- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: TDBBL Week 12 Preview
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:15 pm to PortCityTiger24
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:15 pm to PortCityTiger24
quote:
how does this help you?
List those 12 guys.
If you had to keep 2 of them to be on your team, which would they be?
Bosh and Beasely.
Pretty simple concept. You guys are scared. I cant blame yall
3
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:16 pm to rmc
well if you offered, I don't think this should be vetoed, but i'm out numbered. Vetos aren't there to stop stupid trades
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:22 pm to Lester Earl
I guess it took a trade like this to get you to go against your stance of "never trading with rick again, in any league"
You would keep beasely over carter or jamison? i know you're going to make a case about his potential, but I know you wouldn't keep him.
I can only speak for myself, but not true with me, that's why i have said about 5 different times that if rick proposes it again, i won't veto it.
quote:
List those 12 guys.
If you had to keep 2 of them to be on your team, which would they be?
Bosh and Beasely.
You would keep beasely over carter or jamison? i know you're going to make a case about his potential, but I know you wouldn't keep him.
quote:
Pretty simple concept. You guys are scared.
I can only speak for myself, but not true with me, that's why i have said about 5 different times that if rick proposes it again, i won't veto it.
This post was edited on 1/14/09 at 12:26 pm
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:22 pm to Lester Earl
I'd keep vc and jamison over beasely in a heartbeat
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:23 pm to TigerPhan27
Phan, i didnt offer. And you are the only one that has ever complained about the fairness of my offers, for the record. YOu have to start somehwere.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:24 pm to rmc
quote:
Port and Nobes maintain that is their position -- that it's a stupid trade on my part.
you keep saying this rick, you do realize that i didn't veto your 1st trade, and that I have said that i shouldn't have vetoed this and won't do it again if you porpose it, don't you? why are you bitching like a little girl? run it through, i won't veto, problem solved.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:27 pm to rmc
no i said that i thought that you should ask for a draft pick.
but i hadn't decided on objecting.
i thought it was close...
but i hadn't decided on objecting.
i thought it was close...
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:28 pm to PortCityTiger24
quote:
I guess it took a trade like this to get you to go against your stance of "never trading with rick again, in any league"
Port, rick offered ME the trade. I didnt explore doing anything with him.
It would help me team, so i accepted.
quote:
You would keep beasely over carter or jamison? i know you're going to make a case about his potential, but I know you wouldn't keep him.
Yes. I was going to keep Beasely on my team, and its much better than ricks.
All he needs is minutes. He plays 25 minutes a game.
How many minutes do you think he gets next year? They are just going to keep playing a high pick 25 minutes? frick no.
You know what he averages per 36 minutes played?
19 points, 8 rebounds. He's Antwan Jamison but 12 years younger. He's a great swap for someone looking for a keeper.
And his ceiling is even higher than that.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:33 pm to Lester Earl
just run it through again. though lopsided, it's rick's team. i sound like a broken record, just like rick saying i'm "scared". I would prefer better teams in the league instead of teams who set their lineup half the time, then trade their entire team away for players that aren't a signifigant upgrade, only to do it again next year 
This post was edited on 1/14/09 at 12:36 pm
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:37 pm to PortCityTiger24
Rick and kay are going to have half the picks in the first round and then trade them all for waiver fodder by week 11
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:39 pm to PortCityTiger24
I think this is a good deal for both teams.
What do I know though, i got fleeced twice recently
What do I know though, i got fleeced twice recently
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:40 pm to rmc
quote:
I would like to think I'm pretty active.
you are. and you're a good owner. don't quit.
quote:
It's just funny that you think this is a bad trade for me. People usually don't big brother veto trades for that reason. And they shouldn't. But if you think its bad enough to veto, then fine. You're not scared.
when i look at trades i try not to look at the names involved. just team a and team b.
this one was pretty borderline. Bosh is a super duper star who still has upside. but the rest of it was kind of off kilter.
still hadn't decided.
This post was edited on 1/14/09 at 12:41 pm
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:41 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
What do I know though, i got fleeced twice recently
by whom?
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:41 pm to rmc
rick, how many teams do you consider contenters, because so far you have only listed me and karma. if i take my vote back, you said there will still be 6 vetos. nobes, karma and 4 others. are they all contenders? i'm saying you gave up alot and didn't improve. it isn't "big brothering you" by pointing out you gave up to much without improving.
and for the last time, I WON'T VETO IT AGAIN. I SHOULDN'T HAVE VETOED. OFFER IT AGAIN AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
you are being emo about this.
and for the last time, I WON'T VETO IT AGAIN. I SHOULDN'T HAVE VETOED. OFFER IT AGAIN AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
you are being emo about this.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:42 pm to PortCityTiger24
quote:
just run it through again. though lopsided, it's rick's team.
like i said last night, it is slightly lopsided.
but rick is in 2nd to last place.
he is getting a 24 year old PF that gets 24/10 and shoots GREAT %'s, and a 20 year old SF/PF with as high of a ceiling as anyone at the position who is only lacking minutes. If he doesnt get the minutes by the end of this year, then CERTAINLY he will by next year.
this trade is a big risk for me, because Carter gets hurt every year. Jamison was just hurt. Big Z is always hurt. Deng is coming off injury. Hinrich is close to be a waiver wire guy.
one wrong move on the court, and those guys are hurt and my team is fricked.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:42 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
What do I know though, i got fleeced twice recently
Gyno, for the record, I never said that was a fleecing. I was laughed off the board for trading straight up when I thought it would even out. I still think it will.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:43 pm to LSU Fan 90812
I was being sarcastic... i just read people saying i got fricked by getting oneal from you and 'giving' away granger for deron williams oMg!!
anyone playing for next year like kaman or yi? they are both out a few weeks but i need healthy bodies now and cant just drop these guys
anyone playing for next year like kaman or yi? they are both out a few weeks but i need healthy bodies now and cant just drop these guys
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:43 pm to Lester Earl
-Phan, i didnt offer. And you are the only one that has ever complained about the fairness of my offers, for the record. YOu have to start somehwere.
I never complained about the fairness of this deal. I said if the rick offered there is no way this should be vetoed and if you offered to him, it was just dumb of him to accept the trade, also not grounds for a veto. In this case he should have just done like me and rejected the dumb offer.
Like I said if he offered there is no reason for a veto here.
I never complained about the fairness of this deal. I said if the rick offered there is no way this should be vetoed and if you offered to him, it was just dumb of him to accept the trade, also not grounds for a veto. In this case he should have just done like me and rejected the dumb offer.
Like I said if he offered there is no reason for a veto here.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:44 pm to Lester Earl
i agree with all that brah.
Posted on 1/14/09 at 12:44 pm to PortCityTiger24
quote:
rick, how many teams do you consider contenters, because so far you have only listed me and karma. if i take my vote back, you said there will still be 6 vetos. nobes, karma and 4 others. are they all contenders? i'm saying you gave up alot and didn't improve. it isn't "big brothering you" by pointing out you gave up to much without improving.
for frick's sake, i didn't veto the first time. and i haven't decided on the second time.
i think ronnie mex vetoed for sure. i know he wants to trade with RMCC. the thing is, when people are making trades they need to be thinking about not only what they want, but whether or not the trade is fair and will pass league approval.
and btw, 9 of us are contenders. so let's just stop the bs.
Page 13 of 55
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News