Steelhead Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Team 1 is 3-4 and trades Grant, Chambers, and Scaife to Team 2 for Addai, Matt Jones, and Gates. Team 2 is 4-3 and prior to the trade only had Moore as an RB this week with bye week issues (Addai hurt, Westbrook, Buck on bye). Team 2 used to do stupid trades with Team 1 years ago but finally wised up. I don't get this as why would you trade your keeper in addai just to cure a bye week issue. We are a 2 keeper league and this year team 2 had addai and westbrook as keepers. I have never vetoed a trade before because if an owner is a dumbass then I can't stop that. However this seems just too lopsided to me. I'd also like to say Team 1 and Team 2 are in the same division, and I am in that division as well. I am currently 5-2 and in division lead. So please tell me if I am just being partial because it tips the scales in favor of Team 1 and threatens me Prior to trade Team 1 QB – Romo RB – Turner, Grant, McFadden, Julius Jones WR – Chambers, Driver, Bruce, Walter, Desean Jackson TE – Scaife Team 2 QB – Rodgers, Palmer RB – Addai, Westbrook, Buckhalter, Moore WR – Coles, Holmes, galloway, Jones, Brown TE – Gates After trade Team 1 QB – Romo RB – Turner, Addai, McFadden, Julius Jones WR – Driver, Bruce, Walter, Matt Jones, Desean Jackson TE – Gates Team 2 QB – Rodgers, Palmer RB – Grant, Westbrook, Buckhalter, Moore WR – Coles, Chambers, Holmes, galloway, Brown TE – Scaife Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Don't meddle. The trade isn't that bad. And as a commish, you really should never veto any trades unless you think two teams are colluding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelhead Posted October 18, 2008 Author Share Posted October 18, 2008 Don't meddle. The trade isn't that bad. And as a commish, you really should never veto any trades unless you think two teams are colluding. Yeah in 9 yrs of this 2 man keeper I've never vetoed. I think I am just overreacting because Team 1 has a couple owners that he routinely rapes every year. He did one last week and I think here comes another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchico Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Yeah in 9 yrs of this 2 man keeper I've never vetoed. I think I am just overreacting because Team 1 has a couple owners that he routinely rapes every year. He did one last week and I think here comes another. Addai's hurt and Grant has Potential, which he hasn't lived up to yet. If he does you could say team got the better deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Agent Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Trade looks valid. Team 1 gets the better deal IMO but it's legit. Besides, you don't complain or veto unless it's collusion. Team 1 looks like the type of manager we all want in our leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Don't meddle. The trade isn't that bad. And as a commish, you really should never veto any trades unless you think two teams are colluding. I have commished our main local for many years and never vetoed a trade. That being said I disagree with this statement. Sometimes a team is getting raped so bad that it will throw off the competitive balance of the league. I dont feel that way in this case but in some cases that applies Vlad/Rios etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Vlad/Rios etc Here, Menudo, here boy......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelhead Posted October 18, 2008 Author Share Posted October 18, 2008 to me it looks like Team 1 is getting alot (Addai and Gates) for garbage thus far (Grant) and Scaife? Chambers is ok, though he's hurt too. This trade would look more fair to me if Gates was not included I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 It's not a Commishes job to monitor stupid people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 It's not a Commishes job to monitor stupid people. For the competitive balance of the league I think it is if a trade is tremendously lopsided Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelhead Posted October 18, 2008 Author Share Posted October 18, 2008 So from what I see you all think it's not tremendously lopsided and shouldn't affect the competitive balance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 I have commished our main local for many years and never vetoed a trade. That being said I disagree with this statement. Sometimes a team is getting raped so bad that it will throw off the competitive balance of the league. I dont feel that way in this case but in some cases that applies Vlad/Rios etc I agree it can hurt the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 For the competitive balance of the league I think it is if a trade is tremendously lopsided I've stolen this from bronco billy, but it rang true with me so: Let us suppose that you veto a trade that you deemed 'tremendously lopsided.' And let us suppose that the team you deemed to be making a completely moranic trade, in the end, would have done better and perhaps even won the championship if his trade had gone through. Do you then refund that owner his money or do you tell him, "Tough luck. Sorry I vetoed your tremendously lopsided trade and kept you from winning." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 (edited) to me it looks like Team 1 is getting alot (Addai and Gates) for garbage thus far (Grant) and Scaife? Chambers is ok, though he's hurt too. This trade would look more fair to me if Gates was not included I guess Really? Addai could be out for four weeks (or longer, depending on how well this soft player recovers from a partially torn hamstring). And garbage thus far? Grant has a solid next several weeks to improve his mediocre stats, an in a place like Green Bay, chances are they will HAVE to rely on the run as the weather gets worse. I have Grant targeted as a "buy" in all of my leagues. Gates has been disappointing this season, and though he is currently the #2 TE, he is no longer "elite"....Witten holds that title all to himself. Gates and Scaiffe are a basically a wash...Gates was trade on his name-value. Chambers is having a phenomneal year, and it should continue after he returns...he is in an offense that, with the lingering injury to LT, needs to pass, and is playing in a climate (San Diego) that will allow them to pass well into december. So.... Grant vs. Addai....who knows? Both were Top-10 when the season started, but with Addai hurt, I'd rather have Grant right now. Chambers vs. Jones? no brainer, edge to Chambers Gates vs. Scaife? Wash, with Gates not himself with a lingering toe injury. So I'd said Team 2 got the best of this deal....what am I missing? ETA: your bitterness over Team 1 having gotten the better of other owners in past years should have no bearing on your evaluation of this deal. Just because he is a better trader than most of your other owners, there is no need to hate. Edited October 18, 2008 by i_am_the_swammi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTSuper7 Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Really? Addai could be out for four weeks (or longer, depending on how well this soft player recovers from a partially torn hamstring). And garbage thus far? Grant has a solid next several weeks to improve his mediocre stats, an in a place like Green Bay, chances are they will HAVE to rely on the run as the weather gets worse. I have Grant targeted as a "buy" in all of my leagues. Gates has been disappointing this season, and though he is currently the #2 TE, he is no longer "elite"....Witten holds that title all to himself. Gates and Scaiffe are a basically a wash...Gates was trade on his name-value. Chambers is having a phenomneal year, and it should continue after he returns...he is in an offense that, with the lingering injury to LT, needs to pass, and is playing in a climate (San Diego) that will allow them to pass well into december. So.... Grant vs. Addai....who knows? Both were Top-10 when the season started, but with Addai hurt, I'd rather have Grant right now. Chambers vs. Jones? no brainer, edge to Chambers Gates vs. Scaife? Wash, with Gates not himself with a lingering toe injury. So I'd said Team 2 got the best of this deal....what am I missing? ETA: your bitterness over Team 1 having gotten the better of other owners in past years should have no bearing on your evaluation of this deal. Just because he is a better trader than most of your other owners, there is no need to hate. I agree with most of this assessment except the Gates - Scaife part. Even not being elite, Gates is still the primary target when the Chargers are 1st and goal. I'd give him the slight edge, hoping he will improve with rest at the bye. So I'd say that team one has a slight edge. Still, regardless of the exact assessment, this trade is certainly not lopsided. Grant is the exclusive ball carrier, and Dungy could easily go back to a RBBC with Rhodes and Addai if Rhodes does well (and to keep Addai fresh). Grant is bound to find the end zone soon with all of his opportunities, and I agree with the comment that they'll need to lean on him in bad weather at the end of the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 I've stolen this from bronco billy, but it rang true with me so: Let us suppose that you veto a trade that you deemed 'tremendously lopsided.' And let us suppose that the team you deemed to be making a completely moranic trade, in the end, would have done better and perhaps even won the championship if his trade had gone through. Do you then refund that owner his money or do you tell him, "Tough luck. Sorry I vetoed your tremendously lopsided trade and kept you from winning." This is where common sense must kick in. Like I said I have never vetoed a trade in my many years as commish in my main local but if I ever saw something of the likes of Tomlinson and T.O for Kenny Watson and Marty Booker I think I would nix it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 This is where common sense must kick in. Like I said I have never vetoed a trade in my many years as commish in my main local but if I ever saw something of the likes of Tomlinson and T.O for Kenny Watson and Marty Booker I think I would nix it. I guess I'm the only one who projects Booker to break out in a big way in the 2nd half of th season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 I don't see an issue. Any team trading for M. Jones has no idea what they are doing. Addai is out a couple weeks and Gates isn't exactly the #1 TE. I'm not even sure if either team got a considerably better deal than the other. Sounds like sour grapes to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steelhead Posted October 18, 2008 Author Share Posted October 18, 2008 Matt Jones was a throw away because Team 2 would have to cut a WR to take Chambers. Thanks for all the input. I already approved the trade. You guys have been very helpful. I am always skeptical of trades Team 1 makes as he's known to be a rapist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 I am always skeptical of trades Team 1 makes as he's known to be a rapist And this is an important point. Unlike real rape, it takes two to complete a trade "rape". The "rapee" needs to hit the Accept button. The Reject button is right alongside it. As others have said, stupidity is not a reason for veto. FWIW, as others have explained, I don't think this trade is especially out of whack given current injuries and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Bottom line is you just have to be careful as commish and think out all of your decisions. There are Menudo types in every league and you have to be sure they can sit down after a trade is made 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.