erosryd

12 team ppr with one keeper from previous season; starting 1 QB, 2 RBs, 2 WRs, 1 TE, 1 TE/WR flex, 1 K, 1 D. Tim Tebow (Den - QB) Josh Freeman (TB - QB) Roddy White (Atl - WR) Andre Johnson (Hou - WR) Demaryius Thomas (Den - WR) Nate Washington (Ten - WR) Santana Moss (Was - WR) Reggie Bush (Mia - RB) Frank Gore (SF - RB) F Jackson (keeper from prev year) (Buf - RB) Roy Helu (Was - RB) Antonio Gates (SD - TE) Dallas Clark (Ind - TE) Mike Nugent (Cin - K) Denver (Den - DEF) Washington (Was - DEF)

Agreed that having the Commish handle trades for Team B doesn't seem fair to the rest of the league. Team B owner should handle his trades himself, ignore all trade requests and keep his original roster intact, or give his team up to one of your other buddies that doesn't yet play in your league. This topic would be appropriate for the "a little help" board vs this board. But since it is here, I'd say the first trade isn't so lopsided that it smacks of collusion anyways.

No matter how bad the trade appears to be to most of the owners in my league - including me (and I don't think Maroney will be more than a borderline #2 RB for the rest of this season - but he does have upside on that high scoring team), I can't think of a good reason to tell teams they cannot make trade decisions for their teams that I personally feel are bad decisions - its his/her team to manage to the best of his abilities. Oh well, it'll make it all the more sweet if we beat the Commish's team from here on out (though with LT and now Peyton anchoring that team, it'll be hard). Now if the other owner ends up not setting his roster from here on out, we might be able to assume that team apathy on his part (a form of collusion, IMO) was taking place - and perhaps then have a trade reversal. But I don't believe that will happen (and I hope it doesn't happen).

I've went ahead and posted my comment to my league regarding this trade and have pasted that comment below. Thanks for the input. "Trades will hardly ever, if ever, be exactly fair. Trades are supposed to be made by owners to improve their teams, and sometimes you have to sacrifice more than you get to fill a void. A recent trade involving Peyton/Winslow for Maroney/Crumpler seems to heavily favor the owner getting Peyton and Winslow. Winslow has been productive (currently 6th best TE), and seems poised to be even better than that in the pass-happy Clev offense. Crumpler (currently 20th best TE) is talented but appears to be on pace for a bad year as Atlanta is a very bad offensive and defensive team. Peyton is the 6th best QB in points in our league. Maroney is the 53 best RB in points. So looking at the above stats, it is easy to say the trade is not fair. And i personally don't think the trade is fair. But is there collusion involved? Is one team trying to give better players away in order to pump up that other owner's team? I think "no" to both questions. One team has two of his three starting RBs on bye during Week 8 and ended up trading Peyton and Winslow to a team in order to fill that RB void. And there is a chance that Maroney will end up doing very well later this season if he becomes the primary back in NEs offense. So at this point, as much as I hate seeing our Commish adding both Peyton and Winslow to his team, I don't see any valid reason to demand that the trade be reversed."

Just completed an edit of original post - second trade involved Maroney and Crumpler for Peyton and Winslow. Sorry for the confusion. My initial opinion is that the trade is not fair, but as I don't feel there is collusion inolved (nor do i have any reason to believe that the team trading for Maroney and giving up Peyton has given up on his season), I would say the trade should stand. But several other league owners are upset in that it seems like a lot to give up (winslow and Peyton) for Maroney to fill in for his bye week RB issues for week 8. Just figured to get your guys input (regardless as to what that input is) as I wanted some outside opinions to share with the other owners.

Last week, Commish (4-2 last week) needed RB badly and traded H Ward to one of the bottom feeder teams (2-4 last week) for Maroney in our 12-team league. Not altogether balanced IMO, but I put in my two cents to the league that it wasn't bad enough to automatically force a veto debate as both teams addressed respective needs. Then yesterday (Mon) the Commish (5-2 now) trades with a middle-tier team (4-3 now) Maroney and Crumpler for P Manning and K Winslow. The Commish's current QB was Big Ben. The team getting Maroney does have three other starting RBs - Chester Taylor, McGahee, and Dunn - but the latter two are on a bye during Week 8 (thus leaving him in a bind for a starting RB for at least that one week). His other QB is Eli Manning, who (in our league) is doing almost as well as P Manning scoring-wise. So far in our league scoring, QB P Manning and TE Winslow are each ranked 6th at their respective positions. Crumpler is ranked as the 20th TE and Maroney is ranked as the 51st RB (I believe he's only played in three or four games thus far due to injury). Both teams are doing well enough to be in contention for our league championship and both teams had needs at the positions traded for (and the Commish isn't someone that I would suspect of cheating). However, the trade appears to be extremely unbalanced and will likely put the Commish in good shape for a championship run due to him giving up what appears to be so little for so much. Not to mention the difference in the TEs traded, with the Commish getting the much more productive (and healthy) Winslow by giving up injured Crumpler. Several other team owners have expressed dissatisfaction with this trade due to the perceived lopsided nature of it. Do you guys think this trade is so lopsided that it should not be allowed? Is there a FF "legal argument" to use to disallow the trade, if such is your opinion? Again, I don't believe that the two teams made the trade solely to pump up the Commish's team. Thanks.

One thing you need to look at is predicting who those top 30 will be on a consistent basis. It is far more easy to predict a top 30 RB as most teams have a single back that is clearly the featured back. It is far more difficult to judge on a day to day basis which WR will be featured on a consistent basis. So, IMO, I would still rather have a top 30 RB than a top 30 WR this year under the assumption that most of those same RBs will continue to be in the top 30 near year's end and that many of those top 30 WRs will likely not be there at the end of the season. Also, for drafting purposes, much easier to predict a top RB than a top WR (using the same arguments as above).

I agree w/ this guy - i'm guessing the owner accidentally dropped him and might not even know it yet. Yrs ago at the beginning of the season i accidentally dropped a very good player but realized it immediately and called the Commish right away to have it corrected. But in the event the owner dropped him on purpose, def go and grab him now.

Thanks for these two sites, guys. Easy to see inactives at both of them - now hopefully they are correct!

Like some others mentioned, with LT and S-Jax gone my third pick I went with LJ but almost went Addai instead. My 12 team redraft picks with NO ppr went like this: 1:3 LJ 2:10 Harrison 3:3 Portis 4:10 McNabb 5:3 Branch 6:10 T Gonzalez 7:3 Heap (I know - 2 TEs but didn't like anything else as much and figured one of these could be trade-bait) 8:10 L Jordan 9:3 G Jennings 10:10 V Morency 11:3 Big Ben 12:10 Chris Henry (RB for TN) 13:3 R Dayne 14:10 Jax Def 15:3 Elam 16:10 Cecil Sapp

and another one http://www.wunderground.com/sports/NFL/

I've currently got him starting next to S-Jax in my league's SB (vs the team loaded at RB w/ LT, FWP and Gore). Addai, C Houston and Fargas are my other options. I like Addai's talent the best, but his splitting carries w/ Rhodes and ankle sprain have me worried about consistent production. Since taking over the primary role in Hou, Dayne has averaged just over 100 total yds and 21 touches each of the past 3 games, including three total TDs. Against Indy's poor rush D I am hoping for good things. And Kubiak at least has known and worked with Dayne for longer than his other backs - having worked w/ him in Denver the past couple of yrs. I feel confident that he'll get the touches again - just not sure whether Hou gets so far behind Indy early that they abandon the run altogether.

App State is in Boone NC, less than an hour from the TN border. Yeah, Chattanooga is closer to ASU than UMass (not sure the exact distance, though). And App won the national championship here last year, and averages something like 20 pts more scoring than their opponents all season. I'd say you will be doing right by taking ASU even when giving up the points. Keep an eye on App's star RB (who has scored something like 27 TD, if i recall correctly) - he has an injury but last i heard was going to be fine to play. ASU football website is: http://www.goasu.com/football/

I am thinking of starting him over Addai (who is coming off ankle injury and plays vs a tough run D and still may share too much w/ Rhodes, but who has the most talent of this bunch), Dayne (who gets a lot of touches - so many am tempted to start him this week - but who is playing a tough run D as well), and both C Houston and A Harris (neither of whom i trust to get full-time RB numbers). There are two things going Fargas' way coming into this game: 1) he has been the clear #1 RB for Oakland since week 11 and 2) he should get a heavy workload due to Oak taking advantage of a Ram's horrendous run D (assuming you can trust the Oak coaching staff to pick up on this & take advantage of it).

I think that Hou's Dayne (who plays vs Indy in many league's SB during week 16) and Det's A Harris (likely replacing K Jones who seems to have a broken foot) are better adds at this time, esp since I expect C Taylor to replace Pinner next week. Pinner's still on my leagues' WW, where i assume he will stay.