Commissioner Trade (1 Viewer)

[Yitbos69]

Fair Trade....move on

 

[pinequick]

So the guy trades Anquan Boldin on Boldin's bye week for Javon Walker, right before the games for that week start.

So to summarize:

Guy who is still in it at 5-3

Instead of X starts Javon Walker (Boldin traded)

Guy who is out of it at 2-6

Instead of Walker now has to decide between scrubs (Boldin benched due to bye)

--

How can that trade be considered ethical? I mean c'mon, the guy replaces a bye week WR 30 minutes before opening kickoff on Sunday? The 2-6 team CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE if he has any chance of winning the league at all. So what does he do? Trades his by far best WR that week for a guy on a bye. That should send a clear signal that he is tanking the game (and thus his season). The 5-3 guy is desperate for a win, being two games back from the lead, and with his best WR on bye. He then conveniently trades his bye week WR for a guy that is playing that week. Clear case of collusion IMO. If the other team 2-6 team was not out of it, then I can see making this trade. But the way it stands now, clearly the 2-6 is tanking and thus collusion is apparent. If I was in that league I would be pissed.

OR it means he agrees with many others that Boldin is superior to Walker. He knows that if he waits a week, the deal won't go through because team A won't be desperate for a WR next week and won't give up Boldin for the inferior Walker. If he wants Boldin it's now or never. So, he has to make a choice: (a) have a weaker team this week (and hope he gets lucky with one of his other WR's) and then have a stronger team the rest of the season with Boldin, making him more likely to win those games; or (b) hang onto Walker and have a slightly better chance of winning this week but less of a chance of winning the rest of his games. I'd do the trade since I have a better chance to get lucky with a weaker lineup this 1 week than I do with a weaker lineup every week for the rest of the season--since he's 2-6 so far, his lineup with Walker sure isn't setting the world on fire, so why would anyone think he could stand pat and suddenly win the rest of his games? Taking a gamble is the only way to have a chance.

you make the best case for the 2-6 team, by far. everyone else is just getting angry and making bad pts, but you make a good one. not that that is what the other owner was thinking, but good pt nonetheless.

So did you just not read everyone else's posts, or what? What is the heart of apalmer's post? THAT THE OWNER WHO TRADED AWAY WALKER SEES BOLDIN MORE VALUABLE IN THE LONG TERM. If you haven't been able to glean that from almost everybody else's posts in this thread, then. . . well, I guess that might explain why you brought this up in here in the first place.Keep truckin', shark!!