Mari? O, no!
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
*** VD 14 Commentary Thread ***
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by johnnya24 View Postbumpity bump bump---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnnya24 View Post---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnnya24 View Post:nods:---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnnya24 View PostWell at least you have Mariano Rivera, who is basically an extra vintage pitcher with SB's that can carry your entire team total ... I picked Chase Utley in the 5th, and an almost identical player will go undrafted---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnnya24 View PostI've been on a knife-edge with almost every pick since I gambled with Mathews and Helton. Needed Lowe or Larkin to make it back,; needed I-Rod and Deacon White to make it back; needed Galvin to make it back. Everything worked out apart from Raisel Iglesias. I've pull this one around nicely, but it's been a massive struggle. After a brutal first half, I was looking down the barrel of a bottom half finish for a long time ... especially when I realized my 1980's hitter error.
That said, it's still really tight in there ... and the last round of a multi draft is very unpredictable.
Comment
-
Originally posted by cavebird View PostI hate to tell you this, but I still have you in the second division, although it is very close (currently 8th, 0.2 out of 7th, 1.8 out of 6th). I think your problem now is that your options are, shall we say, very limited. That's why I expected Duke Farrell 1901 from you; to save the flexibility that a W pitcher gives. I actually expected you to go with Farrell 1891 and a different MI. Your way isn't particularly worse, just different, and you left Galvin exposed---if he didn't make it back, your finish is ugly.
Farrell 1901 would only have been a desperation choice. He would have made my BY hitting lineup very vulnerable to the unpredictability of multi scoring. I was only considering Farrell in the 1890's, and would have went that direction if Larkin made it back. The robustness of Lowe, I-Rod and White was a no-brainer at that point ... especially when it looked very likely i would be able to get Galvin later - only a WC or an 1890's G were likely to take him, and I believe it was only the ratio tankers who could have taken him in the 1890's ... so definitely a solid gamble. That said i planned to take Galvin a little earlier. But when I saw Deacon White was a strong option for Bene, I had to gamble on Galvin. G sucked for me once I elected to pick Helton. I created that problem, but it was worth the risk. G became like an ENVO in almost every hitting and pitching decade (apart from Galvin) after Guidry and Gooden went.
Besides, it would probably have only cost me ~4 points if Galvin didn't make it back.
Where's the value in playing safe at this stage?
Comment
-
Originally posted by johnnya24 View PostI didn't mean to say I was winning. I knew that in round 8. Second division is a victory considering my options a while back, the steeply declining value of my early picks and Garp and Frae brutalizing my short lists. Hubble and Leonard were daggers.
Farrell 1901 would only have been a desperation choice. He would have made my BY hitting lineup very vulnerable to the unpredictability of multi scoring. I was only considering Farrell in the 1890's, and would have went that direction if Larkin made it back. The robustness of Lowe, I-Rod and White was a no-brainer at that point ... especially when it looked very likely i would be able to get Galvin later - only a WC or an 1890's G were likely to take him, and I believe it was only the ratio tankers who could have taken him in the 1890's ... so definitely a solid gamble. That said i planned to take Galvin a little earlier. But when I saw Deacon White was a strong option for Bene, I had to gamble on Galvin. G sucked for me once I elected to pick Helton. I created that problem, but it was worth the risk. G became like an ENVO in almost every hitting and pitching decade (apart from Galvin) after Guidry and Gooden went.
Besides, it would probably have only cost me ~4 points if Galvin didn't make it back.
Where's the value in playing safe at this stage?
Comment
-
Cupid Childs or Cupid's Child ? I never know---------------------------------------------
Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
---------------------------------------------
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
George Orwell, 1984
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Feral Slasher View PostCupid Childs or Cupid's Child ? I never know
Comment
-
Comment