Crw561 Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 (edited) Team 1 receives: T. Hill and Bilal Powell Team 2 receives: Joe Mixon and Sterling Shepard 10 man PPR league These are the teams before the trade Team 1 K. Cousins D. Baldwin E. Sanders M. Gordon C. McCaffrey K. Rudolph J. Mixon J. Gordon D. Westbrook S. Shepard I. Crowell N. Aghalor W. Smallwood Team 2 R. Wilson A. Brown K. Allen P. Lindsay J. White Z. Ertz T. Hill K. Coutee B. Powell D. Lewis D. Henry M. Davis Thanks in advance Edited October 12, 2018 by Crw561 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
League_Champion Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 Team 1 because they were already stacked. But it's a good trade for both if needs were met. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crw561 Posted October 12, 2018 Author Share Posted October 12, 2018 27 minutes ago, LordOpie said: Tyreek is by far the best player in the trade and worth more that those 3 combined I'm high on Hill but not near as high on him as you are on him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 (edited) It's a balanced trade. Team 2 clearly needs a RB and they are stacked a WR. Wait, is that the teams before or after the trade? Edited October 12, 2018 by Shaft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyV Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 I favor RBs because they are so hard to replace. Hill is hard to trust because he has always been up and down. He has a higher ceiling but also has a lower floor. The Bengals offense is pretty good and it'll revolve around Mixon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crw561 Posted October 12, 2018 Author Share Posted October 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Shaft said: It's a balanced trade. Team 2 clearly needs a RB and they are stacked a WR. Wait, is that the teams before or after the trade? Before the trade. Sorry, should be mentioned that in the post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 1 minute ago, LordOpie said: . why does a team's need factor in to the value of the traded pieces? IMO, and many others, a team's need does factor. If someone is stacked at a position (i.e. WR or RB), they might be willing to make a sacrifice to strengthen one of their weaker roster spots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, LordOpie said: i get that, but it has nothing to do with the value of the pieces. To me, when I think of "won," the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. I compare the team before and after the trade, but it's all a matter of perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 Just now, LordOpie said: but to take that concept to the next level, that means if all your RBs went on IR and there were zero RBs on the WW, then you'd trade Antonio Brown for CJ Anderson if you had four other great WRs. the point of that extreme example is that each piece as value, if you're not getting good enough return, then you need to move on to another trade partner otherwise, overtime, you keep losing overall value until your team is depleted. Either way, value is value. Now, it's your team, and you should do what you want, but math is math and there's only one definition of winning. Now, if you want to argue the value of the pieces, that's different. But since I see Hill worth more than those three guys, this is a clear case that one owner got the "Shaft". Well, that's the key, you took that to the point of extreme. And this game is more than math. A realistic example would be trading Antonio Brown for Mixon or David Johnson. Is Antonio Brown, the best player in the trade? Absolutely! But if the team has Hopkins, OBJ, Julio Jones, and A. Brown, that trade is not that bad if the team has no RB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaft Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, LordOpie said: i annoy people when I say it's not much more than that over the past 10 years. Nah, it's all in fun fantasy debating. Some people get too uptight about this stuff. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purplemonster Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 Personally I'd prefer Mixon over Hill. Mixon is locked in at RB it seems (definitely if Gio is out) but they may establish a new balance once Gio is back. Hill is great,I own him, but he's pretty variable week to week Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AerialDrop Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 honestly it seems pretty even, but if you had a declare a "winner" due to team, the team who got Hill, since team 1 looks like they have a worse WR corps than team 2 has a worse RB corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seahawk3133 Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 Did Mixon suddenly lose his job? Or lost his skills? To say a team got screwed getting Mixon for Hill is like saying you got screwed paying $2 for a soda - might have done better, might end up doing worse but surely didn't get ripped off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montana is da Man Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 Team 2 wins the trade, team 1 is better 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.