E. Sanders traded to the 49ers

[Ice]

Surprised the Pats didn't take Sanders for that price over Sanu.

I heard the Pats wanted to trade for Sanu in the off-season, so they have been on him for a while. Sanu and Sanders are different players, I think Sanu fits what the Pats were looking for more than Sanders can do. Sanders probably would have filled the Dorsett role, which they didn't need.

Agree 100%

[PR0v3]

I would assume many teams will trade with teams in their own division or conference out of necessity (or price) at times, but probably prefer to trade with teams in the other conference, more often - if only to avoid playing against the players they just traded that often.

I never get this argument. If you are afraid of playing against a player, why are you trading him away in the first place?

If you are getting rid of a guy you should want to play against him as you feel you are better off with him on someone else’s team than your own.

[hoos89]

I would assume many teams will trade with teams in their own division or conference out of necessity (or price) at times, but probably prefer to trade with teams in the other conference, more often - if only to avoid playing against the players they just traded that often.

I never get this argument. If you are afraid of playing against a player, why are you trading him away in the first place?

If you are getting rid of a guy you should want to play against him as you feel you are better off with him on someone else’s team than your own.

Let's say Team A and Team B are both 6-1 and the two top contenders in the league. Team A needs RB help and has an excess of WRs. Team B has an extra RB and needs a WR...but so does Team C, which is 4-3. Which team would you prefer to trade with if you were Team A?

[djeternal2]

Let's say Team A and Team B are both 6-1 and the two top contenders in the league. Team A needs RB help and has an excess of WRs. Team B has an extra RB and needs a WR...but so does Team C, which is 4-3. Which team would you prefer to trade with if you were Team A?

Whichever trade would make my team better. I worry about my team and not others.

[Shcritters]

Let's say Team A and Team B are both 6-1 and the two top contenders in the league. Team A needs RB help and has an excess of WRs. Team B has an extra RB and needs a WR...but so does Team C, which is 4-3. Which team would you prefer to trade with if you were Team A?

Whichever trade would make my team better. I worry about my team and not others.

Checkers, meet chess.

[PR0v3]

I would assume many teams will trade with teams in their own division or conference out of necessity (or price) at times, but probably prefer to trade with teams in the other conference, more often - if only to avoid playing against the players they just traded that often.

I never get this argument. If you are afraid of playing against a player, why are you trading him away in the first place?

If you are getting rid of a guy you should want to play against him as you feel you are better off with him on someone else’s team than your own.

Let's say Team A and Team B are both 6-1 and the two top contenders in the league. Team A needs RB help and has an excess of WRs. Team B has an extra RB and needs a WR...but so does Team C, which is 4-3. Which team would you prefer to trade with if you were Team A?

Whichever team makes the better offer.

[Orenthal Shames]

Denver likely had zero interest in dealing with NE at any price.

If so, that's bad process. A 2nd > 3rd + 4th, especially when both teams are projected to have late picks.

[Orenthal Shames]

Surprised the Pats didn't take Sanders for that price over Sanu.

I heard the Pats wanted to trade for Sanu in the off-season, so they have been on him for a while. Sanu and Sanders are different players, I think Sanu fits what the Pats were looking for more than Sanders can do. Sanders probably would have filled the Dorsett role, which they didn't need.

Don't disagree, but Sanders would be about as close to AB as the Pats could've gotten. NE was interested in that role then and AB looked awfully good there until he melted down

[Jigga94]

Surprised the Pats didn't take Sanders for that price over Sanu.

I heard the Pats wanted to trade for Sanu in the off-season, so they have been on him for a while. Sanu and Sanders are different players, I think Sanu fits what the Pats were looking for more than Sanders can do. Sanders probably would have filled the Dorsett role, which they didn't need.

I was thinking Sanders was more comparable to Edelman. Sanu closer to Gordon... Maybe I'm wrong but those were my thoughts

[lukkynumber13]

I would assume many teams will trade with teams in their own division or conference out of necessity (or price) at times, but probably prefer to trade with teams in the other conference, more often - if only to avoid playing against the players they just traded that often.

I never get this argument. If you are afraid of playing against a player, why are you trading him away in the first place?

If you are getting rid of a guy you should want to play against him as you feel you are better off with him on someone else’s team than your own.

Let's say Team A and Team B are both 6-1 and the two top contenders in the league. Team A needs RB help and has an excess of WRs. Team B has an extra RB and needs a WR...but so does Team C, which is 4-3. Which team would you prefer to trade with if you were Team A?

Trades like that happen in fantasy, but almost never in the real NFL.

[jenkins.math]

I never get this argument. If you are afraid of playing against a player, why are you trading him away in the first place?

If you are getting rid of a guy you should want to play against him as you feel you are better off with him on someone else’s team than your own.

Let's say Team A and Team B are both 6-1 and the two top contenders in the league. Team A needs RB help and has an excess of WRs. Team B has an extra RB and needs a WR...but so does Team C, which is 4-3. Which team would you prefer to trade with if you were Team A?

Trades like that happen in fantasy, but almost never in the real NFL.

The NFL really isn't conducive to trading player(s) for player(s) like the NBA, MLB, or NHL is. It's a totally different structure.

To the original point about trading with certain teams and not, I think you should always take the best deal for your franchise that presents itself. In a perfect world the best deal would could from a team in the opposite conference, but I wouldn't short change my organization by taking a lesser deal just because of that. Isn't the average NFL career around 4 years currently? Plus you probably don't ship that player out until at least year 2. So statically speaking, that player probably isn't going to haunt you that long if at all.

If I'm the Pats and Bills I wouldn't want to trade with each other seeing as how those 2 teams will compete for the division and could see each other in the playoffs. I wouldn't want a player switching sides that has inside knowledge of my schemes and systems that could bite me later. However, if I am the Pats or Bills and the Dolphins call.....you could almost tell them what play you are about to run and they don't have the talent to stop it anyway.

I think you have to factor in who you are trading with and what the difference is. If I can trade outside my division/conference and I only lose a few spots in the draft or its a 6th rounder instead of a 5th, fine. The chances of either of those picks turning out to be anything more than depth/ST contributors is low anyway. But if that difference is a 2nd to ship him into the other conference vs a 1st to keep him in my division....Welp looks like we will be seeing him twice a year.

[hoos89]

I never get this argument. If you are afraid of playing against a player, why are you trading him away in the first place?

If you are getting rid of a guy you should want to play against him as you feel you are better off with him on someone else’s team than your own.

Let's say Team A and Team B are both 6-1 and the two top contenders in the league. Team A needs RB help and has an excess of WRs. Team B has an extra RB and needs a WR...but so does Team C, which is 4-3. Which team would you prefer to trade with if you were Team A?

Trades like that happen in fantasy, but almost never in the real NFL.

I was using the fantasy example because that seemed to be what he was referring to. But yeah, NFL teams clearly don't want to make the Patriots better and are willing to take value hit to do that.

In any case...improving my biggest competitor hurts my chances to win the title. That should be taken into consideration. That doesn't mean I'm taking a 2nd instead of a 1st, but if I've got two comparable offers from two different owners, one contender and one non-contender, then I'm probably either taking the non-contender's offer or neither offer.

That said...no idea why the Broncos would care given that they aren't even close to contending.

[ArrylT]

Sanders is the new Goodwin / Garcon?

IE the aging veteran that the 49ers prefer to their own developing players.

[lukkynumber13]

Sanders is the new Goodwin / Garcon?

IE the aging veteran that the 49ers prefer to their own developing players.

Haha, definitely better than Garçon tho, and immensely better than Goodwin has ever dreamed of being.

[Paul717]

What is Sanders worth at this point in terms of a 2020 pick? I can envision 2 contending teams in my league easily giving up a 3rd. But would I be laughed at if I offered say Sanders + 2020 5th for a 2020 2nd?