NEPats Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 There is a pending trade in my league that would send SA to the team with LT for Maroney... The team with Alexander is 0-9, and this is a 2 player keeper league. I have no idea why he would send SA to a team with LT knowing this format, expecially since his season is basically finished. I like Maroney alot, but this doesn't make sense. thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 My thought is you have sour grapes and don't want to get whooped by the LT/SA owner next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEPats Posted November 9, 2006 Author Share Posted November 9, 2006 My thought is you have sour grapes and don't want to get whooped by the LT/SA owner next year. Thanks for your help.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Thanks for your help.. No problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think you ought to let people run their own teams. If Dillon retires, it's entirely plausible that Maroney will outperform Alexander next year. Did you not see the rough start that Alexander had this year that dropped him to #2 FF RB status? Do you think SEA will be able to reassemble their O-line again with someone of Huchinson's caliber at OG? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinatieri Is God Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Perfectly legal. Maroney is going to be a stud next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboysDiehard Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 (edited) It's not like SA will totally disappear next year, and there are no guarantees regarding Maroney. What will be more interesting is to see how many owners come back next year if it looks like SA is going to be even halfway viable--never mind this season, SA may not be himself for a while. I mean, if it's a pay league, why would you throw away good money to go up against that tandem next year? Not sure that I would... Edited November 9, 2006 by CowboysDiehard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 There is a pending trade in my league that would send SA to the team with LT for Maroney... The team with Alexander is 0-9, and this is a 2 player keeper league. I have no idea why he would send SA to a team with LT knowing this format, expecially since his season is basically finished. I like Maroney alot, but this doesn't make sense. thoughts? I own SA, and if someone offered me Maroney for him, I'd do it in a second, keeper league or not. Does this answer your question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Seems to me like the problem would be with your keeper rules. If you can have 2 keepers and teams could keep 2 RB's I would say that is the problem ... not the trade. Some valid points have been made about the prospects of Maroney and SA not having the same production he has with or without the bumb foot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhippens Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I own SA, and if someone offered me Maroney for him, I'd do it in a second, keeper league or not. Does this answer your question? +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I mean, if it's a pay league, why would you throw away good money to go up against that tandem next year? Not sure that I would... I think I'd rather risk my money next year going against LT & Alexander rather than LT & Maroney. Besides, a challenge like that is irresistable to some of us. You act as if an LT/SA couldn't be beaten next year. I'd take my chances, given reasonably decent keepers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboysDiehard Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I think I'd rather risk my money next year going against LT & Alexander rather than LT & Maroney. Besides, a challenge like that is irresistable to some of us. You act as if an LT/SA couldn't be beaten next year. I'd take my chances, given reasonably decent keepers. Good for you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefjay Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 (edited) For the rest of this year and next year minimum I'll take LT and Shaun over LT and Maroney in a heartbeat. If Dillon retires, if Maroney elevates his game to elite status, etc.. Give me the proven commodity that is still young and in my mind still durable. Shaun will be back with a vengeance, maybe not this year but next year for sure. Seattle's offense will only get better. I think I just sounded like Seahawks37. Someone slap me. Edit to add that I'm not saying the trade should be vetoed just expressing my opinion on the SA -v- Maroney debate that ensued. Edited November 9, 2006 by chiefjay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEPats Posted November 9, 2006 Author Share Posted November 9, 2006 It's not like SA will totally disappear next year, and there are no guarantees regarding Maroney. What will be more interesting is to see how many owners come back next year if it looks like SA is going to be even halfway viable--never mind this season, SA may not be himself for a while. I mean, if it's a pay league, why would you throw away good money to go up against that tandem next year? Not sure that I would... Yeah it's a pay league ($125 each). If it was a re-draft league I would have NO problem with it. Or, if it was a 1-player keeper it would be fine too. However, LT and SA on the same team may dominate.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEPats Posted November 9, 2006 Author Share Posted November 9, 2006 Seems to me like the problem would be with your keeper rules. If you can have 2 keepers and teams could keep 2 RB's I would say that is the problem ... not the trade. Some valid points have been made about the prospects of Maroney and SA not having the same production he has with or without the bumb foot. Yes it's more the 2 keepers than the actual trade that is bothering me.. I do agree that Maroney could out-produce SA at some point, but as a seemingly un-proven back, I would have to go with SA.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I'd rather have Maroney next year than Alexander next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle2003 Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Yes it's more the 2 keepers than the actual trade that is bothering me.. I do agree that Maroney could out-produce SA at some point, but as a seemingly un-proven back, I would have to go with SA.. That is you. You run your team and let others run their teams. What if the deal got vetoed and Maroney came out like a beast next year. You are not giving the guy who wants him the opportunity to get him. Different people put different values on different players. If you don't like trades like this than vote against having keepers in the future. This is the type of deals you get in keeper leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 There is a pending trade in my league that would send SA to the team with LT for Maroney... The team with Alexander is 0-9, and this is a 2 player keeper league. I have no idea why he would send SA to a team with LT knowing this format, expecially since his season is basically finished. I like Maroney alot, but this doesn't make sense. thoughts? SA is closing in on Social Security in regards to RB age not to mention there cant be much tread left on those tires. When a RB hits the wall they usually hit it hard and fast, cant blame the guy if he thinks Maroney is the next LT....he is paying $125 to play so it would be safe to assume he feels strongly about Maroney doing better then SA next yr...you dont like deals like this then draft some rules to combat it or go re-draft because it seems keeper is above your head Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhippens Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Yeah it's a pay league ($125 each). If it was a re-draft league I would have NO problem with it. Or, if it was a 1-player keeper it would be fine too. However, LT and SA on the same team may dominate.. that 1 word is all that matters in this argument and should end it. it's possible that if SA and LT perform next year like they have in year's past, that team may not lose a game. on the other hand, if SA doesn't score 20 td's next year, that team may have screwed up by losing Maroney who may score 20 td's next year. it's why we all trade, it's why fantasy is sometimes skill and sometimes luck, it's all about getting value when you think it's there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Not that it matters one iota in the argument being made about whether the trade should be allowed or not, but anyone who thinks Maroney is an unproven quantity has not seen him play this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 personally i wouldn't deal SA for maroney, but that doesn't mean it's your job to try and prevent someone else from doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 Not that it matters one iota in the argument being made about whether the trade should be allowed or not, but anyone who thinks Maroney is an unproven quantity has not seen him play this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 I'd rather have Maroney next year than Alexander next year. +1 Especially in a keeper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted November 9, 2006 Share Posted November 9, 2006 just curious, how long are you able to keep the keepers? 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.