Urgent! Please Help! Trade Opninion Needed

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

A league just drafted, and now 3 weeks later there's a trade.

 

Trying to see if it's fair or should be rejected - please let me know what you think. It's urgent!

 

Team A gives:

Brandon Jacobs (3rd round pick)

Andre Johnson (4th round pick)

 

Team A gets:

Caddy Williams (6th round pick)

Eddie Kennison (15th round pick)

 

I'd appreciate any opinions on this deal and whether or not it should be made. If you think it should be made please let me know why.

 

It's really important, thanks!

[Groundhog 24]

Unless someone can show evidence that either Jacobs or AJ has been injured in preseason, this is a very fishy trade. Why would someone trade a 3rd and a 4th for a 6th and a throw-in? Especially when no real games have been played? I'm not in favor of vetoing trades, but this seems crazy.

[bozobear 0]

very fishy indeed.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

bump - any more opinions? The more the better, thanks!

[rdrs4life 0]

Veto and murder, ask no questions and take no prisoners. This is not a Democracy.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Uh, perhaps I was mistaken with my "more the better" theory a moment ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

so apparently some are arguing that "player values change in preseason" and "the draft was weeks ago - Alstott retired and that improves Caddy, and Kennison could be as valuable as AJohnson"

 

are these valid?

 

has anything happened over the last month that would make this a fair deal?

 

opinions appreciated.

[oneinchgroups@100yds 0]

There hasnt even been a game played so obviously no collusion can be involved. Let the trade go through but one team just lost all chance of winning.

[Nomad99 748]

Unless you can prove collusion, let the trade go through. Veto's are not a fail safe for bad trading, they are a insurance of league integrity. This does not look like an integrity issue....rather just bad judgement.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

I made no mention of collusion or blocking a trade. Just asking for opinions on the trade itself.

[oneinchgroups@100yds 0]

I made no mention of collusion or blocking a trade. Just asking for opinions on the trade itself.

Why was this so urgent then?

[oneinchgroups@100yds 0]

A league just drafted, and now 3 weeks later there's a trade.

 

Trying to see if it's fair or should be rejected -

It would seem that you forgot what you originally wrote. This seems like a "veto" questions to me.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

It would seem that you forgot what you originally wrote. This seems like a "veto" questions to me.

 

No, because i originally wrote rejected. If I mean vetoed I would have written vetoed. But I didn't - I wrote rejected. Rejected being the opposite of accepted.

 

As in you accept a fair deal or reject an unfair deal.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Why was this so urgent then?

 

because I said it is.

[Stewburtx8 67]

If your on the side getting Jacobs and AJ then accept the deal. If your on the side getting Caddy and Kennison, then reject the deal.

 

If two other teams in your league made the deal then the person getting Caddy and Kennison is an idiot. The league should not veto this trade though because there are no signs of collusion. Just a bad trade.

[rdrs4life 0]

Do you guys seriously not realize what's going on here?

 

Look on the main forum, there is a 10+ page thread about this trade and 2cents has been arguing fruitlessly that it should be vetoed, despite the original post saying there is no evidence of collusion.

 

This sorry excuse for a thread is his way of justifying that he is correct (it should be vetoed) because everyone is going to vote for the Jacobs side.

 

He is just a post ######.

[Beyond Chaos 75]

I'd vote to reject it if it were in my league and it was put to a vote. Unbalanced trade right now.

 

 

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=282427

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

Do you guys seriously not realize what's going on here?

 

Look on the main forum, there is a 10+ page thread about this trade and 2cents has been arguing fruitlessly that it should be vetoed, despite the original post saying there is no evidence of collusion.

 

This sorry excuse for a thread is his way of justifying that he is correct (it should be vetoed) because everyone is going to vote for the Jacobs side.

 

He is just a post ######.

 

Uh, why is this a bad thing? I presetned the facts neutrally and so far it's 8:1 with some questioning the validity of the deal.

 

Some in that topic claimed that it was close or that things may have happened in the last 4 weeks to make this an even trade and I wanted to see what people NOT in that topic thought.

 

why would you have any problem with this whatsoever? The whole point was to post it without bias and gather responses - I fully intended to post them on that topic.

 

And I bet anything that if it were 8:1 the other way, you'd be posting the reponses there also claiming some sort of victory. if you really have a problem with validation then you must know you're wrong.

 

 

And you say "everyone is going to vote for the Jacobs side" - so that's an acknowledgement that you've been wrong and further that you know you've been wrong. Hillarious!

 

Way to pwn yourself by crying about my posting this topic. LMAO!!!!

[WhiteWonder 2,744]

Uh, why is this a bad thing? I presetned the facts neutrally and so far it's 8:1 with some questioning the validity of the deal.

 

Some in that topic claimed that it was close or that things may have happened in the last 4 weeks to make this an even trade and I wanted to see what people NOT in that topic thought.

 

why would you have any problem with this whatsoever? The whole point was to post it without bias and gather responses - I fully intended to post them on that topic.

 

And I bet anything that if it were 8:1 the other way, you'd be posting the reponses there also claiming some sort of victory. if you really have a problem with validation then you must know you're wrong.

And you say "everyone is going to vote for the Jacobs side" - so that's an acknowledgement that you've been wrong and further that you know you've been wrong. Hillarious!

 

Way to pwn yourself by crying about my posting this topic. LMAO!!!!

 

 

uhhh yeahhhh its 8:1 that Jacobs and AJ are the better tandem.... It is not 8:1 that the trade should be vetoed numb nutz

[rdrs4life 0]

well said.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

uhhh yeahhhh its 8:1 that Jacobs and AJ are the better tandem.... It is not 8:1 that the trade should be vetoed numb nutz

 

And again, I wasn't asking about a veto - I don't care about a veto. i care about valuation. That's why I didn't ask about a veto, and why I explicitly stated that it's not about a veto. People are stating that something may have happened to increase the value of the Caddy/Kennison side so as to make this an even deal and I was seeking neutral validation of that by posting this in a vacuum on a neutral bias forum.

 

Learn to read, and then comprehend something instead of childishly calling names like a 5 y/o.

 

And way to agree with that childish name caller there rdrs4life - really shows your true colors.

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

10:1 and counting.

 

Thanks to everyone who's provided input. it's valued and appreciated.

[brownsfan2007 0]

I think by the votes you can tell what people think of this trade.

 

Caddy hasn't been able to stay healthy since he first came into the league and Kennison is just a non factor in the Chiefs offense. Conversely, Brandon Jacobs and Andre Johnson are both centerpieces of their offenses. Jacobs will see 20-25 carries per game and Johnson led the league in receptions last year with over 100. You'll want to hang onto both.

 

Check out a site like MockDraftCentral.com to see where these two have gone in drafts and you'll see what I mean.

[mayapop 0]

This is a terrible trade for whoever is giving up Jacobs and Johnson. Even if you feel Jacobs and Cadillac Williams are dead even, I can't see trading Andre Johnson for Eddie Kennison straight up.

[Dr. Octopus 0]

I made no mention of collusion or blocking a trade. Just asking for opinions on the trade itself.

 

 

[theyhateme 0]

i definitely think the trade is way unbalanced,but if this is a private friends league i would probably let it go,if its a public league veto,there has to be collusion of some sort

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.p...howtopic=282522

[Guest _my_2_cents_]

 

go on and quote me instead of making an ass of yourself. right back at you.

 

You might notice that I didn't even mention collusion until someone else did and at that point I told them not to consider that.

 

Literacy: look into it.