Trade abuse? DeVonta Smith for Mostert + Kirk (1 Viewer)

[bloc8888]

We had a trade in our league, and one owner is giving sh!t, calling it trade abuse (well, calling it "trade r@pe", which we're not supposed to say anymore). As Commish, I've tried to explain why it's not, but need an independent view point here. Won't tell you who thinks what, or what the arguments are so as to bias you.

One owner got DeVonta Smith, the got Christian Kirk + Raheem Mostert in the trade.

Thank you!!
I'll help in return, if you leave a link!

 

[Gally]

I think it's a fair trade. It's one week and my guess is the guy is looking at one week of results and jumping to conclusions. I have no problem with the deal even though it looks pretty bad after week 1.

 

[Jaruby]

It’s fine. I wouldn’t have done it but if he needed a RB bad he probably improved his starters.……next week.

 

[bloc8888]

It’s fine. I wouldn’t have done it but if he needed a RB bad he probably improved his starters.……next week.

Exactly - he autodrafted, and after Pollard, had no one better (Dowdle, Gus tha Bus). He needed RB badly, and only got a small downgrade (potentially) to Kirk. Just dealing with a whiny b!tch of a manager.

 

[bryhamm]

never understood people who gripe about trades. unless you strongly think (or have proof) that collusion is involved, who cares.

 

[Big Nate]

In one of my redraft leagues last year I had a wealth of RBs after the draft. One guy was desperate for RBs and I traded him Mostert (my last pick in the draft) before week 1 started. It looked like I had won the deal, until I didn't. Mostert went on to crush and he won the league.

What may look lopsided to someone at the start of the season might be the other way by the end. No one truly knows who will win this trade until the season plays out.

No one should veto or complain about trades unless there is true collusion. Moreover no trade should be vetoed or overturned even if it is favored (perceived) to be one sided. You have no idea what either manager has planned or how the season will play out.

Those managers that ***** and complain are just made they didn't get to do the deal themselves. Straight up send the link to this post and I'll tell them to do better.

 

[BLOCKED_PUNT]

Moreover no trade should be vetoed or overturned even if it is favored (perceived) to be one sided.

exactly, this is why Nate is going to trade me ARSB for Zay Jones.

 

[bloc8888]

I think you're exactly right, Big Nate - the owner b!tching is just annoyed he wasn't able to get a trade done, and is annoyed if my team might improve (as we're both reasonably competitive each year in the league). Makes sense, I ain't gunna be losing any sleep over this.

 

[BLOCKED_PUNT]

I can understand why some owner thinks that the guy getting Smith is getting a good deal though

 

[bloc8888]

Yea that’s fair.

The whiny b!tch called it “trade r@pe” which it just ain’t.

 

[Big Nate]

Can look at this situation a number of ways. Smith is at best #2 in this offense. Now that Barkley is there Smith may be #3. Barkley may get more touches than past RBs (increased carries and targets). As talented as Smith is maybe his production is down this year. Not saying it will but that is one side.

Kirk was crushing it at the start of last season in PPR leagues. Solid starter who was averaging 7.5 targets per week for the first 11 weeks.

If someone believes in a player then all the power to them. Go get your guy.

 

[Gruden's Keyboard]

All of this sounds like a league that would not be enjoyable to participate in.