- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Veto? AP for Bell
Posted on 9/13/18 at 10:56 am to Tigereye10005
Posted on 9/13/18 at 10:56 am to Tigereye10005
quote:
The quick answer is that no trade would get vetoed, and that’s the point.
So why is there a review trade feature on all fantasy apps? If your scenario holds true I can just collude with by brother to create the best team. Cameron Meredith for Michael Thomas. I promise we weren't colluding. Championship. We could split $1000 every year.
3
Posted on 9/13/18 at 10:57 am to Mr. Wayne
I’d rather beat my brother than collude with him, but that’s just me 
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:02 am to Mr. Wayne
quote:
So why is there a review trade feature on all fantasy apps? If your scenario holds true I can just collude with by brother to create the best team. Cameron Meredith for Michael Thomas. I promise we weren't colluding. Championship. We could split $1000 every year.
Instead of arguing semantics I think it comes down to whether you can justify the trade. I don’t think many here would trade Bell for AP, but many have pointed out WHY a guy would do that trade.
Nobody could justify Meredith for Thomas.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:02 am to Mr. Wayne
quote:
So why is there a review trade feature on all fantasy apps? If your scenario holds true I can just collude with by brother to create the best team. Cameron Meredith for Michael Thomas. I promise we weren't colluding. Championship. We could split $1000 every year.
2 things to this:
1. It's like the SCOTUS quote about pornography, "I know it when I see it." All you have to do is ask the owners why they made the trade, if they can't give you a real reason, there's your evidence. But if you play in a league where people are colluding often on trades, leave that league or kick those people out.
2. Good luck finding anyone to play with you if you do this type of crap. At the end of the day, fantasy football is fun, so if you want to be that guy that manipulates the game and removes the fun for everyone else, congrats you just ruined your league.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:04 am to Lester Earl
quote:
Bell isn’t going to miss 10 games I can’t believe people are still buying this
Did you talk to your boy Le’Veon about this? Give us the scoop. How many weeks is he sitting?
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:05 am to Tigereye10005
quote:
Why is the rest of the league able to dictate who I trade?
The league shouldn’t but a good commissioner should.
You pay to play but so do 10 other people. I let most stuff go but on that rare occasion that a trade could egregiously affect the competitive balance of the whole league then we have to sit down & talk
In this case you have a guy that drafted Bell with a top 3 pick if not the top pick, and Peterson who wasn’t drafted at all. The hold out is this guys saving grace otherwise this is vetoable
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:06 am to DeathValley85
quote:
Nobody could justify Meredith for Thomas.
But it’s his team he can do what he wants!!!!
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:09 am to ehidal1
quote:
Did you talk to your boy Le’Veon about this? Give us the scoop. How many weeks is he sitting?
Each of the last 2 weeks there have been reports by Schefter that he was likely to report. The pressure will only mount with each game on both ends
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:09 am to Mr. Wayne
This doesn’t seem that awful given all the speculation about Bell barely playing this year.
It depends on what other backs are on the wire that could fill APs role until Ingram gets back for that owner
It depends on what other backs are on the wire that could fill APs role until Ingram gets back for that owner
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 11:12 am
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:10 am to Lester Earl
quote:
In this case you have a guy that drafted Bell with a top 3 pick if not the top pick, and Peterson who wasn’t drafted at all. The hold out is this guys saving grace otherwise this is vetoable
Thanks Captain Obvious
Just messing around
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:23 am to Rabbs and QStick
quote:
But you would give up Bell for AP? I wish you played in my league.
You do play in the league with a guy willing to do that
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:46 am to Lester Earl
I don’t disagree, LE. I’m arguing against the veto (and I know you said you would let it pass). Personally I would want more of a high end RB2 (Howard, Mixon).
If Bell is a 20 pt PPR guy (260) and AD is a 13 pt guy (169), then Bell would have to miss ~4 1/2 weeks of production to equal out. Not out of the question for him to miss 4 weeks and have a half output return week. That excludes playoffs.
The pressure will mount with the performance of Connor and losing $800k+ a week.
If Bell is a 20 pt PPR guy (260) and AD is a 13 pt guy (169), then Bell would have to miss ~4 1/2 weeks of production to equal out. Not out of the question for him to miss 4 weeks and have a half output return week. That excludes playoffs.
The pressure will mount with the performance of Connor and losing $800k+ a week.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 11:52 am to ehidal1
There's also a chance that when Bell does come back that Connor has carved out a role for himself that eats into Bell's production.
Seriously, there is a viable and legitimate reason for both teams to do this trade.
If I were in a league that vetoed this I'd be looking for a new league next year, regardless of whether I was a party to the trade or not.
Seriously, there is a viable and legitimate reason for both teams to do this trade.
If I were in a league that vetoed this I'd be looking for a new league next year, regardless of whether I was a party to the trade or not.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 12:12 pm to castorinho
quote:
I think the "only veto if there's collusion" is an overrated line of thinking. Some trades are just not good for the league.
Vetoing a trade because it makes one of the teams better than everyone else is pathetic.
ETA: This happening right before the deadline and involving a team with no shot at the playoffs is one thing. Happening before week 2 is another.
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 12:23 pm
Posted on 9/13/18 at 12:45 pm to Mr. Wayne
quote:
But you would give up Bell for AP? I wish you played in my league.
Right now? Probably not, but I can see the side of the argument where an RB poor team might need the immediate help.
The fact that this is a conversation needs to be had every year is ridiculous. Just because you think the trade is bad, doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. It's not your team!
Posted on 9/13/18 at 12:47 pm to DeathValley85
This:
And this:
quote:
Instead of arguing semantics I think it comes down to whether you can justify the trade. I don’t think many here would trade Bell for AP, but many have pointed out WHY a guy would do that trade.
Nobody could justify Meredith for Thomas.
And this:
quote:
2 things to this:
1. It's like the SCOTUS quote about pornography, "I know it when I see it." All you have to do is ask the owners why they made the trade, if they can't give you a real reason, there's your evidence. But if you play in a league where people are colluding often on trades, leave that league or kick those people out.
2. Good luck finding anyone to play with you if you do this type of crap. At the end of the day, fantasy football is fun, so if you want to be that guy that manipulates the game and removes the fun for everyone else, congrats you just ruined your league.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 12:47 pm to DeathValley85
Double post.
Basically, if you suspect things don't look right, get the justification for the trade from both owners. If one or both of them can't (ideally, they should both be able to make an argument for both teams), then you probably have a problem. If they can justify the trade, then let it go.
Basically, if you suspect things don't look right, get the justification for the trade from both owners. If one or both of them can't (ideally, they should both be able to make an argument for both teams), then you probably have a problem. If they can justify the trade, then let it go.
This post was edited on 9/13/18 at 1:13 pm
Posted on 9/13/18 at 12:49 pm to lsuhunt555
quote:
Right now? Probably not, but I can see the side of the argument where an RB poor team might need the immediate help.
This. As things stand right now, the guy giving Bell is giving up zero production and getting a starter in return.
He's trying to make his team better right now.
Posted on 9/13/18 at 1:10 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
The hold out is this guys saving grace otherwise this is vetoable
you think?
Posted on 9/13/18 at 1:12 pm to lsuhunt555
quote:
quote:
But you would give up Bell for AP? I wish you played in my league.
Right now? Probably not, but I can see the side of the argument where an RB poor team might need the immediate help.
The fact that this is a conversation needs to be had every year is ridiculous. Just because you think the trade is bad, doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. It's not your team!
The guy with Bell took him in the top 4 of round 1 - so if he waited another few rounds to get a rb, he is probably struggling to field 1 legit starter at this point.
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News