2013 Off Season Dynasty Trade Thread (for completed trades) (2 Viewers)

[ghostguy123]

I feel like Doug Martin should net way more than that. I was considering trading Ray Rice for Martin and other parts

Who on earth is going to give you MORE than Martin for Ray Rice??

Or are you saying Rice and more for martin??

 

[ghostguy123]

12 team PPR, 1.25 PPR TE, 1 QB, 2RB, 3WR, 1 TE, 1 Flex

Team A gave: Matthew Stafford

Team B gave: Antonio Brown

Greg Olsen

Alex Smith

In terms of rosters, the team acquiring Stafford had Smith, Flacco and Schaub so a need for QB1. Team acquiring the other players was a little thin in WR and only had Pitta as reliable TE and already has Kaepernick at QB. Kind of trade I tought made both teams better.

Value-wise, that is fantastic for team A

 

[ghostguy123]

Team A Gave: 2013 2nd rounder (middle of round)

Team B Gave: Mark Ingram

This is a 10 team 10 player keeper league and Ingram could likely not be kept by team that traded him.

Always good to get something for a player not likely to survive roster cuts.

He virtually got a mid-12th round pick, with 10 keepers, which is worth less than Ingram most likely (although given the parameters of his situation your statement is still valid).

Either of you guys wanna put money on this?

on what?

Ingram getting cut

You do realize he is talking about being cut from his FANTASY team, right? As in, 10 keeper, Ingram not being one of them??

 

[Spin]

Not sure if this is helpful to anyone but Gave: Next year's 1stGot: This year's 2.06 (Used it to get Keenan Allen in a non-ppr)

Where'd you finish this year (assuming it was your 2014 1st)?

It was a crazy year and I finished last.

My team isn't nearly that devoid of talent though. RBs are a problem but I wasn't going to fix that this year anyway since I didn't have a 1st round pick this year either (used it in a trade for Victor Cruz).

Ick.

These mid-round WRs that land in a "great spot" are a dime a dozen. There's a new handful every year and most just fade away. Really low percentage play here.

No offense, but I think if someone came on this board and said they traded the 2.06 for the 2014 1st round pick of the guy who finished last this year we'd all be mocking the quality of league he played in.

It could certainly work out for you, but I think it's a really bad trade.

That's hyperbole, but then I've come to learn that that's your MO. But that's cool.

It's risky. But it's not bad. I didn't trade it for the 2.06. I traded for Keenan Allen.

There's a difference between the typical mid-round WR like you're talking about and a guy that ended up there because of injury concerns.

I took last because of a perfect storm. I don't expect guys like Stafford and Fitzgerald will have the epically bad seasons like they did this past season.

When I see guys like Bloom and EBF ranking Allen in the top 10 (or thereabouts, I realize Bloom's rankings are based on PPR) THIS year then I have no problem giving up a pick from next year to get him.

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

 

[Christo]

After he signed with ATL, I traded 2.2 and 2.7

FOR

Steven Jackson

Nice. I offered pick 3 for Sjax in a league and was turned down.

Wow, the 3rd overall pick? 1.03??

I got him for 2 '14 2nds.

 

[lbouchard]

12 team PPR, 1.25 PPR TE, 1 QB, 2RB, 3WR, 1 TE, 1 Flex

Team A gave: Matthew Stafford

Team B gave: Antonio Brown

Greg Olsen

Alex Smith

In terms of rosters, the team acquiring Stafford had Smith, Flacco and Schaub so a need for QB1. Team acquiring the other players was a little thin in WR and only had Pitta as reliable TE and already has Kaepernick at QB. Kind of trade I tought made both teams better.

Value-wise, that is fantastic for team A

I'm not as sure. Smith is basically worthless, so I see this as Stafford for Brown and Olsen. I would rather have Pitta than Olsen. I'm not a fan of Brown, and I think Stafford should throw more TDs this year. I guess I see where A is coming from, since he already has Kaep, but I think he could have done better.

 

[Concept Coop]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

Guys fall relative to our own value all the time. It's common. I think dealing within a few spots based on that is fine. But most picks - hypothetical or real - present personal value higher than the actual value of the pick. Meaning, if Allen is worth 1.06 to him, and the pick ends up being 1.06 - he can still lose. Top 3 personal value could be on the board at 1.06 next year.

I just think there is a low margin for error, and high potential for backfire. Just my thoughts and I wish everyone involved good luck.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

12 team PPR

Gave:

2013 3rd

Got:

5.1 (to take Chris Harper)

 

[Andy Dufresne]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

Guys fall relative to our own value all the time. It's common. I think dealing within a few spots based on that is fine. But most picks - hypothetical or real - present personal value higher than the actual value of the pick. Meaning, if Allen is worth 1.06 to him, and the pick ends up being 1.06 - he can still lose. Top 3 personal value could be on the board at 1.06 next year.

I just think there is a low margin for error, and high potential for backfire. Just my thoughts and I wish everyone involved good luck.

I don't get what you're saying. If I get 1.06 value this year vs getting it next year....the bolded is a wash.

Actually, it still puts this year ahead because...well...you get it this year.

What you're gambling on is that you think the value you're getting with the pick this year is at least as good as the value you think you'll get with it next year. For a player of Allen's potential upside, that's worth the risk because the player you take with that pick next year also has he possibility of busting.

 

[Spin]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

Guys fall relative to our own value all the time. It's common. I think dealing within a few spots based on that is fine. But most picks - hypothetical or real - present personal value higher than the actual value of the pick. Meaning, if Allen is worth 1.06 to him, and the pick ends up being 1.06 - he can still lose. Top 3 personal value could be on the board at 1.06 next year.

I just think there is a low margin for error, and high potential for backfire. Just my thoughts and I wish everyone involved good luck.

I generally agree with this. I'm not a fan of the trade as is, but I'm not high on Allen. If he is, then I can see why he did it. Last year Blackmon fell hard in my league, we drafted two days after his DUI incident. I traded a 2013 first for 2.1 to take Blackmon. But in my mind he was still worth 1.5. (I literally offered my future first to everyone between 1.6 -> 2.1 as he kept dropping.

Some people were to caught up in the "Future first for 2.6" vs "future first for Allen".Which is a completely different conversation.

 

[Concept Coop]

I don't get what you're saying. If I get 1.06 value this year vs getting it next year....the bolded is a wash.

Actually, it still puts this year ahead because...well...you get it this year.

What you're gambling on is that you think the value you're getting with the pick this year is better than the value you think you'll get with it next year. For a player of Allen's potential upside, that's worth the risk because the player you take with that pick next year also has he possibility of busting.

This time next year there will be someone you like more than 1.06 on the board at 1.06. So if you're going to treat Allen as the 1.06, you should treat the 1.06 as more than 1.06 to account for the very high potential of talent sliding, according to your personal rankings.

Players slide every year. You surrender value when you buy them at their actual worth, despite them sliding.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I don't get what you're saying. If I get 1.06 value this year vs getting it next year....the bolded is a wash.

Actually, it still puts this year ahead because...well...you get it this year.

What you're gambling on is that you think the value you're getting with the pick this year is better than the value you think you'll get with it next year. For a player of Allen's potential upside, that's worth the risk because the player you take with that pick next year also has he possibility of busting.

This time next year there will be someone you like more than 1.06 on the board at 1.06. So if you're going to treat Allen as the 1.06, you should treat the 1.06 as more than 1.06 to account for the very high potential of talent sliding, according to your personal rankings.

Players slide every year. You surrender value when you buy them at their actual, despite them sliding.

None of us know that.

And the debate is still will I like "Allen + 1 year" more than the hypothetical player sitting at 1.06 as a rookie. I think I would so it was a pretty easy trade to make.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

gave 2013 2.4

got 2014 first

Gave: Much less value

got: Much more value

Nah... Im very much a believer in getting a player whose situation I like better NOW than waiting a yr and counting on being able to draft somebody then.

It's not always as easy as the bolded would make it seem. It really depends on what you think you can get at the 2.4

Its a trade that I wouldn't make unless somebody that I really covet is still available when the guy who holds the 2.4 pick is on the clock... then it becomes a 2014 1st Rd pick for "that player that I covet now"

I've even gone as far as putting language in my trades where I reserve the right when THEY are on the clock at the middle to end of Rd 2 to jump in and take that pick in exchange for my "latest 2014 1st rd pick to be determined later"

I've done it for a few yrs now and its worked out nicely... just last yr I snaked Josh Gordon at the 3.2 by offering them one of my 2013 2nd rd picks that was projected to be an early one.

Bottom line is you should feel comfortable to stick your neck out if you feel strongly enough about a player... be prepared though that it really could smack you in the face so you gotta be ok with that possibility too... I like taking risks at appropriate times

 

[Concept Coop]

None of us know that.

And the debate is still will I like "Allen + 1 year" more than the hypothetical player sitting at 1.06 as a rookie. I think I would so it was a pretty easy trade to make.

We don't know that - you're right. We don't know anything about Allen's or the picks future value. If you think he's worth the 1.06 in the average draft, it could pay off. We'll see and I hope it works out for you.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

None of us know that.

And the debate is still will I like "Allen + 1 year" more than the hypothetical player sitting at 1.06 as a rookie. I think I would so it was a pretty easy trade to make.

We don't know that - you're right. We don't know anything about Allen's or the picks future value. If you think he's worth the 1.06 in the average draft, it could pay off. We'll see and I hope it works out for you.

Right. Every pick has a bust risk. I'd rather have the devil I know than the one I don't.

 

[JamboTaylor]

2014 1st

for

C.Ivory

 

[5Rings]

12 dynasty idp ppr

Gave: 1.12, Alex Smith, misc

Got: 1.6

Gave: DeAndre Hopkins (1.6) and 2.12

Got: Justin Blackmon

----------

16 dynasty idp ppr w/ defensive lineups that affect offensive points (ie run a nickel D, take 20% off opposing QB and WR)

Gave: 2.06 (he took Christine Michael), 4.06

Got: 3.05, 2014 2nd, 2015 1st

2015 picks is new for me, kinda odd

-----------

32 team dynasty salary cap idp ppr (no duplicate players)

Gave: DE Evander Hood, CB Philip Adams, 2013 3.29, 2014 2nd

Got: DE Muhamme Wilkderson

Gave: WR Mario Manningham ($1900 cap figure, needed salary dump)

Got: 3.29

 

[cstu]

Gave: 2.06 (he took Christine Michael), 4.06

Got: 3.05, 2014 2nd, 2015 1st

2015 picks is new for me, kinda odd

Amazing job. Almost anytime you can get a future 1st and 2nd for a current 2nd you did well.

 

[cstu]

Give:

Nicks, Hakeem NYG WRThompson, Chris WAS RBMcDonald, Vance SFO TEGet:

Jeffery, Alshon CHI WRMaclin, Jeremy PHI WRFinley, Jermichael GBP TE

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

2014 1st for C.Ivory

I wish I could have gotten him for that price in my league... Good deal

 

[Dez]

What kind of price were you paying ? A 1st is a pretty big price he went for the 2.06, 3.01 in one of my leagues.

2014 1st for C.Ivory

I wish I could have gotten him for that price in my league... Good deal

 

[ghostguy123]

12 team PPR, 1.25 PPR TE, 1 QB, 2RB, 3WR, 1 TE, 1 Flex

Team A gave: Matthew Stafford

Team B gave: Antonio Brown

Greg Olsen

Alex Smith

In terms of rosters, the team acquiring Stafford had Smith, Flacco and Schaub so a need for QB1. Team acquiring the other players was a little thin in WR and only had Pitta as reliable TE and already has Kaepernick at QB. Kind of trade I tought made both teams better.

Value-wise, that is fantastic for team A

I'm not as sure. Smith is basically worthless, so I see this as Stafford for Brown and Olsen. I would rather have Pitta than Olsen. I'm not a fan of Brown, and I think Stafford should throw more TDs this year. I guess I see where A is coming from, since he already has Kaep, but I think he could have done better.

I disagree. I think he can do a lot better trading Brown and Olsen than he could by trading Stafford. Therefore, he did fine, and gained value.

Remember, he can just retrade what he received for Stafford, and I am pretty sure it is more overall value than Stafford is.

 

[Phenix]

• Kiss My Ring gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB; Ballard, Vick IND RB; Moore, Denarius OAK WR
• Joe C's Midget Killers gave up Brees, Drew NOS QB

Thoughts?

 

[ghostguy123]

gave 2013 2.4got 2014 first

Gave: Much less valuegot: Much more value

Nah... Im very much a believer in getting a player whose situation I like better NOW than waiting a yr and counting on being able to draft somebody then.It's not always as easy as the bolded would make it seem. It really depends on what you think you can get at the 2.4 Its a trade that I wouldn't make unless somebody that I really covet is still available when the guy who holds the 2.4 pick is on the clock... then it becomes a 2014 1st Rd pick for "that player that I covet now" I've even gone as far as putting language in my trades where I reserve the right when THEY are on the clock at the middle to end of Rd 2 to jump in and take that pick in exchange for my "latest 2014 1st rd pick to be determined later" I've done it for a few yrs now and its worked out nicely... just last yr I snaked Josh Gordon at the 3.2 by offering them one of my 2013 2nd rd picks that was projected to be an early one. Bottom line is you should feel comfortable to stick your neck out if you feel strongly enough about a player... be prepared though that it really could smack you in the face so you gotta be ok with that possibility too... I like taking risks at appropriate times

A guy you really like COULD slide to pick 16. But since the 2014 pick is already guaranteed to be 4 spots better, and likely more than 4 spots better with potential for much higher, I will ALWAYS make this trade. If you made this deal every single year, you have two 1sts every year while everyone else has 1. In the longrun, it's the way to go. Dynasty=longrun. If you wanna wait till you are on the clock for this deal to see who is there cool, but there is a VERY significant chance the guy wont make the deal with you then, or he will deal with someone else (like me at pick 15 if I was there) for his 2014 1st. Also, and this is a huge factor, you are allowed to trade those 2014 1sts DURING the season to help your team. So while you are going for the lower value instant gratification of pick 16, you could very well trade that 2014 1st for a need to nice upgrade during the season. It's not like you HAVE to wait to use that value.

 

[ghostguy123]

• Kiss My Ring gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB; Ballard, Vick IND RB; Moore, Denarius OAK WR
• Joe C's Midget Killers gave up Brees, Drew NOS QB

Thoughts?

Horrible for whoever traded Brees

 

[squistion]

• Kiss My Ring gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB; Ballard, Vick IND RB; Moore, Denarius OAK WR
• Joe C's Midget Killers gave up Brees, Drew NOS QB

Thoughts?

Horrible for whoever traded Brees

Without context, yes.

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

[*]Kiss My Ring gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB; Ballard, Vick IND RB; Moore, Denarius OAK WR

[*]Joe C's Midget Killers gave up Brees, Drew NOS QB

Thoughts?

Horrible for whoever traded Brees

Agreed... I can't even imagine a scenario where those 3 players ever equal or get close to equaling the value of drew stinkin brees...Nope, I gotta imagine there was more to that trade that would at least make it a little closer in value... Maybe something like... I don't know... How bout a date with Meghan fox with a clause thrown in regarding whether or not the date ended "happily" or not...

No happy ending would mean they'd have to add a top 5 1st rd pick to the deal...

a happy ending would mean theyd have to throw in a 3rd rd pick and a coupon for a free blood test to check for STDs...

I mean hey it is drew Brees

 

[Truman]

Team A Gave: 2013 2nd rounder (middle of round)

Team B Gave: Mark Ingram

This is a 10 team 10 player keeper league and Ingram could likely not be kept by team that traded him.

Always good to get something for a player not likely to survive roster cuts.

He virtually got a mid-12th round pick, with 10 keepers, which is worth less than Ingram most likely (although given the parameters of his situation your statement is still valid).

Either of you guys wanna put money on this?

on what?

Ingram getting cut

You do realize he is talking about being cut from his FANTASY team, right? As in, 10 keeper, Ingram not being one of them??

No I did not.

Imma go sit in the corner

 

[ghostguy123]

No I did not.

Imma go sit in the corner

Don't forget the dunce cap, hahahhhah. Honest mistake I suppose.

Although, I would consider taking a bet that Ingram does get cut after this year after he shows how much more he can suck, lol.

Regarding the above post, love the incorporation of Meghan Fox into the Brees deal. Make it this one girl I work with and I will deal Brees for Ponder or Gabbert.

 

[humpback]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

But obviously the rest of the league doesn't have his value pegged at 1.06. In your real draft scenario, if a guy you value higher is there when you pick at 1.27 great, but you aren't going to pick him there and also give away more draft picks because you thought he was a steal, would you?

The reality is he gave up a #1 next year, in a draft class most think is stronger for FF than this one, from a team who finished in last place, for the 2.06 this year. It could work out, but it isn't good value on paper.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Gave:

1.05

2014 1st

Small amount of RFA/FA bidding money

Got:

1.03

I used the 1.03 on Le'Veon Bell, who I really wanted and had tried unsuccessfully to trade up to both 1.01 and 1.02 for prior. I also am loaded at WR (Megatron, Demaryius, Fitz) and didn't want to get stuck missing out on one of the four RBs (RBs went 1st and 2nd and both the people ahead of me had a big need at RB).

2014 1st that I gave up will likely be late (haven't finished worse than 3rd in the last six years) so I had no problem moving it to get a shot at a young feature RB when I have a need there.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

But obviously the rest of the league doesn't have his value pegged at 1.06. In your real draft scenario, if a guy you value higher is there when you pick at 1.27 great, but you aren't going to pick him there and also give away more draft picks because you thought he was a steal, would you?

The reality is he gave up a #1 next year, in a draft class most think is stronger for FF than this one, from a team who finished in last place, for the 2.06 this year. It could work out, but it isn't good value on paper.

But there are people that have him in the top 10. And this is a league where Geno Smith went at #7.

So...perhaps...in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

 

[utahandy]

12-team PPR Q/2R/3W/T/Flex

Harvin & Vereen

for

Forte, Pitta & 2014 3rd

 

[Truman]

12-team PPR Q/2R/3W/T/Flex

Harvin & Vereen

for

Forte, Pitta & 2014 3rd

Harvin is worth more than that by himself

 

[ghostguy123]

Gave:

1.05

2014 1st

Small amount of RFA/FA bidding money

Got:

1.03

I used the 1.03 on Le'Veon Bell, who I really wanted and had tried unsuccessfully to trade up to both 1.01 and 1.02 for prior. I also am loaded at WR (Megatron, Demaryius, Fitz) and didn't want to get stuck missing out on one of the four RBs (RBs went 1st and 2nd and both the people ahead of me had a big need at RB).

2014 1st that I gave up will likely be late (haven't finished worse than 3rd in the last six years) so I had no problem moving it to get a shot at a young feature RB when I have a need there.

I dont like it in terms of value at all for this years draft, but its not a huge price to pay to make sure you go get the guy you wanted. I just dont like the value for you, and I also dont like Bell any more than Lacy/Bernard/Ball. Maybe one of them didnt make it to pick 5, but maybe you coulda just waited to see if Bell fell to 5, and if not then try and deal up for him if he was picked at 3 or 4.

 

[Chad Parsons]

Gave:

1.05

2014 1st

Small amount of RFA/FA bidding money

Got:

1.03

I used the 1.03 on Le'Veon Bell, who I really wanted and had tried unsuccessfully to trade up to both 1.01 and 1.02 for prior. I also am loaded at WR (Megatron, Demaryius, Fitz) and didn't want to get stuck missing out on one of the four RBs (RBs went 1st and 2nd and both the people ahead of me had a big need at RB).

2014 1st that I gave up will likely be late (haven't finished worse than 3rd in the last six years) so I had no problem moving it to get a shot at a young feature RB when I have a need there.

I dont like it in terms of value at all for this years draft, but its not a huge price to pay to make sure you go get the guy you wanted. I just dont like the value for you, and I also dont like Bell any more than Lacy/Bernard/Ball. Maybe one of them didnt make it to pick 5, but maybe you coulda just waited to see if Bell fell to 5, and if not then try and deal up for him if he was picked at 3 or 4.

That's a huge overpay IMO

Stick in the middle of the first and take BPA or even move down this year. A future 1st to trade up within a tier? Without a draft class like 2011 or 2012, that seems like a big-time value drain.

 

[Chad Parsons]

12-team PPR Q/2R/3W/T/Flex

Harvin & Vereen

for

Forte, Pitta & 2014 3rd

Two years from now one side of this trade will still have value, the other will not.

 

[ghostguy123]

12-team PPR Q/2R/3W/T/Flex

Harvin & Vereen

for

Forte, Pitta & 2014 3rd

Two years from now one side of this trade will still have value, the other will not.

Yeah, this isnt even really much of a "win now" deal for the team getting Forte. A little, but not much, and then it swings big towards the Harvin side in a year or two and will last for several years after that.

 

[Phenix]

• Kiss My Ring gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB; Ballard, Vick IND RB; Moore, Denarius OAK WR
• Joe C's Midget Killers gave up Brees, Drew NOS QB

Thoughts?

Horrible for whoever traded Brees

Without context, yes.

I had Brady already but Ballard was my #6 RB and Moore was my #7 WR. Had to get my favorite and best fantasy player for that price while I was deep enough,

 

[ghostguy123]

• Kiss My Ring gave up Rivers, Philip SDC QB; Ballard, Vick IND RB; Moore, Denarius OAK WR
• Joe C's Midget Killers gave up Brees, Drew NOS QB

Thoughts?

Horrible for whoever traded Brees

Without context, yes.

I had Brady already but Ballard was my #6 RB and Moore was my #7 WR. Had to get my favorite and best fantasy player for that price while I was deep enough,

Some deals you gotta do for need, but some you have to do whether you need the guy or not cause the value of it is just too stupid of the other guy for you to pass up.

Any team with Rivers, Ballard, or Moors in their lineup is going nowhere. Brees has more of a positive effect on your bench doing nothing for you by hurting his team since he doesnt have Brees any more. MAYBE Rivers and Ballard combined will average what Brees scores, but since that comes from two lineup spots...................yeah...................bad

 

[petenice15]

2 trades in a 14 Team NON-PPR QB,RB,RB,WR,WR,TE,Flex,Flex(can't flex QB)

Team A gives Ridley

Team B gives Garçon and 2013 1.09

Team B gives Crabtree and 2013 3.09

Team C gives Freeman and Tamme

Thoughts here guys?

 

[I was in the pool]

2 trades in a 14 Team NON-PPR QB,RB,RB,WR,WR,TE,Flex,Flex(can't flex QB)Team A gives RidleyTeam B gives Garçon and 2013 1.09Team B gives Crabtree and 2013 3.09Team C gives Freeman and TammeThoughts here guys?

1.09 side and Crabtree side pretty easily

 

[GoodLloydHaveMercy]

2 trades in a 14 Team NON-PPR QB,RB,RB,WR,WR,TE,Flex,Flex(can't flex QB)Team A gives RidleyTeam B gives Garçon and 2013 1.09Team B gives Crabtree and 2013 3.09Team C gives Freeman and TammeThoughts here guys?

Not a fan of the second trade at all... I don't think they feel Freeman is going to be THE guy there long term and while Tamme can add some short term value I don't think he is the long term answer there either... So give me the Crabtree side by FAR

As far as the first trade... Meh... I can see a situation where either side wins... Im in the camp that Ridley will be a headache to own but I can be talked into him being the best player in this draft and a solid low end RB1 or High end RB2 for the next few yrs.

 

[petenice15]

2 trades in a 14 Team NON-PPR QB,RB,RB,WR,WR,TE,Flex,Flex(can't flex QB)Team A gives RidleyTeam B gives Garçon and 2013 1.09Team B gives Crabtree and 2013 3.09Team C gives Freeman and TammeThoughts here guys?

Thanks for the replies guys. This is the first year s second Flex is added to the starting lineups. Since this is a 14 team non-PPR league, RBs are like gold. How do you guys think the extra flex affects this trade and the league in general? And I'm not involved in either trade for the record.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Team A Gave: 2013 2nd rounder (middle of round)

Team B Gave: Mark Ingram

This is a 10 team 10 player keeper league and Ingram could likely not be kept by team that traded him.

Always good to get something for a player not likely to survive roster cuts.

He virtually got a mid-12th round pick, with 10 keepers, which is worth less than Ingram most likely (although given the parameters of his situation your statement is still valid).

Either of you guys wanna put money on this?

on what?

Ingram getting cut

You misinterpreted what was said. Go back and read the posts again. There's absolutely no way Ingram gets cut by the Saints.

ETA: I see this has already been addressed.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

12-team PPR Q/2R/3W/T/Flex

Harvin & Vereen

for

Forte, Pitta & 2014 3rd

Two years from now one side of this trade will still have value, the other will not.

Yeah, this isnt even really much of a "win now" deal for the team getting Forte. A little, but not much, and then it swings big towards the Harvin side in a year or two and will last for several years after that.

in a ppr it's highly debateable if's even a "win now" move, unless the team desperately needed RB help. Vereen is actually not a terrible option at RB in a ppr either.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

You misinterpreted what was said. Go back and read the posts again. There's absolutely no way Ingram gets cut by the Saints.

ETA: I see this has already been addressed.

Those responsible for the sacking have now been sacked...

 

[humpback]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

But obviously the rest of the league doesn't have his value pegged at 1.06. In your real draft scenario, if a guy you value higher is there when you pick at 1.27 great, but you aren't going to pick him there and also give away more draft picks because you thought he was a steal, would you?

The reality is he gave up a #1 next year, in a draft class most think is stronger for FF than this one, from a team who finished in last place, for the 2.06 this year. It could work out, but it isn't good value on paper.

But there are people that have him in the top 10. And this is a league where Geno Smith went at #7.

So...perhaps...in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

They should have drafted him or traded for him then instead of letting him fall that far.

Again, it's entirely possible that it works out for you, and Allen is better than whoever is taken with that pick next year, just like it's possible that someone drafted in the 4th or 5th round is better than Allen. IMO, it's hard to argue that the value is that close however. If the point of the Geno Smith pick was to say your league has some shaky owners, it seems to me you should have been able to give up a lot less to get him. Just my $.02, good luck.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

But obviously the rest of the league doesn't have his value pegged at 1.06. In your real draft scenario, if a guy you value higher is there when you pick at 1.27 great, but you aren't going to pick him there and also give away more draft picks because you thought he was a steal, would you?

The reality is he gave up a #1 next year, in a draft class most think is stronger for FF than this one, from a team who finished in last place, for the 2.06 this year. It could work out, but it isn't good value on paper.

But there are people that have him in the top 10. And this is a league where Geno Smith went at #7.

So...perhaps...in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

They should have drafted him or traded for him then instead of letting him fall that far.

Again, it's entirely possible that it works out for you, and Allen is better than whoever is taken with that pick next year, just like it's possible that someone drafted in the 4th or 5th round is better than Allen. IMO, it's hard to argue that the value is that close however. If the point of the Geno Smith pick was to say your league has some shaky owners, it seems to me you should have been able to give up a lot less to get him. Just my $.02, good luck.

Bolded #1 - I meant that there are people in the FF community that have him rated there.

Bolded #2 - This implies that all members of the league are as equally likely to trade. Which obviously isn't true.

I had one guy that told me he's sworn off all trading because he'd been involved with too many trades involving Indian Givers. Even after he explained himself I still have no idea what that meant.

 

[humpback]

This point here is something that people routinely miss. Maybe Andy has Allen's value pegged at 1.06. The fact that he fell to 2.06 doesn't change how Andy views him. So he's trading his 2014 first for the player he would normally have taken at 1.06.

It's like this in the real draft too. People cling to that value chart and say that some teams overtraded. Well if a team thinks someone is worth 1.15, but he's there at 1.27, in their mind they're getting 1.15 value in return.

But obviously the rest of the league doesn't have his value pegged at 1.06. In your real draft scenario, if a guy you value higher is there when you pick at 1.27 great, but you aren't going to pick him there and also give away more draft picks because you thought he was a steal, would you?

The reality is he gave up a #1 next year, in a draft class most think is stronger for FF than this one, from a team who finished in last place, for the 2.06 this year. It could work out, but it isn't good value on paper.

But there are people that have him in the top 10. And this is a league where Geno Smith went at #7.

So...perhaps...in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

They should have drafted him or traded for him then instead of letting him fall that far.

Again, it's entirely possible that it works out for you, and Allen is better than whoever is taken with that pick next year, just like it's possible that someone drafted in the 4th or 5th round is better than Allen. IMO, it's hard to argue that the value is that close however. If the point of the Geno Smith pick was to say your league has some shaky owners, it seems to me you should have been able to give up a lot less to get him. Just my $.02, good luck.

Bolded #1 - I meant that there are people in the FF community that have him rated there.

Bolded #2 - This implies that all members of the league are as equally likely to trade. Which obviously isn't true.

I had one guy that told me he's sworn off all trading because he'd been involved with too many trades involving Indian Givers. Even after he explained himself I still have no idea what that meant.

#1- You aren't trading with the FF community, you are trading within your league. If your league valued him at around pick 2.06, then that's approx. the value you should have given up. I think 1st rounder next year from the last place team this year is much, much more than that.

#2- Not really, it implies that one other owner somewhere between say pick 1.06 and 2.06 is willing to trade for more reasonable value. Granted, not a guarantee.

I totally understand how trading can be difficult, I'm in a league like that too, but I still have to imagine you could have gotten a better deal. As for the "Indian Giver", I'm assuming he's saying that because he's had some handshake-type agreements for trades that the other teams backed out of, so now he's sworn all dealing off, which is obviously silly.

Again, good luck.