detlef Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I honestly think the only reason why a trade should be rejected is if there's obvious evidence of collusion. However, you can't just do it to save the league from one owner being an idiot. Thus whilst holding my nose, I just approved: B Favre and Edge for M Lynch and Brady Keep in mind, this is an 8 team league. Rodgers, Kitna, Shaub, Pennington, and Warner among others are all FAs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 (edited) If its not some sort of keeper or dynasty league you had every right to reject that. Check that. It may have been your duty to reject it Edited September 9, 2008 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 (edited) i dont really so where its so bad ...Lynch is a HUGH upgrade over edge without seeing the rosters it is really hard to comment any further edit: oh wait the guy getting lynch is who you are calling the fleecer Edited September 9, 2008 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If its not some sort of keeper or dynasty league you had every right to reject that. Check that. It may have been your duty to reject it disagree totally. absent evidence of collusion, the guy has every right to overpay for brett favre if that is how he chooses to address his QB issue. it's a pretty dumb trade, but it would not be a complete shocker if favre+edge outscored, say, schaub+lynch. this is one where the commish absolutely has to just hold his nose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abishagenaden Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 disagree totally. absent evidence of collusion, the guy has every right to overpay for brett favre if that is how he chooses to address his QB issue. it's a pretty dumb trade, but it would not be a complete shocker if favre+edge outscored, say, schaub+lynch. this is one where the commish absolutely has to just hold his nose. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 B Favre and Edge for M Lynch - don't sound that bad if Farve is going to be sitting on his bench he is getting Lynch for Edge which team do you think is getting hosed ???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 9, 2008 Author Share Posted September 9, 2008 disagree totally. absent evidence of collusion, the guy has every right to overpay for brett favre if that is how he chooses to address his QB issue. it's a pretty dumb trade, but it would not be a complete shocker if favre+edge outscored, say, schaub+lynch. this is one where the commish absolutely has to just hold his nose. Pretty much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 (edited) If its not some sort of keeper or dynasty league you had every right to reject that. Check that. It may have been your duty to reject it Backtrack. Maybe my initial reaction was a little quick. I just think if its not keepr or dynasty then including Brady makes it a little hairy since he is no longer playing this year Edited September 9, 2008 by whomper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Backtrack. Maybe my initial reaction was a little quick. I just think if its not keepr or dynasty then including Brady makes it a little hairy since he is no longer playing this year Brady was just thrown in to balance the trade ( meaning some leagues have to have equal amount of players not say balance as in value ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 9, 2008 Author Share Posted September 9, 2008 Backtrack. Maybe my initial reaction was a little quick. I just think if its not keepr or dynasty then including Brady makes it a little hairy since he is no longer playing this year Including Brady is merely to preserve roster sizes. Basically it's Favre and Edge for Lynch. Which is all well and good but not when you consider that it's really Favre and Edge for Lynch plus either Warner, Rodgers, Kitna, Shaub... Since the dude who gets Brady is merely going to waive him for any of those he wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Brady was just thrown in to balance the trade ( meaning some leagues have to have equal amount of players not say balance as in value ) Yeah. I jumped the gun..My bad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 disagree totally. absent evidence of collusion, the guy has every right to overpay for brett favre if that is how he chooses to address his QB issue. it's a pretty dumb trade, but it would not be a complete shocker if favre+edge outscored, say, schaub+lynch. this is one where the commish absolutely has to just hold his nose. Uh, yeah. If it's a keeper league I'd consider it totally lopsided, in a re-draft, a fair trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MustOfBeenDrunk Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Including Brady is merely to preserve roster sizes. Basically it's Favre and Edge for Lynch. Which is all well and good but not when you consider that it's really Favre and Edge for Lynch plus either Warner, Rodgers, Kitna, Shaub... Since the dude who gets Brady is merely going to waive him for any of those he wants. good point *** 8 team league Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle2003 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 B Favre and Edge for M Lynch - don't sound that bad if Farve is going to be sitting on his bench he is getting Lynch for Edge which team do you think is getting hosed ???? Then if Farve goes out a throws 35 TDs this year, is this a fair trade? Well, he could very well do that. Including Brady is probably to fill roster requirements. This could be a fair trade, but none of us can predict the future. I may end up benefiting the team giving up Lynch. NO COLLUSION, LET IT STAND Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Including Brady is merely to preserve roster sizes. Basically it's Favre and Edge for Lynch. Which is all well and good but not when you consider that it's really Favre and Edge for Lynch plus either Warner, Rodgers, Kitna, Shaub... Since the dude who gets Brady is merely going to waive him for any of those he wants. ok then i have to ask who is this guys other QB that he currently has to pair with Favre? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 9, 2008 Author Share Posted September 9, 2008 Then if Farve goes out a throws 35 TDs this year, is this a fair trade? Well, he could very well do that. Including Brady is probably to fill roster requirements. This could be a fair trade, but none of us can predict the future. I may end up benefiting the team giving up Lynch. NO COLLUSION, LET IT STAND Obviously I let it stand, however your argument for why this trade is not horrible is sort of silly. O Sullivan could throw 35 TDs for all we know, would that trade be cool? The simple fact is, Lynch is a top 10 guy going into the season that did nothing this weekend to lead anyone to believe that he didn't deserve that. Edge looked nice but has some major wear on his treads and a rookie nipping at his heels. Favre certainly looked good but really no better than any number of guys that can be had for free. So why volunteer to make such a huge downgrade at RB? I'm simply venting because now one of my opponents has managed to trade his back up QB and a back up RB for a stud RB. All because somebody panicked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 9, 2008 Author Share Posted September 9, 2008 ok then i have to ask who is this guys other QB that he currently has to pair with Favre? The funny thing is that the same dude traded Eli Manning for Leinart right after the draft (early August) because he realized that Manning and Brady had the same bye week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle2003 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 So you will pay his league fee if Farve and Edge have great years and Lynch not as much? Farve plays behind one of the best lines in the league and has a couple of very good receivers, so he could very well have a great year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I think the most mind boggling part of all is that you are participating in an 8-team league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Need to see both rosters first before anyalzing this trade, but if the guy giving up Lynch has other stud RBs to make up for the loss of Lynch (which is possible, since its an 8-team league), and he is getting a QB that HE feels gets him closer to making up for the loss of Brady, then who is anyone to veto it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catfish Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Good job. It would be nice if every comish would have the open mindedness to allow trades they felt were lopsided. Subjectivity should not enter into it. No collusion no problem. The man paid his dime, let him run his team as he sees fit. It’s the American way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theeohiostate Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I wouldn't have any issues with the trade for either owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Meh. I don't see why it's a big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsmayes Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch over that trade. I think half the time we fantasy gods berate a lopsided traded, the sucker ends up with the better part of it by the end of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 9, 2008 Author Share Posted September 9, 2008 So you will pay his league fee if Farve and Edge have great years and Lynch not as much? Farve plays behind one of the best lines in the league and has a couple of very good receivers, so he could very well have a great year. What the hell are you talking about? I allowed the f'ing trade! Hell, Favre could have 50 TDs for all I know. That doesn't change the fact that as of September 9th 2008, there is no evidence to support that he should be markedly better than any number of guys that could be had for free. There is, however, plenty of reason to expect that Lynch should be better than Edge. If you'd be happy to trade Lynch for those guys knowing that there were plenty of options to be had for free, that's your business but I doubt you'd find many who would agree with that logic. Really, that's it. Now shoo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.