "higher" on Ff's hierarchy so setting it to "IR" means NFL IR or PUP players are eligible for the GWJFFL IR slot. I guess there's no need for that particular discussion then.

I love the IR slot for the keeper league. Seems like the settings are already where we want i.e. a very injured player 5+ weeks out if not whole season. And I appreciate getting Montario back.

In the week 4 thread, garion333 wrote:

Dammit, I should've pushed Kaos earlier about the keeper trade ... won't go through until after the games.

Any way to ... uh, accelerate the process?

Hmm... So there are ten owners not involved in the trade. It takes five of them to veto it. So, if you can raise six "yes" votes in this thread from the remaining owners, I'll push it through. Since I think we're all adults and, perhaps more importantly, "goodjers" here, I'll never vote "no" against a trade (though I will consider outright killing one if it's blatantly, obviously unfair) so you can consider that one. As soon as I see five more (from among the remaining nine owners), I'll push it through. I'll check as late as Sunday morning (if I can) but I can't guarantee anything if you don't have your votes by the time I go to bed on Saturday night.

The Elliottx Experience votes Yes.

Appreciated. Learned my lesson, though.

VETO!

Just kidding. Any trade that results in Vince Young getting cut is A-OK in my book. Approved.

We need just a couple more people to say it's okay for us to do the trade so Grumps will push it for tomorrow. I won't be heart broken if it doesn't happen, but we're half of the way there .... PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THIS THREAD PEOPLE! I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE 0 and 3! THERE'S STILL A CHANCE!!!!! Oh, wait, I'm 0-3. Well, the rest of you are sitting prettier than me, so help a brother out.

[size=10]In all seriousness, if it doesn't go through by tomorrow, that's fine. Just trying to raise awareness.[/size]

I vote yes.

Fine with me.

4...

Yes. You can always count me as a yes.

If you look at his lineup for this week, I'm pretty sure Boogle just got himself kicked out of GWJFFLK.

Grumpicus wrote:

If you look at his lineup for this week, I'm pretty sure Boogle just got himself kicked out of GWJFFLK.

Like I told you over IM, I was out of town from friday noon on so I couldn't update anything once the trade was processed. If I'm out fine.

Awww not boogle!

Can this be some kind of double super secret probation?

boogle wrote:
Grumpicus wrote:

If you look at his lineup for this week, I'm pretty sure Boogle just got himself kicked out of GWJFFLK.

Like I told you over IM, I was out of town from friday noon on so I couldn't update anything once the trade was processed. If I'm out fine.

You told me that? Buh... I don't recall the second half of that sentence _at all_. What you should have told me is to commish-update your lineup once it processed.

Edit: Found the IM (that I never personally saw) thanks to gChat history. I'm not putting Brady in for you since you could have done that yourself long before the trade processed..., but since you got VY for Flacco (your week 5 starter), I slotted VY in where Flacco was. I also slotted BJGE in where Reggie Bush was - your bench.

Since I found the IM, you're not out for not starting a QB but that doesn't change the fact that, trade or not, you didn't put Brady back in after his bye week. Consider yourself on probation.. That means I don't expect to see any obvious lineup slackerness the rest of the season.

A few more drunken blackouts, and I'm sure it'll be double super secret anyway.

Edit: Huh. It just occurred to me that since he didn't play yet, you could have just put in VY yourself and avoided the drama. But then again, you love the drama, don't you?

Grumpicus wrote:

But then again, you love the drama, don't you? :D

Well he doesn't have any chicks around him to fill his drama quota.