Lacy for McCoy

[Raid]

Most of the questionable trades start after week 5 or 6... after 2 weeks? A '#1/#2 pick for a #3/#4 pick is not questionable. You are the kind of commish that is trying to micro manage. Your heart's in the right place... but it's affecting the brain a bit IMO.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

1st round pick for 1st pick is in no way, shape, or form vetoable. Who are you to decide whether or not the McCoy owner is now scared of Sproles? Vetoes are for shady (pardon the pun) deals...not 1st round picks.

But this is a shady deal(pun intended)...

And i can only make my own assumptions, i dont see how he could be more scared of sproles after week 2 than week one... i dont see how he can be confident with lacy after a concussion in week one and only 61 yards in week 2.

Then lets add that the 2 people in the trade are in a relationship, and he clearly did not shop around McCoy first...

Again, the only 2 defenses i can see is Lacy was taken before McCoy OR if the Pick of McCoy was autoDrafted...

 

[tlance]

But this is a shady deal(pun intended)...

And i can only make my own assumptions, i dont see how he could be more scared of sproles after week 2 than week one... i dont see how he can be confident with lacy after a concussion in week one and only 61 yards in week 2.

Then lets add that the 2 people in the trade are in a relationship, and he clearly did not shop around McCoy first...

Again, the only 2 defenses i can see is Lacy was taken before McCoy OR if the Pick of McCoy was autoDrafted...

Milk,

I have been doing this for a long time, and one thing I have come to realize is that I don't know everything. Even the best fantasy football experts in the world are right less than 65% of the time.

It does not matter whether or not you can see the trade "loser's" rationale. Stop making assumptions, because very often we are all wrong when it comes to this frustrating game. If you are having a hard time seeing someone's rationale for making a trade, then just ask. Then remember, it does not matter if you agree, because you will be wrong at least 35% of the time.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Milk,

I have been doing this for a long time, and one thing I have come to realize is that I don't know everything. Even the best fantasy football experts in the world are right less than 65% of the time.

It does not matter whether or not you can see the trade "loser's" rationale. Stop making assumptions, because very often we are all wrong when it comes to this frustrating game. If you are having a hard time seeing someone's rationale for making a trade, then just ask. Then remember, it does not matter if you agree, because you will be wrong at least 35% of the time.

I never claim to be correct, and me being correct is irrelevant... Lacy may be better than McCoy this season, and even if he is that does not make this trade a good one...

If you are going to trade a BIG 3 RB so early you better shop around, and it is clear that he didn't(i know that is an assumption, but it is my opinion through deduction)...

We are not here to tell the future, only the present, and this trade to me just makes no sense currently...

It sounds like you are more opposed to the veto system- and i agree i hate it too... But if it is there then use it until it gets abolished...

And i am not going to wait for the CLEAR CUT collusion, i would rather snip it in the bud from the beginning... and again to me this trade is clearly collusion(even if it is not egregious)...

 

[tlance]

But this is a shady deal(pun intended)...

And i can only make my own assumptions, i dont see how he could be more scared of sproles after week 2 than week one... i dont see how he can be confident with lacy after a concussion in week one and only 61 yards in week 2.

Then lets add that the 2 people in the trade are in a relationship, and he clearly did not shop around McCoy first...

Again, the only 2 defenses i can see is Lacy was taken before McCoy OR if the Pick of McCoy was autoDrafted...

Here are some more, just off the top of my head:

-NFC East defenses appear stronger against the run relative to the pass.
- Sproles looked like a monster in week 2
- Starks barely played in week 2
- Philly offense has been inefficient for stretches during games
- Aaron Rodgers

Again, just a few possibilities.

 

[Brasky]

Sproles was the steal of the entire draft. If you have a solid team around him, you're going to the playoffs barring anything unforeseen.

 

[TKOSpikes]

That's the whole point!!!! When you refer to the "big 3", there A LOT of different threes. For me, McCoy was 4TH.... so there goes your whole philosophy.

 

[Raid]

That's the whole point!!!! When you refer to the "big 3", there A LOT of different threes. For me, McCoy was 4TH.... so there goes your whole philosophy.

McCoy was 4th? Wow.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

That's the whole point!!!! When you refer to the "big 3", there A LOT of different threes. For me, McCoy was 4TH.... so there goes your whole philosophy.

again, that is irrelevant... it only matters where he was taken in this league...

I will admit, i jumped on collusion without knowing enough information... But i have always stated the assumptions that i am making in my arguments...

 

[TKOSpikes]

Okay. So if McCoy get 7 points this week and Lacy gets 13, is it okay then? You're not making sense milk. Yes I understand what you're saying about this specific league, but trades are about perceived value, and definitely should not be judged by an idle party with THEIR OPINION. You said yourself, Lacy's value dropped (on your board), why can't McCoy drop on someone else's? And why can't Lacy's rise?

And I'll repeat the biggest point. 1st rounder for 1st rounder. Collusion means one team is tanking.

 

[TKOSpikes]

Maybe someone was 0-1 with Demaryius. Didn't like what they saw, and didn't like looking at SEA then a bye, and traded him for Jordy Nelson? Guess what, when EVERYONE was saying WTF, Jordy was doubling up DT on the fantasy scoreboard. Collusion? Veto? Not with the best of the best.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Okay. So if McCoy get 7 points this week and Lacy gets 13, is it okay then? You're not making sense milk. Yes I understand what you're saying about this specific league, but trades are about perceived value, and definitely should not be judged by an idle party with THEIR OPINION. You said yourself, Lacy's value dropped (on your board), why can't McCoy drop on someone else's? And why can't Lacy's rise?

And I'll repeat the biggest point. 1st rounder for 1st rounder. Collusion means one team is tanking.

TKO, apparently we are not on the same page because your scenarios you give me are all irrelevant in what i think i am arguing...

 

[tlance]

TKO, apparently we are not on the same page because your scenarios you give me are all irrelevant in what i think i am arguing...

What is it that you think you are arguing?

Jordy to Demaryius is a bigger value gap than McCoy to Lacy.

If you are hung up on the husband/wife thing, then don't play in a league where anybody knows one another.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

What is it that you think you are arguing?

Jordy to Demaryius is a bigger value gap than McCoy to Lacy.

If you are hung up on the husband/wife thing, then don't play in a league where anybody knows one another.

do i really have to explain this again??

assuming that McCoy was drafted before Lacy and McCoy was not an auto draft.

My problem is that the player who was perceived to be the better player preseason has been significantly better than the player who he replaced him with... and in this specific example Lacy left game one with a concussion and only had 61 total yards in game 2... Not to mention he has 25 total carries compared to McCoys 41...

i just dont see the point where the owner can think that lacy will be better than McCoy(it is irrelevant if he has a better season, we can only talk about the present)... This trade could work out, but results dont change the Trade

My problem continues, but this is just under my deduction and assumptions... But i think it is clear that he did not even shop around McCoy, How can you draft a player so early on watch him play decent and get a player of lesser value without any extras??

Again, what you guys dont understand, is that this is all opinion based on assumptions, and that is all you can base it on since there is no way to actually prove collusion... I am not going to wait for an egregious trade, i would rather snip it in the bud...

Again, the reasons i think this is collusion...

1. preseason- McCoy>Lacy
2. PreTrade season stats- McCoy> lacy
3. Lacy has concussion already this season and has not yet played well
4. Clearly did not shop around McCoy(my opinion based on my deduction)
5. Relationship between 2 owners(only a situation due to the other factors)
6. Sproles had only 4 carries the game he was a BEAST
7. OP debated on vetoing

- Now i will put a 3rd stipulation in where i would not veto.... and that is if this league is filled with noobs and fantasy uneducated and history shows bad trades throughout the whole league regularly...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

a better example for WRs would be antonio Brown vs Keenan Allen...

Antonio Brown was valued higher preseason...

If Brown is drafted before Keenan allen, and then traded one for one... Keenan allen has proven nothing yet this season while Brown has been pretty good...

 

[tlance]

a better example for WRs would be antonio Brown vs Keenan Allen...

Antonio Brown was valued higher preseason...

If Brown is drafted before Keenan allen, and then traded one for one... Keenan allen has proven nothing yet this season while Brown has been pretty good...

Milk,

I am done after this.

I understand perfectly what you are saying and I understand your logic. It still is not your job. I don't care what the league rules are, I would never play in a league with people who think like this.

Maybe the McCoy owner drafted Stacy in the 2nd round and wanted his top 2 RBs to have rhyming names. The point that everyone here is making and that you clearly are missing is that the reasons don't matter and it is not your job to figure them out. Unless the trade is star for scrub, it goes through. Period.

 

[TKOSpikes]

I'm done too. Concussion is moot since he didn't miss the nect game. 61 yards against the best run defense in the league and you're using that? Then you say yourself that it has everything to do with assumption, but future results are irrelevant? Wow.

Maybe he didn't shop around because Lacy was the guy he wanted (yes after the draft). People can change their mind.

 

[TKOSpikes]

And that's not a better example for WR because my example had two top 7 WR. But still, if someone wanted Allen over Brown, that isn't veto material either!

 

[TKOSpikes]

And last but not least. What if the Bryce Harper owner wanted to deal him for Michael Brantley after the first week of the season. What looks to be a no brainer veto, turns out to be a landslide win for the Brantley owner.

Conclusion. We know nothing! We are just guessing.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

And last but not least. What if the Bryce Harper owner wanted to deal him for Michael Brantley after the first week of the season. What looks to be a no brainer veto, turns out to be a landslide win for the Brantley owner.

Conclusion. We know nothing! We are just guessing.[/QUOTE]



Of course we are guessing, but the end of year conclusion does not make a trade any less vetoable!!!

How about if I traded Joey votto, dominic Brown and Cliff lee for corey Kluber early on this season... That is a clear vetoable trade, but it would have worked out for the "loser"... Results mean nothing to a trade, you can only look at present value!!!


Apparently TKO and Tlance are getting frusterated with this debate... I, personally have been having fun with it... I like talking philosophy, the actual players are irrelevant in the debate... If I came out too strong or stubborn, don't blame me, this thread was the first Philosophy type thread I have been able to argue here on SportsHoopla since the restricted access, and I am arguing a little too strongly...

I do agree with what I am saying, but I honestly don't think I would ever actually follow what I am saying... I do think this is collusion, and I think what you guys get confused about is that it could only be an opinion since there is no real way to prove collusion... And I just don't understand the thought that you are willing to veto a trade ONLY if it is egregious collusion... shouldn't all collusion that you believe is collusion be vetoed by you??