Draft and Trade Talk Message Board
I'm a commissioner of a public 16 team non-ppr league and need an outside view on if this trade should be approved.
The trade is team A receiving Phillip Rivers, Hillis and Blount in exchange for sending Ponder and Bradshaw to Team B.
Rosters would look like this AFTER TRADE. (starting positions are qb,rb,rb,wr,wr,flex (w/r/t),k, def)
team A (AFTER TRADE)
QB - hasselbeck, Rivers
RB - Mendenhall, Pierre Thomas, Hillis, Blount
WR - Roddy White, Bowe, Demarious Moore, Kevin Walter, Decker
TE - Finley, Daniel Fells
Def - Redskins
Team B (AFTER TRADE)
QB- Ponder, Gabbert
RB- Bradshaw, Daniel Thomas, DeAngelo Williams, Ridley
WR- Cruz, Breaston, David Nelson
TE- Gates, Olsen
Another thing to consider is Team B is 1-5 in last place in his 4 team division and is nearly eliminated from the playoff hunt and can only hold 2 qb in his roster and both qb's will be on bye this week. The only qb available in FA is Matt Moore. While Team A is 4-2 and in first place in the same division.
Please take everything in consideration and tell me if you would vote to accept or veto this trade with explanation.
I'm a commissioner also. since it is a public league, you don't know if both teams are managed by the same person or if they are friends. Is this a money league? If so veto it. If it is a non-money league I guess I would still veto it just on principle.
I wouldn't veto it - Team B really needs a competent runningback - they obviously got screwed by DeAngelo Williams and Daniel Thomas being hurt. I say let the trade go through - obviously Ponder is no Philip Rivers but I do think team B is trying to replace a mediocre Rivers and get a better back.
As a commish you should NEVER veto a trade unless you have reason to believe collusion is going on. I don't know your league at all, obviously, so I can't comment on that, but as an isolated trade I dont see any reason to veto this.
I think it's fair. Team A gets Rivers (below average QB this year), Hillis (bust at RB), & Blount (fairly solid RB). Team B gets a solid RB in Bradshaw and a QB with potential to grow as the season goes on. They may just not be considering the bye weeks, which would help explain why they are 1-5 to this point.
this depends on your philosophy on whether or not a veto should only be for backroom dealings or really bad trades for one side. in this case, i'd veto it because team A will become loaded by getting rid of their 2nd QB and bradshaw, who is pretty equivalent to Blount. if team A gave up hasselbeck instead of ponder, then it would at least not be one-sided enough to veto. but, dpeends on your philosophy on vetos, really.
The only reasons to veto a trade is if you think the two teams are collaborating together to put together an all star team, or if someone is a sore loser and trying to tank the league and trade away all his players.....If the guy is trying desperately to keep his season alive then you shouldn't veto it
- View More Messages
Expert Fantasy Advice
A look at fantasy players whose values have moved up and down in week 13. … More »
Another week, another Knicks guard on the fantasy radar. … More »