Tommygator99 Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 I am giving up Warner and E. Royal for S. Smith (Carolina receiver) and Tyler Thigpen. I lucked out at QB in my draft and have Warner, Brees and Garrard. Warner is arguably the no. 1 QB right now and Smith is certainly a top 5 receiver. I have no interest in Thigpen but trades in our league must be equal from a position standpoint (i.e. If you give up a QB and WR you must receive a QB and WR). It should be noted that I do not know the individual I am trading with so this is not some kind of inside deal. What do you think, is the trade fair? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 I am giving up Warner and E. Royal for S. Smith (Carolina receiver) and Tyler Thigpen. I lucked out at QB in my draft and have Warner, Brees and Garrard. Warner is arguably the no. 1 QB right now and Smith is certainly a top 5 receiver. I have no interest in Thigpen but trades in our league must be equal from a position standpoint (i.e. If you give up a QB and WR you must receive a QB and WR). It should be noted that I do not know the individual I am trading with so this is not some kind of inside deal. What do you think, is the trade fair? Whats the record of your team and the team your trading with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildTurkey Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 are you in first place and the guy you're trading with in last place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildTurkey Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 then again, if your lineup is correct, you must be in last place LOLZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolniak Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 Seems perfectly fair to me. You are deep at QB and are trading for a top receiver. The throw-ins are both upside players, with Royal already showing signs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygator99 Posted November 6, 2008 Author Share Posted November 6, 2008 I am 5-4 and he is 2-7. There are five teams in each division and three from each go to the playoffs. The four teams in his division are 4-5, 4-5, 5-4, and 6-3, so he is only two games back and could clearly make the playoffs if he makes some changes. The four teams in my division are 7-2, 5-4, 4-5. and 3-6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygator99 Posted November 6, 2008 Author Share Posted November 6, 2008 My lineup listed in my sig was from a couple year ago. It is now correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.K.Trey Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 Seems perfectly fair to me. You are deep at QB and are trading for a top receiver. The throw-ins are both upside players, with Royal already showing signs. Royal is far from a throw in, he is a viable WR2 on most squads. Thigpen is useless to the team acquireing him. Is this an unfair trade? Yes , as The guy gettin Smith is giving up too much to get him. Should it be vetoed? Absolutely not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolniak Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 As far as the "premier" players in the trade goes, Royal is a throw-in. He has a lot of upside and is a quality #2, but the deal isn't being made for Royal. Warner is the top player on that side of the trade. As far as it being unfair, I disagree. Warner's value to Tommygator is less than the trading partner's due to his depth at QB and needs at WR. You must consider all factors on each team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygator99 Posted November 6, 2008 Author Share Posted November 6, 2008 As far as the "premier" players in the trade goes, Royal is a throw-in. He has a lot of upside and is a quality #2, but the deal isn't being made for Royal. Warner is the top player on that side of the trade. As far as it being unfair, I disagree. Warner's value to Tommygator is less than the trading partner's due to his depth at QB and needs at WR. You must consider all factors on each team. I have to disagree with that logic. You are saying someone should be penalized for having depth at a position. It is like saying wealthy people shouldn't get as much for thier money because they have more of it. The reality of the situation is that people in my division are vetoing the trade not because they think the exchange is unequal, but rather because it is making my team stronger and reducing their chances of making the playoffs. To me as long as the deal is made at arms length (i.e. players are not colluding to make one team better at the expense of another) and the exchanged player are equitable there should be no objections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 Whats the record of your team and the team your trading with? that has ZERO bearing on this....nothing wrong with this deal at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.K.Trey Posted November 6, 2008 Share Posted November 6, 2008 (edited) As far as the "premier" players in the trade goes, Royal is a throw-in. He has a lot of upside and is a quality #2, but the deal isn't being made for Royal. Warner is the top player on that side of the trade. As far as it being unfair, I disagree. Warner's value to Tommygator is less than the trading partner's due to his depth at QB and needs at WR. You must consider all factors on each team.[/quote You can disagree if you like, that is your prerogative, but Royal is under no definition of the term " a throw-in" . Is Thigpen a throw-in ? Yes. I was just answering his question as to if it was fair or not. The fact that it is a bad trade for him as far as talent goes had no bearing wheter the trade should go through. I said the trade should not be vetoed. Trades are evaluated as a whole , not just by your idea of who a "premier player" is or isn't. Edited November 6, 2008 by G.K.Trey 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.