This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I'm sure he was just a throw in to even out rosters, but having John Skelton's name in there just makes the deal look bad for you at first glance.
In my leagues where I need a RB pretty bad I would easily give that for McFadden but they don't give them RB's away in my leagues.
Practically giving away DMC unless Pead emerges as the undisputed starter over Richardson/Stacy and that is assuming that he will be just as productive as McFadden (who is the undisputed starter and the Raiders are on record that they will be featuring him in the offense this season). Just my
This is certainly possible, if Pierce gets his chance soon this trade will look pretty silly on my part.
You gave up a lot to upgrade from Vereen to Pierce (and I know a lot of people have Pierce higher). 71 spots is a huge difference even if you value Vereen more than Pierce.
I only want to veto if I suspect collusion and can't conceive of a reason outside of collusion or brain injury for the Cam owner to make this trade.
The Ballard trade wasn't close to the worst one for you (Manuel....ooof). The other ones were solid.
Is Manuel worth more than Ballard? I like Manuel, but would move him for that package. I wouldn't have sold so low on Ballard afterwards, however.
The Manuel trade wouldn't have been so bad if he didn't just give away Ballard (should've held until until there are RB injuries). I'm high on Hill though.
These are my thoughts as well. I like Manuel and am not especially high on Ballard, but I'd still prefer the RB in most situations.
Most of the others were OK, but I don't like any of these for you.
If this is all superflex too, I like 8 and 9 for him in a big way. And he got Gordon and 1.03 - just not sure I like moving Romo in a SF.
Honestly, when I see trades like these my eyes just gloss over. So many variables it's hard to know where to start let alone evaluate the entire thing.
I saw AJ and Cam on one side and didn't have to look any further
I don't understand Team A's reasoning here. It makes no sense whether he's a contender or rebuilding.
If people don't reply it's usually because it's pretty fair. I'll take the Wilson side and try to move Mathews.
Ah, didn't see that he got Gordon. I like that for him. I agree if it is superflex it makes the other too much better, but I still come down on the other side.
Yeah, unfortunately this thread turns into a "look how much I ripped off the other guy". Thanks for the post. Those are the ones that are actually helpful to other owners.
Appreciate the feedback, thought others might be interested in discussing a rebuild a year into it and the trades along the way. It is a superflex, so it made it hard to give up Romo but at that point already had RGIII and Stafford. I was also trying to get younger, and had shopped Romo to just about every team in our league.
Ill take Wright here.
Except mine, you Richard.
Maybe all he had was Cam and AJ, and does not have faith in those players like you do? maybe? just maybe? White put up 1.5 points fewer then Green. While Big Ben put up 3 points less then Cam. Now I'm sure Nicks and picks could make up other 5 points, no? People dont just trade to get players, they trade cuz they have a team to run and have to field a team.
This is where we differ:Green>>White and Nicks
Also, do not know how big a factor, but Team A got Pitta too, so add that to the mix. I missed that myself. So it turns out to be....
Why post the trade if you don't want feedback?
So if i get feedback, I must agree with it and not discuss? Noted.
