Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

The Trade Thread

124

Comments



  • OK lads I need some serious advice today (for a change). I rejected the Benson for White deal and benson's owner has come back with this proposal -

    I get - Mendenhall and Baldwin (WR) KC
    He gets - White and Felix Jones

    My roster
    Current roster flex league

    QB Romo, Eli

    RB MJD, Wells, Felix Jones, Ogbonnaya

    WR White, Bowe, Manningham (thanks to advice from here), Burress, DHB, Robinson (DAL)

    TE Hernandez

    His roster -

    QB Newton

    RB McGahee, Mendenhall, Greene, Benson (he's traded him for Murray now though)

    WR Smith (CAR) Johnson (BUF) Baldwin, Ford, Smith (BAL)

    TE Gates, Davis

    I'm thinking maybe asking for Smith (BAL) instead of Baldwin?




  • Well I've had Gronkowski and White both this season. Gronk has over-performed while Roddy has under-performed.

    What makes you think that? I'd say he's performing as expected.




  • ashdale5 wrote: »
    I get - Mendenhall and Baldwin (WR) KC
    He gets - White and Felix Jones

    Baldwin has one decent game. In the other 2 games he's played he's had once catch

    Mendenhall has gone over 10 points only 3 times, and only gone over 70 yards once.

    White is the only good player in the deal, and I wouldn't do it




  • Dodge wrote: »
    Baldwin has one decent game. In the other 2 games he's played he's had once catch

    Mendenhall has gone over 10 points only 3 times, and only gone over 70 yards once.

    White is the only good player in the deal, and I wouldn't do it

    Would you do it for McGahee instead of Mendenhall?




  • Maybe

    That'd leave your RBs as; MJD, McGahee, Wells
    WRs; Bowe, manningham, PLax and a bunch of guys who may/may not play


  • Advertisement


  • Cam Newton wrote: »
    What makes you think that? I'd say he's performing as expected.

    My total lack of knowledge of most players in the NFL. First time playing so I was naively going by the projected scores for the whole season.

    He was projected for 76 points and Dallas Clark was going to be my starting TE. Gronkowski racked up 57 points in his first 3 weeks, is now on 95 overall and has started every week. That's more points than White who was tipped as a top-3 WR in pre-season.

    In my view that's over-achieving but I don't know enough about him or the game to say that everyone else should believe it.




  • My total lack of knowledge of most players in the NFL. First time playing so I was naively going by the projected scores for the whole season.

    He was projected for 76 points and Dallas Clark was going to be my starting TE. Gronkowski racked up 57 points in his first 3 weeks, is now on 95 overall and has started every week. That's more points than White who was tipped as a top-3 WR in pre-season.

    In my view that's over-achieving but I don't know enough about him or the game to say that everyone else should believe it.

    Once it became clear Tom Brady was using both his tight-ends as primary receivers (which we had already seen to a degree last year) it was clear both of them were going to be very good options, it's hard to make a value case for any of the receivers over Gronkowski and Hernandez at this point.




  • I see Stompers in Div 1 is in the market for a QB now that Matt Schaub is out for the season.

    Frankly a time sharing Jackie Battle, Deon Branch or an injured Miles Austin are a joke of players to put on the block in search for a QB.

    None of them have even scored more than a top 25 QB. Stompers you need to offer more.

    Ive offered you Big Ben for Ray Rice. Fair trade based on points.

    Honestly if anybody offers you a QB for Battle, Austin or Branch there are clueless and I will defo be voting against such a trade.




  • D3PO wrote: »
    Honestly if anybody offers you a QB for Battle, Austin or Branch there are clueless and I will defo be voting against such a trade.

    Nothing to do with me (Im in Division 3) but is that not a complete abuse of the voting against a trade functionality? IMO only trades that are dodgy (i.e. AP & Megatron for Hillis and Ochocino) should be voted against.




  • Blured wrote: »
    Nothing to do with me (Im in Division 3) but is that not a complete abuse of the voting against a trade functionality? IMO only trades that are dodgy (i.e. AP & Megatron for Hillis and Ochocino) should be voted against.

    well to me that would be a dodgy trade hense a veto. Offering to trade away your bench rubbish for a starting QB isnt reasonable.

    Battle (a nothing running back in a committee), Branch (4th choice recieving option in New England) or Austin (injured) dont stack up to any decent QB's so I think that is a reasonable veto.

    where as the Welker for Newton trade ealier this year in the division wasnt vetoed becasue it was a reasonable trade.


  • Advertisement


  • D3PO wrote: »
    None of them have even scored more than a top 25 QB

    Thats immaterial. A 45th ranked WR is worth more than a 17th ranked QB in our league as he's likely to play most weeks

    If you don't think you're getting value, don't trade, but vetoing a deal where both participants think they're getting value is a cock move IMO (particularly seeing as you haven't even seen it)
    D3PO wrote: »
    well to me that would be a dodgy trade hense a veto. Offering to trade away your bench rubbish for a starting QB isnt reasonable.

    If I had Alex Smith (for example) and needed a WR, I'd absolutely trade him for Miles Austin. I'd 100% be getting the better deal there (if Austin gets fit like msot think he will)




  • D3PO wrote: »
    I see Stompers in Div 1 is in the market for a QB now that Matt Schaub is out for the season.

    Frankly a time sharing Jackie Battle, Deon Branch or an injured Miles Austin are a joke of players to put on the block in search for a QB.

    None of them have even scored more than a top 25 QB. Stompers you need to offer more.

    Ive offered you Big Ben for Ray Rice. Fair trade based on points.

    Honestly if anybody offers you a QB for Battle, Austin or Branch there are clueless and I will defo be voting against such a trade.
    Big Ben for Ray Rice? Thats certainly not a fair trade.

    You'd want to be getting a decent RB along with Big Ben for that.




  • I think i've won the stupid trade offer stakes. Somebody in the Boards keeper just tried to offer his Matthew Stafford for my Adrian Peterson. If this wasn't bad enough, I currently already have Big Ben, Eli and Tebow on my roster




  • Matt Hasselbeck for Andre Johnson? You gotta be kidding me.

    Wtf is that trade about? Would you not shop it around and see if you could get a better deal than that for Andre Johnson?




  • D3PO wrote: »
    I see Stompers in Div 1 is in the market for a QB now that Matt Schaub is out for the season.

    Frankly a time sharing Jackie Battle, Deon Branch or an injured Miles Austin are a joke of players to put on the block in search for a QB.

    None of them have even scored more than a top 25 QB. Stompers you need to offer more.

    Ive offered you Big Ben for Ray Rice. Fair trade based on points.

    Honestly if anybody offers you a QB for Battle, Austin or Branch there are clueless and I will defo be voting against such a trade.

    Joke of an offer. Rice went no.5/6 in most drafts and has exceeded expectations. Big Ben went in the 50's and has barely reached expectations. The drop off between Rice and a RB you'd pick up from the waiver wire is far more than the drop off between the QB equivilant




  • My trade partner has Schaub (obv. out for season) and Fitzpatrick (struggling recently) as his QBs. Is it fair to offer Carson Palmer to him for Brent Celek?




  • Hulk Hands wrote: »
    I think i've won the stupid trade offer stakes. Somebody in the Boards keeper just tried to offer his Matthew Stafford for my Adrian Peterson. If this wasn't bad enough, I currently already have Big Ben, Eli and Tebow on my roster
    You just got a serious trade offer from me. Think it benefits us both.




  • eagle eye wrote: »
    You just got a serious trade offer from me. Think it benefits us both.

    Its a decent offer, but I think the loss of Murray is too much, especially as its been hinted that he's going to stay as the every down back when Jones comes back and he has potential in a keeper league. However, if you also swap Harvin for one of my receivers (Reggie Wayne, Hines Ward or Malcolm Floyd) then i'll agree to the trade




  • Hulk Hands wrote: »
    Its a decent offer, but I think the loss of Murray is too much, especially as its been hinted that he's going to stay as the every down back when Jones comes back and he has potential in a keeper league. However, if you also swap Harvin for one of my receivers (Reggie Wayne, Hines Ward or Malcolm Floyd) then i'll agree to the trade
    No I couldn't do that at the moment. I'm willing in the trade offer to weaken my wr corp significantly in order to improve my rb corp which admittedly is not good right now. If I were to do what you ask then I'd be very weak in the wr position and I don't want to do that.




  • eagle eye wrote: »
    No I couldn't do that at the moment. I'm willing in the trade offer to weaken my wr corp significantly in order to improve my rb corp which admittedly is not good right now. If I were to do what you ask then I'd be very weak in the wr position and I don't want to do that.

    In fairness losing Nicks and gaining Manningham is hardly weakening it significantly. 85 points to 58, and Manningham has been injured for a lot of that. When they're both on the field their output is fairly similar.

    Anyway, no thanks, but feel free to offer again


  • Advertisement


  • May I try and help create a fair trade as a neutral? Obviously if you'd like me to help posting your rostersand what you want in a trade is required.




  • matthew8 wrote: »
    May I try and help create a fair trade as a neutral? Obviously if you'd like me to help posting your rostersand what you want in a trade is required.

    Ah no it's grand. I think whatever way we worked it, it was stacked on one side. The original offer was Nicks + Stewart for Murray + Manningham




  • Hi all. Mind if I interupt with my weekly trade drama?

    Current roster flex league

    QB Romo, Eli

    RB MJD, Wells, Felix Jones, Ogbonnaya

    WR White, Bowe, Manningham, Burress, Moore, Robinson (DAL)

    TE Hernandez

    I've been trying to trade for a RB for yonks (well documentd in this thread) so I put all my WR's on the block and an owner came wanting to know if I wanted Blount - he was willing to trade him for any one of White, Bowe, Manningham. Not really interested in Blount but he also has Lynch but he wants White for him.
    So White/Bowe/Manningham for Blount
    or
    White for Lynch
    or
    Stand pat

    Thanks again lads.




  • Just agreed a trade in Prem div. with me giving up:
    Jason Witten
    Michael Turner
    Deoin Branch

    In return for:

    Matthew Stafford
    Beanie Wells
    Brandon Lloyd
    Owen Daniels

    Thoughts guys??
    Was very thin at QB with Kevin Kolb as my starter.




  • deccy15 wrote: »
    Just agreed a trade in Prem div. with me giving up:
    Jason Witten
    Michael Turner
    Deoin Branch

    In return for:

    Matthew Stafford
    Beanie Wells
    Brandon Lloyd
    Owen Daniels

    Thoughts guys??
    Was very thin at QB with Kevin Kolb as my starter.
    Steal and a half. Sure you gave up an elite TE and RB, but you got a top quality tight end and a very startable RB, while Lloyd's value is far better than Deion's, and getting Stafford is obviously brilliant as he has fantastic matchups for the rest of the season.




  • matthew8 wrote: »
    deccy15 wrote: »
    Just agreed a trade in Prem div. with me giving up:
    Jason Witten
    Michael Turner
    Deoin Branch

    In return for:

    Matthew Stafford
    Beanie Wells
    Brandon Lloyd
    Owen Daniels

    Thoughts guys??
    Was very thin at QB with Kevin Kolb as my starter.
    Steal and a half. Sure you gave up an elite TE and RB, but you got a top quality tight end and a very startable RB, while Lloyd's value is far better than Deion's, and getting Stafford is obviously brilliant as he has fantastic matchups for the rest of the season.
    Cheers dude, was a bit reluctant to give up Witten but felt the difference between Daniels and Witten wasn't as great as the difference between Stafford and Kolb.
    I'd just be a bit worried about Wells as he hasn't been great the last few weeks.




  • deccy15 wrote: »
    Just agreed a trade in Prem div. with me giving up:
    Jason Witten
    Michael Turner
    Deoin Branch

    In return for:

    Matthew Stafford
    Beanie Wells
    Brandon Lloyd
    Owen Daniels

    Thoughts guys??
    Was very thin at QB with Kevin Kolb as my starter.


    I'm the other side of this trade and I'm pretty happy with it. Obviously I'm giving up a lot in Stafford but I'm happy to take a chance and roll with Tebow for the rest of the season so Stafford would have been on the bench most weeks.

    Turner is a big improvement over Wells on my team. Wells always seems to be playing with an injury and has not done much in the last few weeks. Turner has outscored him by 35 points in the last five weeks.

    Witten is also a big improvement over Daniels, who has failed to get in the endzone in the last five weeks. Witten has outscored Daniels by 21 points in this period and Daniels cause is not helped by Schuab going down. Daniels is also on a bye this week, which is a factor so late in the season.

    Branch is a downgrade from Lloyd alright, but not that much.

    I looked at how this trade affected my starting line-up:

    Turner > Wells
    Witten > Daniels
    Branch <= Lloyd


    Plus it's always cool to pull off a blockbuster trade :D




  • Mr. Guappa wrote: »
    deccy15 wrote: »
    Just agreed a trade in Prem div. with me giving up:
    Jason Witten
    Michael Turner
    Deoin Branch

    In return for:

    Matthew Stafford
    Beanie Wells
    Brandon Lloyd
    Owen Daniels

    Thoughts guys??
    Was very thin at QB with Kevin Kolb as my starter.


    I'm the other side of this trade and I'm pretty happy with it. Obviously I'm giving up a lot in Stafford but I'm happy to take a chance and roll with Tebow for the rest of the season so Stafford would have been on the bench most weeks.

    Turner is a big improvement over Wells on my team. Wells always seems to be playing with an injury and has not done much in the last few weeks. Turner has outscored him by 35 points in the last five weeks.

    Witten is also a big improvement over Daniels, who has failed to get in the endzone in the last five weeks. Witten has outscored Daniels by 21 points in this period and Daniels cause is not helped by Schuab going down. Daniels is also on a bye this week, which is a factor so late in the season.

    Branch is a downgrade from Lloyd alright, but not that much.

    I looked at how this trade affected my starting line-up:

    Turner > Wells
    Witten > Daniels
    Branch <= Lloyd


    Plus it's always cool to pull off a blockbuster trade :D

    Think it kinda helps us both dude. Was still gettin beat with Turner and Witten scoring decent the last few weeks.
    Think my qb's haven't got over 15 points all season which is pretty poor, and barely 10 points total the last 3 weeks from Painter and Kolb so it was badly needed change 4 me.
    I agree that on a head to head matchup you probably got the best of the trade. But its not a huge difference.
    Gotta love the blockbuster trades :-)




  • Mr. Guappa wrote: »
    I'm the other side of this trade and I'm pretty happy with it. Obviously I'm giving up a lot in Stafford but I'm happy to take a chance and roll with Tebow for the rest of the season so Stafford would have been on the bench most weeks.

    Turner is a big improvement over Wells on my team. Wells always seems to be playing with an injury and has not done much in the last few weeks. Turner has outscored him by 35 points in the last five weeks.

    Witten is also a big improvement over Daniels, who has failed to get in the endzone in the last five weeks. Witten has outscored Daniels by 21 points in this period and Daniels cause is not helped by Schuab going down. Daniels is also on a bye this week, which is a factor so late in the season.

    Branch is a downgrade from Lloyd alright, but not that much.

    I looked at how this trade affected my starting line-up:

    Turner > Wells
    Witten > Daniels
    Branch <= Lloyd


    Plus it's always cool to pull off a blockbuster trade :D

    The trade's clearly very good for you too. 2 big upgrades, one minor downgrade and one proper downgrade. No point in having great players you don't need at this point in the season.

    However, I'm not sure Schaub going down hurts Daniels. As we know the Texans have been run-first for a while, but often when a QB goes down it causes a team to change tactics. I think that teams may be putting 8 and 9 guys in the box with Leinart at QB which may force them to throw more.


  • Advertisement


  • Nice trade lads, if your both happy with it that's the main thing. I just about prefer the Witten, Turner side of the deal, purely because your getting two elites, whereas the other side is an elite (Stafford) plus three good players. But yeah, its great to see a blockbuster :D

    In Div 3, after a bit of toing and froing, I've just agreed to trade Benson (me) for Percy Harvin. I have Turner, Murray and McGahee already at RB and VJax and a bunch of halfwits at WR.

    It suits me because I get a good WR with lots of upside as Ponder settles into the offence in exchange for what is in effect my 4th choice RB. Ideally I would have traded McGahee for a slightly better player than Harvin, but with his injury I didn't think I'd get a deal done and I really needed a decent WR this week.


Advertisement