Sign in to follow this  
giantsfan

Can you believe someone in my league...

Recommended Posts

traded Harrison FOR C. Brown and T. Henry. I mean what kind of deal is that? A top 5 WR for a RBBC. It is people like that, that quite honetly ruin leagues for the rest of us. And by the way it is the same 2 people who were involved in a deal last year of Q and P. Price for C-Pep after week 1 (same owner getting Harrison got C-Pep). Is that a joke or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Veto? Their history smells of possible collusion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No collusion. Someone who needs RB's may, for some odd reason, like the Tennessee running game. With Brown already dinged up, this might not be RBBC for very long. Harrison is not getting any younger, and Manning has a lot of options in Indy. I don't think Harrison is a top 5 WR this year.

 

In a keeper or dynasty league this is a very fair trade. In a re-draft, maybe a slight advantage for the guy who gets Harrison.

 

AND WRONG FORUM! :D

Edited by Hugh 0ne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
traded Harrison FOR C. Brown and T. Henry. I mean what kind of deal is that? A top 5 WR for a RBBC. It is people like that, that quite honetly ruin leagues for the rest of us. And by the way it is the same 2 people who were involved in a deal last year of Q and P. Price for C-Pep after week 1 (same owner getting Harrison got C-Pep). Is that a joke or what?

 

1006209[/snapback]

 

 

 

If one goes down - very likely - said owner has a starting back. Not a great deal, but not pisspoor either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No collusion. Someone who needs RB's may, for some odd reason, like the Tennessee running game. With Brown already dinged up, this might not be RBBC for very long. Harrison is not getting any younger, and Manning has a lot of options in Indy. I don't think Harrison is a top 5 WR this year.

 

In a keeper or dynasty league this is a very fair trade. In a re-draft, maybe a slight advantage for the guy who gets Harrison.

 

AND WRONG FORUM! :D

 

1007336[/snapback]

 

 

 

1. Not a keeper or dynasty league.

2. How is this the wrong forum when I am not asking for any advice? Just simply stating a deal that went down. I didn't say should this be vetoed, we don't have that rule in our league, so not wrong forum.

 

And it isn't collusion just a really stupid owner. And his only good RB is Jordan but we are allowed to start 4 WR's and only 1 RB so that isn't an issue. Anyway you cut it dealing a top 5 WR for a RBBC which makes both of them pretty useless is a very bad deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in my League, Harrison's scored 9 points while the duo have combined for 6. Not that much of a scoring difference. Slight edge to Harrison but nothing to cry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Althought I agree the trade stinks, but you have not given me enough information to outright say it is bad. What if the guy with Harrison has no RBs (i.e. was banking on Arrington or DD) and he is desperate?

 

I know I have made trades that did not favor me in rough times and they always benefited me in the longrun. However, due to their history maybe something is up.

 

Look at their lineups then decide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2. How is this the wrong forum when I am not asking for any advice? Just simply stating a deal that went down. I didn't say should this be vetoed, we don't have that rule in our league, so not wrong forum.

 

1007412[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Not to get into a p*ssing match, but since you ask:

 

The topic relates to Fantasy Football and a trade made in a Fantasy Football League. Those topics belong in the Fantasy Football Advice Forum (fantasy football team dilemmas). Not a big deal, I was just giving you my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not to get into a p*ssing match, but since you ask:

 

The topic relates to Fantasy Football and a trade made in a Fantasy Football League. Those topics belong in the Fantasy Football Advice Forum (fantasy football team dilemmas). Not a big deal, I was just giving you my opinion.

 

1007459[/snapback]

 

 

 

I respect your opinion and if that's the way it should be so be it my bad. I just didn't know that if you are just stating something and not asking for advice it should be over there. Very good and thanks for the input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup and since we don't have a rule about vetos we do just have to live with it. You should see my leagues message board right now. Not happy.

 

And the guy who dealt Harrison only has Jordan at RB really, and had Bennett, Harrison, Moulds, and Keyshawn at WR. BUT again he can start that lineup. You can start 1 RB and 4 WR's in my league. On top of that even if you need a RB badly you don't deal a top WR for 2 time share RB's regardless. He could have gotten more for Harrison and he isn't required to start 2 RB's anyway so who cares go run and shoot with 1 RB and 4 WR's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yup and since we don't have a rule about vetos we do just have to live with it. You should see my leagues message board right now. Not happy.

 

And the guy who dealt Harrison only has Jordan at RB really, and had Bennett, Harrison, Moulds, and Keyshawn at WR. BUT again he can start that lineup. You can start 1 RB and 4 WR's in my league. On top of that even if you need a RB badly you don't deal a top WR for 2 time share RB's regardless. He could have gotten more for Harrison and he isn't required to start 2 RB's anyway so who cares go run and shoot with 1 RB and 4 WR's.

 

1007517[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

But you CAN start 2 RB's, and normally, starting RB's are more consistent than starting WR's. Again, I'm not saying it's a great deal, but it's not as bad as your making it out to be IMO.

 

Did I mention this is in the wrong forum? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you CAN start 2 RB's, and normally, starting RB's are more consistent than starting WR's. Again, I'm not saying it's a great deal, but it's not as bad as your making it out to be IMO.

 

Did I mention this is in the wrong forum? :D

 

1007526[/snapback]

 

 

 

Fair enough. I don't see it but as always respect all opinions.

 

And no more comments on this. Let's let it disappear. We are offending Hugh :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally and this is IMHO of course,

 

Marvin is slowing down a bit, still a stud I guess....if peyton ever decides to show up this season. But unless it's T.O. or Moss, any RBBC is worth more than any WR cept the two above.

 

RBs have a better chance of scoring and during the season a RBBC can turn into a single back by just one injury.

 

RBs are gold, WRs a dime a dozen. Even though it's Marvin, I wouldn't raise a stink over it unless it looks like team stacking or a gift trade.

 

I was just in a trade where dude offered me D. Davis for Larry fitz and Barlow and only one owner had a problem with the trade.

 

The way we work it on our league is each owner is issued one challenge a year that is used to challenge a trade. Once you use it, you lose it. They can't be traded nor can they be carried over.

 

It's done like this: The owner send a personal EMAIL to the commish stating he wishes to challenge the trade, then the commish (me) sends out an email to everyone stating a challenge has been issued and the reason for the challenge. THe only two people who can't vote are the two people doing the trade. Tie breaker goes to the people doing the trade.

 

This has system has totally worked fantastic in our league. My trade stated above was challenged and 9 people voted yes to the trade out of a 12 man league.

 

You know, i have no idea why i put that in there, that has nothing to do with your statement. my bad. I'm too lazy to hit the delete button.

Edited by cliaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:D I don't see any reason why this is in the wrong forum, but that's just my opinion. :D

 

Some owners get desperate and desperate real fast early in the season. Not a good trade, but it's not anything to get all bent out of shape about either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And it isn't collusion just a really stupid owner. 1007412

 

 

 

collusion: secret cooperation: secret cooperation between people in order to do something illegal or underhanded

 

People like to throw around the "C" word but it is usually not warranted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.