- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is This Vetoable
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:12 am
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:12 am
I accepted a trade this morning that I feel is fair, but the rest of the league is freaking out about. The guy who offered the trade also offered the same package to someone else, so it was in no way collusion. The reason I ask is this is my first year as commissioner and want to be as fair as possible.
The trade was:
Give: Shady
Receive: Davante Adams and Jordan Howard
Rest of my team:
QB: Baker and Dalton
RB: Mixon, Thompson, Justin Jackson, and Howard
WR: MT13, Thielen, Adams, Chark, Marvin Jones, Mike Williams
TE: Dissly
Def: Patriots
His team:
QB: Stafford and Brees
RB: Chubb, Shady, Gio, Ito, and L. Murray
WR: Jarvis, Fitzgerald, Amendola, and Ginn
TE: Waller
Def: Seahawks
The trade was:
Give: Shady
Receive: Davante Adams and Jordan Howard
Rest of my team:
QB: Baker and Dalton
RB: Mixon, Thompson, Justin Jackson, and Howard
WR: MT13, Thielen, Adams, Chark, Marvin Jones, Mike Williams
TE: Dissly
Def: Patriots
His team:
QB: Stafford and Brees
RB: Chubb, Shady, Gio, Ito, and L. Murray
WR: Jarvis, Fitzgerald, Amendola, and Ginn
TE: Waller
Def: Seahawks
10
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:14 am to lionward2014
Looks fine to me. Im a believer that KC is Shady's backfield. Im guessing they feel otherwise.
This post was edited on 9/24/19 at 9:15 am
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:15 am to lionward2014
I don't think the trade is fair. But I also don't believe it to be collusion.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:16 am to lionward2014
I believe you're getting hooked up for nothing but vetoing is for pussies.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:17 am to TigerMan327
He also offered that package to the Kerryon Johnson owner, Leveon bell owner, and to an owner for Freeman and Tevin Coleman. They all declined.
I offered to send over Marvin Jones or Chark if they think that makes it more fair.
I offered to send over Marvin Jones or Chark if they think that makes it more fair.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:20 am to lionward2014
You're basically trading Adams for McCoy which at this point is fair based on their production. But, it's tilted to Adams as far as what people expected coming into the season and what they're expected to do ROS. This is a classic case of selling Shady high and buying Adams low. This is the essence of fantasy sports. Not a veto scenario IMO at all.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:22 am to TigerLunatik
Are we really thinking shady is going to be a thing?
To me this trade is kind of absurd.
To me this trade is kind of absurd.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:25 am to castorinho
I think he's going to be involved enough that people are wanting to aquire him and so far Adams hasn't impressed. Those that are paying attention realize GB has had a difficult schedule. But, not everyone sees it that way and panic over Adams ensues. I wouldn't give up Adams for McCoy personally.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:28 am to castorinho
Shady was always going to take over that backfield, and with the other two banged up he’s going to solidify it.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:33 am to castorinho
quote:
Are we really thinking shady is going to be a thing?
To me this trade is kind of absurd.
IMO the trade is lopsided, but not vetoable.
I think him offering to sell Devante low (Someone didn't accept for Freeman/Coleman
) to multiple owners only serves as proof this isn't collusion. Let it go through.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:35 am to lionward2014
Fair trade and in no way vetoable.
If both parties feel that the trade is fair and improves their teams, there is no reason to veto a trade just because the rest of the league is butthurt that they think one team "won" the trade.
Do not stand for that bullshite. If there is no obvious collusion, you DO NOT VETO.
If both parties feel that the trade is fair and improves their teams, there is no reason to veto a trade just because the rest of the league is butthurt that they think one team "won" the trade.
Do not stand for that bullshite. If there is no obvious collusion, you DO NOT VETO.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:35 am to lionward2014
quote:what other two are banged up? Darrel And Darwin are fine. Only Damien is out. And if you believe so much in him why are you trying to get rid of him?
Shady was always going to take over that backfield, and with the other two banged up he’s going to solidify it.
Look, if we focus only on the thread title, the answer is no. I literattly have never vetoed a trade in my life.
However that trade is ridiculous to me.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:44 am to castorinho
quote:
However that trade is ridiculous to me.
Yes, because you know what you're doing lol. Guy getting Devante is 100% getting the best of it, but that's how it goes sometimes
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:45 am to castorinho
I didn’t actively shop Shady, nothing to do with my thoughts on him ROS. Adams gives me 3 solid WR, and insurance if Thielen starts getting TD dependent bc his targets are decreasing. I have flexed Chark but that is in no way a reliable WR (yet).
Mixon showed some life and took some passing downs from Gio. Thompson will be getting plenty touches as the Redskins will be behind a ton. It was going to be hard to start Shady over either of them.
Mixon showed some life and took some passing downs from Gio. Thompson will be getting plenty touches as the Redskins will be behind a ton. It was going to be hard to start Shady over either of them.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:49 am to lionward2014
You're getting the much better end of that deal, but unless there is clear collusion your league shouldn't be policing trades.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:50 am to lionward2014
Prefer the d Adams side by a wide margin but not veto able.
Selling high and buying low. Nothing wrong with that
Selling high and buying low. Nothing wrong with that
Posted on 9/24/19 at 9:53 am to lionward2014
quote:
Thompson will be getting plenty touches as the Redskins will be behind a ton. It was going to be hard to start Shady over either of them.
I don't know. I have both and if Shady is ok this weekend and Damien Williams is out, I probably won't consider Thompson. Damien Williams hasn't shown that he can carry the load for a full season yet and he's already hurt.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 11:13 am to lionward2014
Definitely think you get the benefit of this one, but I don't think it's vetoable. I think you let people run their teams how they want to, even if you think it's dumb.
Posted on 9/24/19 at 11:16 am to lionward2014
The trade is tilted heavily in your favor but that’s not your fault. It’s not collusion so I’d let it go.
You should almost never veto a trade
You should almost never veto a trade
Posted on 9/24/19 at 2:48 pm to lionward2014
quote:
Is This Vetoable
Vetoing is not an acceptable response to a trade. If there's collusion, the cheaters should be ejected from the league and never spoken to again--I don't want to be in a league where there are cheaters. If it's not cheating, it stands.
That said, this is not a good trade for either team. you have strong receivers and suck at RB. He NEEDS another decent WR really bad and could have gone with Shady.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News