needtradehelp88 Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) New to fantasy football so bare with me. This is a 10 team league with standard scoring: 4 points for passing TD, 4 points per 100 passing yards, no ppr. My team: QB: Peyton Manning RB1: Zac Stacy RB2: Ben Tate WR1: Calvin Johson WR2: Desean Jackson TE: Jason Witten Flex: Ryan Matthews D/ST: Broncos K: Mason Crosby Bench: Steven Jackson Michael Crabtree Wes Welker Carlos Hyde James Starks Josh Gordon Opponents Team: QB: Matthew Stafford RB1: Matt Forte RB2: Giovanni Bernard WR1:Demariyus Thomas WR2:Percy Harvin TE: Zac Ertz Flex: Chris Johnson D/ST: 49ers K: Justin Tucker Bench: Shane Vereen Golden Tate Reggie Wayne Andy Dalton Andre Hopkins LeGarrette Blunt My opponent is interested in taking Manning to pair up with Thomas and I wouldn't mind doing the same with Stafford. I am interested in Matt Forte and Shane Vereen. He is willing to take a chance on Josh Gordon while he is in limbo and it the suspension is 8+ games I'd liked to get some value out of him (picked him up off the waiver shortly after draft). Would giving up Manning, Stacy, Gordon for Stafford, Forte, Vereen be worth it? Is there a better combination that I should offer? Edited August 27, 2014 by needtradehelp88 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willswear3 Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 I like your team a lot where it is right now. The current trade doesn't benefit you in my opinion, and since he wants such a good player in Manning, i'd try to make him give you much better value than that. Try getting Bernard instead of Vereen. If he really wants Gordan/Manning enough he may go for it. If he isn't giving you that you could try a little less, but I wouldn't take too big of a drop off. Maybe you could keep the trade how it is, but substitute Ryan Mathews/Ben Tate for Zac Stacy, that would be a bit more fair. Honestly though, your team looks really really strong right now, so I wouldn't force a trade for Stafford, because in theory the QB/WR combo sounds good, and it is a lot, but with how dependent Stafford is on Calvin, and visa versa, if one struggles, the other typically does to. And when your best player and your quarterback struggle one week it is really hard to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPLossmans Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Pairing really isn't that great unless you have a weekly high score prize. Right now you are fine and it isn't really worth trading and possibly downgrading over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpr103 Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 My opponent is interested in taking Manning to pair up with Thomas and I wouldn't mind doing the same with Stafford. I am interested in Matt Forte and Shane Vereen. He is willing to take a chance on Josh Gordon while he is in limbo and it the suspension is 8+ games I'd liked to get some value out of him (picked him up off the waiver shortly after draft). BULL-honda: Your opponent is interested in taking Manning because he's a better quarterback. Period. Manning will score more fantasy points than Stafford. No Matter what kind of Zen Buddhist retreat you and your opponent went to that required him to shave his head and chant that keeping his top fantasy QB on the same team as his top fantasy WR: Would giving up Manning, Stacy, Gordon for Stafford, Forte, Vereen be worth it? Is there a better combination that I should offer? No. Manning to Stafford is a tier-one to tier-two drop, in the highest-scoring category, Quarterback. You can subtract 3-4 points from every game by making that move. Granted, Forte for Stacy is an improvement, but it doesn't offset the loss from Manning to Stafford. If it's not a PPR league you really shouldn't be interested in any Patriots RBs in a ten team league, so take a deep breath and reconsider your options here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpr103 Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 BULL-honda: Oh, dear, this site has some kind of anti-offensive language filter that prohibits free speech in a somewhat archaic fashion. Suffice it to say that I do not believe that your trade partner's intentions to be true, and if he wishes to speak his untruths to a lady may his team be stricken by seven plagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboysDiehard Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) Oh, dear, this site has some kind of anti-offensive language filter that prohibits free speech in a somewhat archaic fashion. Suffice it to say that I do not believe that your trade partner's intentions to be true, and if he wishes to speak his untruths to a lady may his team be stricken by seven plagues. I love the regression to Winnie the Pooh language after the original was filtered. Welcome to the Huddle my friend, may you live long and prosper here! Edited August 27, 2014 by CowboysDiehard 1 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.