Another Vick trade

[Joscellin 0]

12 team, non-ppr, 6pt passing tds. 2 RBs and a Flex.

 

So I've been looking at unloading Vick (I have both him and Brady, picked him up as a FA after week 1), but my league is awkward in that most of the RBs I would like to target for him (buy low targets like Charles, MJD, etc) are on teams that need no help at QB. I definately need help at RB as I am rolling with Rice, Greene, Tolbert, Forsett.

 

Ended up accepting a trade of Vick for Matthews straight up, on the supposition that either a.) He will come back and get the carries, or b.) if he doesn't, Tolbert will retain value.

 

 

Good trade? Or am I going to regret this?

 

 

Leave yours

[epinindy 0]

Good trade for you. Matthews will be very good as the season goes on. He will get the carries and later in the year will get the goalline carries. You will not regret this trade down the line.

[dumbassmax2001 0]

At this point, I think you sold a bit low. Vick is probably at his highest selling point and I think you could have done better. Big picture though, not so bad. I think Matthews will be just fine in another week or two.

 

Thanks for answering mine!

[belichick's hoody 0]

It's certainly worth more than keeping Vick on your bench, although you'd be pretty screwed if Mathews came back to a time share. That being said since SD invested a relatively early 1st rounder on him, he could be quite the value in a few weeks. Not a shabby sell high/buy low.

[bnpuconn 0]

Go for it...you have brady and it's not like you are going to play Vick unless it's a buy...Vick can't maintain this kind of production..he never has.

matthews will be alright once he comes back.

 

see mine:

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=371958

[w1978 0]

Thanks for your response. I think you did ok assuming that you only start one QB. Maybe you could have gotten a little more, but with Vick as your backup, you may as well sell him while he's worth something.

[Bui 1]

Great trade, considering the context of most teams with RB depth not needing a QB. Having Mathews' potential trumps having the dog assassin on your bench.

[Joscellin 0]

In reference to a few questions:

 

1.) Yeah, it's just a 1 QB starter. I had considered keeping Vick until after week 5 to ride through Brady's bye week, but I will probably end up picking up Bradford off the WW for week 5 (he has detroit). He is just a bench rat, and I obviously need help at RB.

 

2.) Yeah, looking at the roster grid now... The guy with Mendenhall has Rodgers, DMC and Gore are with Romo/Orton, Foster and McCoy are with Peyton, Bradshaw and Pierre Thomas are with the guy who is a total ravens homer with Flacco, Charles with the Jets homer with Sanchez and Palmer, Forte with Brees... yeah. All the lowend RB1s/High RB2s are on good QB teams.

 

Thanks for the responses so far!

[ree10 0]

Good trade for you. As another poster said, you have Brady already...you are never going to play Vick over him.

[Joscellin 0]

God I hate this CBS league.

 

Trade has been posted for an hour and a half and there's already an objection to it. Give me a freaking break.

 

Dude I'm trading with has Favre/Freeman, he needs a QB. I need the RB. I cannot stand people who throw up objections/vetos to trades because they don't want their competition to get any better.

[LSUtiger 9]

12 team, non-ppr, 6pt passing tds. 2 RBs and a Flex.

 

So I've been looking at unloading Vick (I have both him and Brady, picked him up as a FA after week 1), but my league is awkward in that most of the RBs I would like to target for him (buy low targets like Charles, MJD, etc) are on teams that need no help at QB. I definately need help at RB as I am rolling with Rice, Greene, Tolbert, Forsett.

 

Ended up accepting a trade of Vick for Matthews straight up, on the supposition that either a.) He will come back and get the carries, or b.) if he doesn't, Tolbert will retain value.

 

 

Good trade? Or am I going to regret this?

 

 

Leave yours

 

Thanks for the help in mine. Personally, I think you could've gotten a better deal. My primary concern, as a fellow Mathews owner, is that Tolbert was getting the goal line carries even before Mathews got injured. So, I'm worried as to whether Mathews ever even becomes a consistently "good" start going forward. Moreover, SD's rushing offense hasn't been that impressive so far.

 

Bottom line, it's not a terrible trade by any means. But, I think you could've gotten more, and I think Mathews will probably miss another week or two, thereby making the value even worse.

[Joscellin 0]

Okay now it's team for me to go beat my freaking head against a wall.

 

For the second time in two weeks I make a trade to improve at runningback, and half the freaking league(CBS premium) throws up objections so that it will get tied up with the comissioner until after sunday.

 

 

So freaking tired of this crap.

[Stewburtx8 67]

Okay now it's team for me to go beat my freaking head against a wall.

 

For the second time in two weeks I make a trade to improve at runningback, and half the freaking league(CBS premium) throws up objections so that it will get tied up with the comissioner until after sunday.

 

 

So freaking tired of this crap.

 

 

That's why you shouldn't play in leagues that allow a league vote on trades. Hardly any trades will ever go through cleanly in this format.

 

I think the trade is OK for you. I think Vick is worth more than Mathews right now, BUT you are dealing from strength and with only one or two teams that need QB help. So improving your RB depth while giving up someone you can't play seems like the right move. I may have tried to trade Brady myself and see if he could bring back greater value than Vick. Right now, I wouldn't be suprised if Vick can put up numbers pretty close to what Brady can for the rest of the season. Vick has weapons on par with Brady, and has the added value he adds with his legs.