Commish troubles: teams making possible lop-sided trade

[snark 1]

team a: sending Cam Newton & Dan Baily(k)

 

team b: sending Brandon Marshall

 

 

thing is, team b already has 3 qb's. 2 of which are flacco & r. wilson..... both are way better than cam newton. so, to me it's much too lop-sided.

 

what's your opinion?

[dalie 2]

How is Flacco better than Newton? I also have Wilson even at best, he is nothing overly special this year. Trade seems fair, esp if the team needs a WR upgrade. Certainly not vetoable.

[kujerry 9]

I would say a little lopsided but not veto able. Not Ur fault team be is messing his team up. I wouldn't do that trade

[snark 1]

How is Flacco better than Newton?

 

Well, actually after looking at their stats it appears that Newton is scoring more points than Flacco & Wilson. But, Newton played the Giants and padded his stats.

 

Flacco & Wilson both had to play the Texans which basically blanked both qbs......so, it's really hard to compare stats.

 

Anyway, still at the heart of it... it doesn't make sense to me to trade away your best wr for a qb that's marginal at best, especially when you already have 2 marginal qb's.

 

Also. the person trading away Brandon Marshall didn't shop him around at all. I'm fairly certain he could have got a better offer than Cam Newton.

 

I don't know....maybe it';s just the fact that i'm not high on Cam Newton.

[dalie 2]

That's where it isn't vetoable, just because you may not be high on a player doesn't mean everyone is. Also Cam started out slow last yearthen caught fire, plus a new sceme takes a bit to kick in.

[Shakey210 10]

lol why is a kicker involved in a trade...? And newton is better than both flacco and wilson. Essentially it is Newton for Marshall. Whoever is receiving Marshall is def winning the trade but I don't think it's vetoable. The fact that there is a kicker involved in a trade just shows me how clueless both owners are when it comes to fantasy football.

[snark 1]

Yeah, i ended up not vetoing it.

 

I still think it's a lame trade...

 

Not only is the guy losing his best WR, but he now has 4 qb's. We only start 1.

 

And, is he now forced to start Newton every week? It'd look kinda silly trading B. Marshall for some guy you leave on the bench...

 

I'd rather have Wilson & Marshall than Newton.

 

I'd rather have Flacco & Marshall than Newton.

 

I'd rather have Weeden(his other qb) & Marshall than Newton.

 

i might just be higher on Marshall & lower on Newton than others...