Trade issues in my money league.

[Deleted]

I recently offered up a trade of Big Ben, R Grant, and B Jackson for F Gore in my non-ppr money league, which was accepted last night. Now a member (who so happens to be playoff bound and 1 of my closest competitors this year) is raising a huge stink about this trade happening, so I am obligated to call a vote.

Here are the circumstances surrounding the trade, which I feel makes it palatable enough to where it should not be vetoed. The member I traded to has had Brady, JT O Sullivan, and Orton as her QBs, so her need for a QB is suddenly desperate. This league is a keeper league, where you keep the players in the round of their original draft position. Grant was an 18th round keeper for me this year, and any team he goes to can keep him in the 18th round for next year. That increases his value substantially, if he is able to perform well the rest of this season. The member who just acquired him is 3-6 w/ players dropping left and right to injuries, so she made it clear that she is in rebuilding mode for next year. That is why Grant was an attractive keeper option for her.

I also believe that this wouldn't be an issue if I was not an 8-1 team, sitting in first place.

So how would you guys feel about this trade? Would you veto it? Obviously, the trade favors me, even though the other member is filling huge needs w/ this deal, but I contend that it is certainly not to the extent that it needs to be vetoed.

[Bill (Fog City Force)]

Nov 6, 2008 14:02:29 GMT -6 @jdmakawiz said:

I recently offered up a trade of Big Ben, R Grant, and B Jackson for F Gore in my non-ppr money league, which was accepted last night. Now a member (who so happens to be playoff bound and 1 of my closest competitors this year) is raising a huge stink about this trade happening, so I am obligated to call a vote.

Here are the circumstances surrounding the trade, which I feel makes it palatable enough to where it should not be vetoed. The member I traded to has had Brady, JT O Sullivan, and Orton as her QBs, so her need for a QB is suddenly desperate. This league is a keeper league, where you keep the players in the round of their original draft position. Grant was an 18th round keeper for me this year, and any team he goes to can keep him in the 18th round for next year. That increases his value substantially, if he is able to perform well the rest of this season. The member who just acquired him is 3-6 w/ players dropping left and right to injuries, so she made it clear that she is in rebuilding mode for next year. That is why Grant was an attractive keeper option for her.

I also believe that this wouldn't be an issue if I was not an 8-1 team, sitting in first place.

So how would you guys feel about this trade? Would you veto it? Obviously, the trade favors me, even though the other member is filling huge needs w/ this deal, but I contend that it is certainly not to the extent that it needs to be vetoed.

whoaaaa, hold on, you play in a "CHICK LEAGUE"............wait, are you a CHICK??? Are we all getting played by a L E Z B I A N ?

[Neil (OC Outlaws)]

Nov 6, 2008 14:02:29 GMT -6 @jdmakawiz said:

I recently offered up a trade of Big Ben, R Grant, and B Jackson for F Gore in my non-ppr money league, which was accepted last night. Now a member (who so happens to be playoff bound and 1 of my closest competitors this year) is raising a huge stink about this trade happening, so I am obligated to call a vote.

Here are the circumstances surrounding the trade, which I feel makes it palatable enough to where it should not be vetoed. The member I traded to has had Brady, JT O Sullivan, and Orton as her QBs, so her need for a QB is suddenly desperate. This league is a keeper league, where you keep the players in the round of their original draft position. Grant was an 18th round keeper for me this year, and any team he goes to can keep him in the 18th round for next year. That increases his value substantially, if he is able to perform well the rest of this season. The member who just acquired him is 3-6 w/ players dropping left and right to injuries, so she made it clear that she is in rebuilding mode for next year. That is why Grant was an attractive keeper option for her.

I also believe that this wouldn't be an issue if I was not an 8-1 team, sitting in first place.

So how would you guys feel about this trade? Would you veto it? Obviously, the trade favors me, even though the other member is filling huge needs w/ this deal, but I contend that it is certainly not to the extent that it needs to be vetoed.

This is a very reasonable trade. Big Ben is a top 10 QB when healthy and Grant is an improving RB2. He's just getting his legs under him. He had 86 yards against the immovable object known as the Titans defense. In his last 4 games he has had at least 83 yards. That's very consistent. He should be a beast down the stretch. You also included Grant's handcuff.

Your other points are even more valid that he's an 18th round solid RB who's 25 years old.

The person calling for the veto vote simple is simply jealous that you'll be even more difficult to beat. Tough shit for them!!
That's their problem not yours.

This is a very fair trade.

[johnboora]

How on earth is that not fair? What's the other guy saying?

[Deleted]

After the disgruntled member called for a vote, I posted my rationale as to why the trade is fair (and yes, the team name of the female member is Sweet Cheeks, coined by me when she joined a couple of years ago, and she decided to keep it):

There has been a request for the recent trade between Undertow and Sweet Cheeks to be voted on. I will please need everyone (other than myself or Shannon) to submit their unbiased decision, preferrably w/in 48 hours, and post it on the league message board. If I need to, I will call members, until I get an accept vote.

Naturally, I will now explain how retarded it is that anyone would think that this trade is so vastly unbalanced that it should be vetoed. During this last offseason, there were league members urging everyone to loosen up on their standards for declaring trades so lopsided, that they needed to be overturned. In fact, it was suggested that we get rid of the voting system altogether. I was not one of those members. So how come after making a fair-enough trade, in which the face value favors my team, but not by a large margin, and Sweet Cheeks team is actually filling needs at QB and for a RB2 AS AN 18TH ROUND KEEPER OPTION for next year, that there is suddenly problems? The problem lies in the different values members place on different players. We all see their past value, but the variance in opinion comes w/ future and potential value, and also keeper value, so let me explain why this trade is fair:

Grant was hampered the first 5 weeks of the season w/ a strained hamstring. Since he has been given the full load again, over the last 3 weeks, he has ran for 90 yds, 105 yds & 1 TD, and 86 yds (against a stout Tennesse D), and he will face cupcake run Ds like NO, HOU, and JAX (yes, their D sucks this year). Did I mention he is an 18th round keeper option for next year? Need I also remind you that I put more value on Grant, an RB2, than I did on S Jackson, a top 3 RB, as a keeper going into this last draft, because of their rounds drafted? Our keeper system really influences the values of players.

Ben still has big game potential against every defense that doesn't have a top-notch blitz package (like PHI, BAL, or NYG who Ben already played against). He has certainly not lived up to expectations this year, mainly due to injuries to his O-line. He still tore up JAX and CIN, and he will face cupcake pass Ds like SD, CIN, NE, and DAL. Every FF expert still considers him a low-end QB1, and no worse than a solid QB2 against tough matchups. Also, Ben fills a desperate need for Sweet Cheeks, so he holds a lot more value for her, as some of you may understand from past experiences. I also let Shannon know that she could have Delhomme instead of Ben, if she was worried about his recent arm bruise from the MNF game.

As far as Gore, we certainly know his current value, but he could struggle w/ S Hill taking over at QB for SF. He already has 4 out of his 8 games w/ 13 or less points. Even though he is the 4th ranked RB, he is certainly NOT putting up stud numbers on a regular basis, and he is only 4 pts out of 7th place amongst RBs. He is certainly an RB1, but not elite.

He responded w/ his rationale:

I just want to give my take on this trade. Being the 4th best running back in the league holds much more weight than say being the 4th best receiver. Ryan Grant is O.K. but merely that.As a keeper in the 18th round his value is increased but not sunstantually as he is not a great player,he is merely a player who had a great year,and that year is not this year.Please look at his stats,he's had one good week.
Rothlessberger is hampered by injuries and would be the #2 qb on Shannons team, so her need is not that desperate.This is not to mention he hasn't been producing all year. He's had maybe one or two good weeks and those were towards the beginning of the year.

As far as Gore only scoring 13 or less points in 4 of the weeks?Since when is 13 a bad score? That's a good score. Specially when those are his "bad" weeks. What about the other weeks? 19 or 20 points? That is an elite running back. Especially this year. An elite running back for a has been and a practically never was? I consider that lopsided. Certainly more lopsided than the Peyton Manning trade of mine that got turned down last year.

Fortunately, the trade just got held up, because the trade rules, updated this last offseason, says a trade must have a unanimous vote to veto by all members not involved in the trade, so there was a vote to accept earlier, which prevented a veto.