Rovers Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 Dynasty league, with IDP's. This league uses contract years. Once a contract expires, a player becomes a Restricted Free Agent, where the original owner can match a high bid from another team, to retain an RFA using a limited amount of "league money". An owner can also franchise tag an RFA.... which means he gets a 1st round rookie draft pick and "league money" from the winning high bidder, if he chooses not to match the bid. (there are more details, but to keep it as simple as possible, go with that) Team A has two RB's, one of them being Tiki Barber, who has only one year remaining on his contract. Team A wants to get a younger RB worth protecting, while Tiki is now 30 years old. Team B has FOUR starting RB types, including Lamont Jordan. This guy is hoarding RB's, in a 16 team league. Jordan also has only one year left in his contract. Team A offers Tiki, one of his TWO 1st round 2006 rookie draft picks, and James Darling, an LB with AZ, who was the 28th top scoring LB in our league last year (we typically start 3 LB's each week) for Lamont Jordan to team B. Given the fact that it is a 16 team league, and RB's are at a huge premium, is this a lopsided trade? (I am not asking if this is veto-able, it isnt) , just if you think it was a lopsided trade. Some owners in our league think it was rape.... your opinions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogo2146 Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 Dynasty league, with IDP's. This league uses contract years. Once a contract expires, a player becomes a Restricted Free Agent, where the original owner can match a high bid from another team, to retain an RFA using a limited amount of "league money". An owner can also franchise tag an RFA.... which means he gets a 1st round rookie draft pick and "league money" from the winning high bidder, if he chooses not to match the bid. (there are more details, but to keep it as simple as possible, go with that) Team A has two RB's, one of them being Tiki Barber, who has only one year remaining on his contract. Team A wants to get a younger RB worth protecting, while Tiki is now 30 years old. Team B has FOUR starting RB types, including Lamont Jordan. This guy is hoarding RB's, in a 16 team league. Jordan also has only one year left in his contract. Team A offers Tiki, one of his TWO 1st round 2006 rookie draft picks, and James Darling, an LB with AZ, who was the 28th top scoring LB in our league last year (we typically start 3 LB's each week) for Lamont Jordan to team B. Given the fact that it is a 16 team league, and RB's are at a huge premium, is this a lopsided trade? (I am not asking if this is veto-able, it isnt) , just if you think it was a lopsided trade. Some owners in our league think it was rape.... your opinions? 780708[/snapback] If it was me I would offer Tiki and a 1st rookie pick and the D player. Make sure the draft pick you keep is infront of the one you give. You can pick up LB's all day that will produce higher then 28th. You get younger and still get a top rookie. I traded for Jordan for a first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers Posted April 16, 2005 Author Share Posted April 16, 2005 Actually, this trade did not involve me, but LB's who score almost 200 points are pretty valuable.... there is a big drop off from # 30 or so on down. Concidering we have 16 teams, all starting 3 LB's.... that's 48 starting LB's, not to mention bye week fill ins. You would have to go to the # 90 highest scoring LB to find a free agent. So, Darling has value, for sure. But, with 16 teams, you can imagine how hard RB's are to find. I think it was a fair trade, while some think Team A got spanked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Itals Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 I can't comment on the value of the IDP, but it just seems that Team A is gambling on the value of Jordan down the road, which would seem to be high compared to Barber. Team B gets the clear value in the short term, Team A might get greater value in the long term. All in all, a fair trade, imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogo2146 Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 I understand that LB'ers have a high vaule I play in a IDP leauge too. I just have always have had great luck picking up backers that have been under the radar. Overall, a fair trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 there aint sh!t avail on the ww in that league as far as LBs go...16 teams with 53 man rosters(incl. rooks) there aint didly trust me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogo2146 Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 Didn't know that many were kept. Well. there will be a few lb's comming out that should be starters in the NFL this year. The kid from Texas D. Johnson and S. Merriman from Maryland. They will have a impact right away and should start. I still think it's a fair trade and it depends on how the teams vaule the trade and when they draft to pick up players such as lb'ers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 Boy, and I thought you liked Chester Taylor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers Posted April 19, 2005 Author Share Posted April 19, 2005 Boy, and I thought you liked Chester Taylor. 785001[/snapback] And you thought I liked Betts too.... He's all yers for $23!!!!!! 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.