Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

General talk about Dynasty Leagues.
User avatar
slaughterrt
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4127
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:11 pm

Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby slaughterrt » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:03 am

Ok guys, here is the setup. League is a 12 team dyno, .5ppr, full idp, 1 SuperFlex spot. Had an 0-7 team go inactive and just brought in someone to replace the owner. The owner has made two trades rather quickly in an attempt to rebuild (which I have no problem with), but I wonder if the value is completely off here.

Rebuild team trades: Calvin and Sproles to...
7-0 team (first place in league) for: Davante Adams, Jerick McKinnon, 2015 1st and 3rd

Maybe it just looks worse than it is? Calvin has been hurt, which knocks his value slightly. Sproles is almost a non factor for me in this trade. Adams is worth an early 1st IMO, McKinnon I would probably put at a mid to late 1st, and the 2015 picks will both be late. I guess Calvin for roughly 3 1sts is ok, especially for a rebuild. I guess typin it out made be change my mind a bit and looks a little more even.

Still...opinions would be appreciated.

User avatar
dlf_jules
Administrator
Posts: 9044
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 12:15 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby dlf_jules » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:09 am

slaughterrt wrote: Maybe it just looks worse than it is? Calvin has been hurt, which knocks his value slightly. Sproles is almost a non factor for me in this trade. Adams is worth an early 1st IMO, McKinnon I would probably put at a mid to late 1st, and the 2015 picks will both be late. I guess Calvin for roughly 3 1sts is ok, especially for a rebuild. I guess typin it out made be change my mind a bit and looks a little more even.
Yeah, it's really not that bad. If the former Calvin owner likes Adams and McKinnon, this may be the best return he could've gotten.
Download the 2019 Cohort Report for free today!

User avatar
heyfeefellskee
Ring of Fame
Ring of Fame
Posts: 3969
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:58 am

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby heyfeefellskee » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:13 am

I don't think it's vetoable. There's a lot that the calvin owner is getting.

User avatar
snitchinsider
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:42 am

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby snitchinsider » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:13 am

I'll put behind the argument that you should never veto unless you suspect collusion or extreme incompetence aside for a moment (and in the case of incompetence, you better remove that owner from the league if you are going to veto their trade, because that's what you are saying when you veto it, that they aren't competent enough to be in the league). Not even close to veto-able trade here.

Obvious case of selling off some future for the opportunity to secure a championship. As you said, the team is 7-0. He can likely take a few losses if he has to to wait for Calvin to get back, assuming he was even using McKinnon and Adams to begin with (likely wasn't).

The concept of one in the hand is worth two in the bush applies here. I really believe in Adams, and I'm starting to buy into McKinnon more, but there's no guarantee either of those guys play out, and Calvin has proven to be one of the best fantasy receivers out there when healthy. As well, there's window of opportunity in Dynasty. Calvin might fit his window of opportunity, while Adams and McKinnon may be less so... how highly would you think of McKinnon if the Vikings drafted Gurley next year? You have to allow owners to make their own evaluations, because that's part of fantasy football. Winning on draft day and winning in trades is part of the game. Unless the trade is so bad that you 100% believe the owner who got the bad end should be removed from the league because of how incompetent they are, then don't veto.
Hopkins elitist.
Abdullah apologist.
Ajayi truther.
Bortles drum banger.

hailtoyourvictor
Pro Bowler
Pro Bowler
Posts: 1075
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2012 3:34 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby hailtoyourvictor » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:21 am

If I'm rebuilding, I might rather have Adams, McKinnon, a 1st, and a 3rd than Calvin and Sproles. One could argue that Calvin should net more in return, but his trade value has dropped slighlty because of these injuries.

cha
Charter Member
Charter Member
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 1:12 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby cha » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:24 am

I wouldn't veto that deal.

Lotto4Life
Player of the Year
Player of the Year
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:48 am

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby Lotto4Life » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:27 am

Which side do you think is getting hosed in this deal?

User avatar
NanceUSMC
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 5:29 am

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby NanceUSMC » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:28 am

While I don't know that I'd have accepted it (for the rebuilding team), it's not a bad trade IMHO... I love the upside of McKinnon... Calvin's getting older... he gets more draft picks... Sproles is approaching the end... I like what the 0-7 team got in return to be honest...

I've made McKinnon almost untouchable for me... I think that highly of him... If he pans out, this 0-7 guy will look like a genius in 2-3 years when Calvin is on IR and struggling to maintain WR2 numbers
10 team Non-PPR (1QB, 2RB, 3WR/TE, 1K, 1Def), full keeper, 25 man roster, established 2013

QB: Newton, Tannehill, Tua, Foles, Lock
RB: CEH, Swift, Bell, Fournette, L Murray
WR: Jones, Watkins, Hopkins, Parker, Fuller, Harry, D Johnson, D Samuel, P Williams, Higgins, Chark
K: Butker
Def: Baltimore, Carolina

Championships: 2015, 2017

2014: 1.01 (Became Watkins)
2015: 1.03, 1.04, 3.04 (Became Gurley, Yeldon, CAP, Robinson UDFA)
2016: 1.10 (Became Fuller)
2017: 1.01, 3.07 (Became Fournette, Henderson)
2018: 2.10 (Became Chark)
2019: 1.04 (Became Harry, Samuel, Williams, Isabella, Johnson)
2020: 1.01, 1.05, 2.01, 3.01 (Became CEH, Swift, Tua, Higgins)

Julio
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 207
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:42 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby Julio » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:44 am

The problem I think you are having with the trade is that you have to take the team records out of the equation and just look at it on paper.

I think that because the 7-0 team is getting over-the-top win-now weapons to (presumably) seal a championship in the 2nd half of the fantasy season, it appears that he is taking advantage of the other owner's rebuild situation. However, the 7-0 team is giving up sufficient future value to make this trade on paper to be relatively even. Ideally, I think most owners not involved with a trade want to see a successful team pay a bit of a premium if they are acquiring a stud. There really isn't much, if any, of a premium in this trade and although it is a relatively fair deal, I could see owners grousing about it just because it is a top team getting Calvin and pretty much claiming the season. Frustrating for other owners? Sure. Veto-able? No.

User avatar
slaughterrt
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4127
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:11 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby slaughterrt » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:02 am

Thanks guys. Yeah, the more I look at it the better I feel. I was always the kind that wouldn't give up a stud without getting one back. Like I stated earlier, the trade looked a little better after typing it all out. It will pass. Thanks for putting my concern at ease.

failblazer
All Pro
All Pro
Posts: 1809
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 3:19 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby failblazer » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:50 am

Lotto4Life wrote:Which side do you think is getting hosed in this deal?
Why does it have to be that one side is getting "hosed"? I think perhaps that the 0-7 owner could have gotten more value for Calvin Johnson but I definitely feel like they gained a significant foundation on which to rebuild and as such I'd call it a slight "win" in value for the new Calvin owner (even though I dislike ascribing "winners" and "losers" in trading as it fosters a mentality of trying to "win" trades) but at the same time a trade that does a lot to help both sides in their ambitions.
16 Team PPR (10th Year Dynasty - Reigning 2 Time Champion)
T. Brady, C. Wentz
C. McCaffrey, D. Henry, J. Robinson, A. Peterson, T. CohenIR
D. Hopkins, A. Cooper, C. Kupp, C. Ridley, D. Johnson, D. Mims, C. SuttonIR
D. Waller, M. Gesicki, D. Njoku, D. Knox, C. Kmet

C. Young, S. Hubbard
D. Leonard, D. Greenlaw, T. Reeder, M. Kiser IR, C. MoselyOPT, N. GerryIR
J. Simmons, A. Amos

16 Team PPR (9th Year Dynasty - Reigning 4 Time Champion)
A. Rodgers, T. Brady
C. MacCaffrey, E. Elliott, D. Henry, A. Morris, D. Foreman
D. Hopkins, D. Adams, C. Kupp, M. Jones, M. Valdes-Scantling, A. Isabella, J. Gordon
Z. Ertz, A. Hooper, J. Sternberger, D. Keene, O. HowardIR

D. Lawrence, J. Simmons, K. Chiasson
R. Smith, Z. Cunningham, T. Reeder, T. Adams, B. Okereke, L.Wilson, C. MoselyOPT
J. Johnson, J. Simmons, M. Hyde, K. Dugger, B. McDougaldIR

Lotto4Life
Player of the Year
Player of the Year
Posts: 2364
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:48 am

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby Lotto4Life » Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:56 pm

failblazer wrote:
Lotto4Life wrote:Which side do you think is getting hosed in this deal?
Why does it have to be that one side is getting "hosed"?
If somebody is questioning whether or not it's vetoable, I'd assume it was because somebody was getting hosed.

User avatar
FiremanEd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 6323
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby FiremanEd » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:49 pm

I don't see an issue with that deal. Dude is 0-7 and is knowledgable enough to know he needs to go young with upside and accept dealing a major asset. The outcome of this won't be know for 2 years. He gets a potential WR1, RB1, and two hopeful value plays. Could he get more? Maybe, but you can only get what people will give, and that varies. Plus he has his own opinions on upside. I like the pieces.

Most importantly - this doesn't defy logic or point collusion based on the setup of his team and need for young upside. It doesn't smell of collusion, just value differentiation. I can't blame someone for taking the best offer and I like what he got.

In my league the last place team sold Calvin for Blackmon, Austin, Ebron, Dunlop, Vaccaro, 2nd for comparison. Intent was restocking. Better offer available? Possibly. But I still understood his intent, regardless of I dislike all the pieces.

User avatar
GiantNinja
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 458
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 10:11 am

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby GiantNinja » Thu Oct 23, 2014 7:59 pm

He's trading older players for youth and draft picks. He's doing what he *needs* to do.
Hurricane Ditka (Y17): 16 teams, 14 keepers, ppr
D. Brees*, P. Rivers,
E. Elliott*, J. Williams, T. Montgomery, D. Murray, W. Gallman, B. Powell, J. Williams
Ju. Jones*, AJ Green*, L. Fitzgerald*, M. Crabtree, C. Hogan, J. Matthews, K. White
R. Gronkowski*, J. Cook, T. Burton

5 Fold Porpoise (Y4): 12 teams, 15 keepers, 1/2 ppr
T. Brady*, A. Luck
L. Bell*, Da. Johnson*, D. Cook*, C. McCaffrey, W. Gallman, B. Powell, J. Conner
O. Beckham Jr.*, Ju. Jones*, AJ Green*, D. Bryant, TY Hilton, S. Diggs, K. Cole, C. Williams
R. Gronkowski*, Z. Ertz, A. Shaheen

User avatar
slaughterrt
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4127
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:11 pm

Re: Veto-able? Commish needs advice.

Postby slaughterrt » Thu Oct 23, 2014 8:04 pm

Yeah, I approved this several hours ago. I guess my initial "veto-able" debate was an overreaction. The more I look at the offer/value, the more fair it looks.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], iron, smbkrypt24 and 17 guests