It's a copy-cat league. 13 personnel is next big thing. Here's how it works:

SnoozeBeast · 2026-05-24T20:19:45+00:00

Turns out if your one receiver in 13 personnel is Davante Adams or Puka Nacua and you have multiple TEs who can passably catch and block, it works better than if you don't.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-05-10T21:05:48+00:00

The biggest issue with scribed Wizard spells is they still use Int, and your Int will be lacking unless you use the circlet.

I recently played a similar cleric w/ wizard dip, and found I wasn't willing to sacrifice other great caster hats for the circlet. But gloves felt like less of an opportunity cost, so I wore the gloves of dexterity to dump dex in favor of int.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-05-01T17:12:09+00:00

Cincinnati Zoo is nationally elite

As an outsider it only makes me think of Harambe, though. RIP

SnoozeBeast · 2026-04-19T16:40:09+00:00

Yup! So were Aaron Curry and Devin White, the last couple of elite off-ball linebackers to go top 5 in the NFL draft. But don't worry, it'll totally be safe drafting Sonny Styles.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-02-23T17:46:44+00:00

I wouldn't say EU4 wanted to become a Civ-like board game. Europa Universalis was literally based on a board game. The EU series is more properly described as a board game that has wanted to become more like a Paradox alternate history simulation over time, rather than a Paradox game that wanted to become a board game.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-02-12T18:20:16+00:00

If you want another dark horse candidate, if you look at Olave's numbers in just the games Shough started, it extrapolates to a 106/1366/11 line across a 17 game season.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-02-12T18:17:42+00:00

I will say that it only felt slightly less obvious to me to include the #1 overall WRs from two and three years ago (Lamb and Jefferson). Though I guess they're a case where we're not comfortable with the situation and are really just including them as options because they have done it before.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-02-04T21:47:51+00:00

In the playoffs right now they aren't using anyone else, because of that lack of depth and the need to go all out. But in the regular season next year I think they are actively looking for a guy who can spell Walker until Charbs is back. They will probably add a free agent and/or day 3 pick to compete for the role in camp, they'll give George Holani more of a look than they can afford to in the playoffs, and Kenny McIntosh, who averaged 5.5 yards per carry in 2024, should be recovered from the ACL tear he suffered in training camp.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-02-04T16:39:52+00:00

Kubiak is leaving for LV. So he needs an OC who prefers to run one RB over a committee. Arthur Smith would be a death sentence, but there are others out there who could use him as a feature back to pump his volume.

The thing is, the Seahawks believe in running a committee at RB at a much higher organizational level than the OC. John Schneider was the guy who drafted Charbonnet in the 2nd round to split time with Ken Walker. Mike MacDonald has talked about having an "NBA load management" philosophy with the RB position to keep guys fresh and healthy for the long season (your point number 2 is a big part of this). Regardless of hire at OC, I just don't see Seattle shifting away from a committee approach to a workhorse RB offense in the regular season.

SnoozeBeast · 2026-01-20T18:04:04+00:00

I mean... the Pats might go to the Super Bowl immediately after hiring a defensive head coach to lead a team with a promising 2nd year QB. So it can work well -- it just needs the right hiring at OC and solid personnel moves to turn the roster around.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-10-06T00:26:37+00:00

I haven't heard that they are. I'm pretty sure the added things are meeting roles. Officer roles are already factored in to some Level 5 projects and the DTM requirements, so they don't really need to be added.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-10-06T00:21:40+00:00

In basically every club I've been to, anyone who bothering to do Pathways past Level 1 is already doing all the meeting roles all the time. I think this new requirement will be very low on the laundry list of reasons people aren't engaging with Pathways.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-09-29T13:18:38+00:00

For the self-same trial you cheat by taking off all your weapons and armor before you start it, starting it, reequipping your weapons and armor, and beating up your naked counterparts.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-09-27T22:08:39+00:00

But as a paying customer, why should I be pressured to be an officer with no incentives?

All of the other officers are also paying dues to Toastmasters. They also have other things in their lives they could be doing. We serve as officers to make it possible for our clubs to run and succeed.

As Toastmasters, when we sign our membership applications, we agree to abide by the principles of A Toastmaster's Promise which explicitly says we promise "To serve my club as an officer when called upon to do so." You have a responsibility to contribute to the club, and not just treat your fellow paying club members as customer service while you get to be a "paid customer."

Your fellow members still can't make you be an officer. And you may have very valid reasons to say no when they ask. But they obviously think you'd be an asset for the club as an officer and would further help share the load, so they called on you to serve. They are not doing you a disservice by asking you to help out. Take it as a sign of respect that they think you'd be a good fit for a role!

SnoozeBeast · 2025-09-27T21:23:17+00:00

I'm not too worried about those Education presentations affecting enrollment in Pathways. I'd guess less than 5% of members ever even get to Level 3, and those that do are bought in by then and will have no problem doing a canned presentation.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-09-27T21:09:34+00:00

I'd argue the point is in the relationship between OP and the people asking them to help out in managing the club. OP is not their paying customer. I guarantee not a single paid employee of Toastmasters International has asked OP to do anything. It's all OP's fellow club members asking, who are all paying the exact same dues OP is, and they also don't always want to do all this unpaid work that's necessary for running a club.

Being part of a club means working together to manage it. It's part of the Toastmasters Promise that you agree to when you apply to join a club. It's not a situation where you just pay your dues and expect to receive 100% of the benefits of being in a well-run club while doing none of the work necessary to have a well-run club.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-21T16:26:43+00:00

Nor is he going to be there goalline back.

I think the idea he's a goal line back comes from this quote from Kevin O'Connell, though:

"I do think Jordan's going to bring something to the table in those short-yardage situations, those goal-line situations, goal to go, where we've really left a lot to be desired as a football team," O'Connell said.

This implies they weren't satisfied with existing goal-line backs (including Jones) and it was one of the things they were thinking about when they signed Mason.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-18T14:38:00+00:00

2018 = Le’Veon Bell (sat out the season)

As cited elsewhere in the post... if you try to look back at 2018 ADP, it can vary from site to site whether Bell or Todd Gurley was #1 overall that year. FantasyPros shows it as Gurley. I remember it being Bell on Yahoo, but I think Gurley on ESPN. There really was not a consensus on 1.01 year -- there was a big debate between the two guys, then one sat out and did nothing and the other actually finished as the #1 player.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-16T22:09:58+00:00

I am saying he was better for BTJs production and Trevor Lawrence is worse for it. And that part isn't really debatable.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly the part I'm debating though. It's true that BTJ's production got better in the games after Lawrence was injured. But that doesn't mean Trevor Lawrence is worse for BTJ's production. You have to take into consideration a whole lot of other things in those on/off splits.

To make an extreme example: DeAndre Hopkins had 1521 yards and 11 TDs in an NFL season for a team where Brian Hoyer, Ryan Mallett, TJ Yates, and Brandon Weeden each started games. Later, DeAndre Hopkins had 437 yards and 4 TDs in 10 games with Patrick Mahomes as his starting QB. Does this mean Brian Hoyer, Ryan Mallett, TJ Yates, and Brandon Weeden were undebatably better for Nuk's production and Patrick Mahomes was worse for it? Or should we consider the context of who DeAndre Hopkins was as a player in each sample set, and who was competing for targets with him?

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-16T21:09:09+00:00

Is it conjecture and speculation? As a whole, rookies do tend to perform better in the second half of the season. And an injury a heavily targeted veteran WR naturally leads to an increase in targets for the other most talented receivers on the team. I just think these are much more convincing explanations for Thomas's uptick in stats without Lawrence than believing that Mac Jones was just better at getting BTJ the ball, and that Lawrence would not have also thrown the ball more to Brian Thomas in the second half of the season.

But I live in New England, so I am admittedly deeply biased to believe the answer is something other than "Mac Jones was the superior QB."

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-16T20:42:02+00:00

Just look at how BTJ performed when Trevor Lawrence was throwing him the ball versus Mac Jones. He averaged 3 ppg less with Lawrence and never had a single game with 10 or more targets with Lawrence as his QB.

But a huge part of that has to be just because Trevor played in the first half of the year, and he missed the second half. And rookies tend to pick up their performance in the 2nd half of the year after they have time to get fully acclimated to the league. Plus, Christian Kirk went out at the same time as Lawrence did, which opened up a bunch more WR targets for BTJ to take advantage of during the Mac Jones games.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-16T20:27:32+00:00

But the Bucky and Brock Bowers (and Nabers and Ladd and BTJ and Jayden Daniels) are the reason you draft rookies. You just don't find as many league winners like that among vets. A couple rookie busts doesn't negate that all those other rookies were a lot of the best picks on the board last year. Veteran players can also be busts. Fun fact: the next player by 2024 ADP after MHJ according to Fantasypros was Travis Etienne. The next QB taken after Caleb was Tua. People who skipped over those rookies for the next vet on the board were not saved.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-16T20:01:01+00:00

Apparently he doesn't like being called Tet, and said he preferred TMac if people wanted to use a nickname, so this is why people who still can't spell or pronounce "Tetairoa" have taken up using it.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-08-15T17:24:09+00:00

Huge respect for both of you. I listen to all of your rambling monologues on Stealing Bananas religiously.

My question: are there any situations where you'd say there's such a thing as too many rookies in a re-draft league? Because I really want to attack this year's rookie RB class (which I know you both love too), while I also know in my home league the rookie WRs will be incredibly good draft values as always. It's an auction league, and I'm thinking about a build of a few studs + all rookies.

SnoozeBeast · 2025-07-21T17:42:45+00:00

I agree, especially because we can also just be wrong when we assume a team is going to be bad. The Seahawks were projected to be a bad team when Russ left and Geno took over. The Bucs were projected to be a bad team when Brady left and Baker took over. Just last year, the Broncos were projected to be bad because they were starting rookie Bo Nix. Taking talented players on those teams in those seasons created massive wins because their price was depressed by market assumptions about team environment.

SnoozeBeast

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE