The aggrevation of the stupid trade proposal

[FantasyRetard 49]

12-team PPR league (money league), and we did our draft last night.  This morning, I was offered this trade proposal:

I get Desean Jackson, Larry Fitzgerald, and Devin Funchess

I give up Devin Singletary, Alexander Mattison, AND Deandre Hopkins.  I had the 5th pick and of course took Hopkins, got Singletary in the 13th round (I believe there's a chance Shady gets cut), and Mattison (Dalvin Cook's backup) at the end of the draft.  Jackson's 32 (turns 33 in December) and hasn't played 16 games in a season since 2013.  Fitz is on the downside of his career and is hardly a WR 3 at this point, even with an up tempo offense.  And Funchess is a career under-achiever who may lose his starting spot to Parris Campbell.  The three of them combined won't put up the same totals as Hopkins.  Why waste time with a stupid trade proposal that makes no sense?

[weepaws 2,451]

What if you said yes, then who’s the stupid one. 

It happens, we’ve all seen it.  

 

[sderk 1,040]

I hate dumb trade offers too. Most of the time in my league they actually believe they are making a fair offer. And the teams are putting a lot of money into the league. And I feel like I need to kindly turn them down. How about if you want me to make your team better, you offer up something that will make my team better? 

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

4 hours ago, FantasyRetard said:

12-team PPR league (money league), and we did our draft last night.  This morning, I was offered this trade proposal:

I get Desean Jackson, Larry Fitzgerald, and Devin Funchess

I give up Devin Singletary, Alexander Mattison, AND Deandre Hopkins.  I had the 5th pick and of course took Hopkins, got Singletary in the 13th round (I believe there's a chance Shady gets cut), and Mattison (Dalvin Cook's backup) at the end of the draft.  Jackson's 32 (turns 33 in December) and hasn't played 16 games in a season since 2013.  Fitz is on the downside of his career and is hardly a WR 3 at this point, even with an up tempo offense.  And Funchess is a career under-achiever who may lose his starting spot to Parris Campbell.  The three of them combined won't put up the same totals as Hopkins.  Why waste time with a stupid trade proposal that makes no sense?

Something to keep in mind in trades like this, people don't always have the same opinion on players.  For example, unless I have a draft that's over 20 rounds, I don't see a scenario where I draft Singletary.  Meaning, he has no value what-so-ever.  It's possible that the guy making you the offer feels the same way.  It's also possible that he feels that Jackson and Fitz could both decent WR2's.  

Now, if I look at my team and I have Hopkins and 2 guys at RB that a dropable in Week 1, and a guy offers me 2 solid WR2's and a possible WR3, I might consider this offer depending on my other WR's.  If I have another WR1 and no other decent WR's, I probably take this offer.  The thing is, you value Singletary and Mattison a heck of a lot more than I do, and probably more than the guy who made you the offer.  Odds are that if you made this deal, you'll be able to pick up both Singletary and Mattison after Week 2 off of waivers.

[Law 220]

TBay,

So, would you trade, excluding the RBs all together, the #1 WR for the numbers 37, 47, and 50 WRs? I wouldn't. I don't trade quality for quantity. You don't win FF with a lot of low 3 and 4 WRs. You win with elite players.

And even if he was able to add these two RBs back, he'd have to drop someone to do so.

[jrokh 567]

I've low-balled guys, mostly because I don't want to lead with my best offer, but this is ridiculous. It would be one thing if say a Robert Woods or Golladay was in there in place of Fitz or D-Jax. I still wouldn't come close to doing it but it may produce a counter. If I got an offer right after the draft like you did, my response would be to counter-offer something even more ridiculous to your benefit, or just leave it hanging giving the jabroni just a little hope that you might accept. That's just me though...

[Beyond Chaos 75]

Just counter with your own ridiculous trade offer or just leave it pending for as long as you can in case whoever you would be trading is suddenly out for season and they don't cancel it in time.

[weepaws 2,451]

I don’t have a problem with receiving a silly trade request. 

I just say no.  

No strees no pressure no sweat on the palms of the hands. 

Just say no.  

Thats some darn good advise concerning this thought and stressful situtuation. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

1 hour ago, Law said:

TBay,

So, would you trade, excluding the RBs all together, the #1 WR for the numbers 37, 47, and 50 WRs? I wouldn't. I don't trade quality for quantity. You don't win FF with a lot of low 3 and 4 WRs. You win with elite players.

And even if he was able to add these two RBs back, he'd have to drop someone to do so.

Like I said in my post, it depends on what else I have.  All he gave us was the players involved in the trade.  If I have 2 WR1's and the best after that are pot-luck guys, I think Jackson and Fitz can put up strong WR2 numbers, I'd consider that offer because I see Singletary and Mattison as having 0 value.  Now, I'm not all that thrilled with Funchess, so I'd see if I could get a different player in return.  At the very least, I'd have a conversation and not just chalk it up to this being a "stupid trade proposal".

 

He said he "...had the 5th pick and of course took Hopkins...", which to me isn't an "of course" pick, but he thought so.  Either way, coming back around, he could have taken Juju, Beckham, and Evans (all of which are WR1's).  He then might have gone and taken a bunch of RB's (hoping to hit), and possibly a TE with the next 4 or 5 picks.  Then come round 7, his best WR option were guys like Robbie Anderson, Will Fuller, and Marcus Robinson.  If I believe Fitz and Jackson are better than all of those guys, and I do, and I can start Evans, Jackson, and Fitz, I'd call that a win.  Again, it depends on how you value guys.

 

Last year, Hopkins had the 3rd highest ppg in PPR leagues at 21.1.  WR's between 20 and 24 were around 14.  At that point, it's all about where you feel Fitz and Jackson finish as well as Hopkins and whom else you have.  If you think think that Fitz and Jackson could be around 16 or 17, then to take that offer, it's not unreasonable.  If you think that those two will be around 10, then you don't do it.  If you have Robinson who might get you 11 ppg and Hopkins at 21, are you better off with them two or Fitz and Jackson who both might get you 16.5.?

[FantasyRetard 49]

4 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Something to keep in mind in trades like this, people don't always have the same opinion on players.  For example, unless I have a draft that's over 20 rounds, I don't see a scenario where I draft Singletary.  Meaning, he has no value what-so-ever.  It's possible that the guy making you the offer feels the same way.  It's also possible that he feels that Jackson and Fitz could both decent WR2's.  

Now, if I look at my team and I have Hopkins and 2 guys at RB that a dropable in Week 1, and a guy offers me 2 solid WR2's and a possible WR3, I might consider this offer depending on my other WR's.  If I have another WR1 and no other decent WR's, I probably take this offer.  The thing is, you value Singletary and Mattison a heck of a lot more than I do, and probably more than the guy who made you the offer.  Odds are that if you made this deal, you'll be able to pick up both Singletary and Mattison after Week 2 off of waivers.

The draft had 22 rounds, but I took Singletary in the 13th round.  The reason is plain and simple, the other two RBs in Buffalo are over 30.  I'm also think it's a possibility that Shady gets cut at some point during training camp, making Singletary a much more viable player.  An injury to either McCoy or Gore also increases his value.  As for Mattison, he only becomes relevant if Cook gets hurt.  I might try and swing a trade to the guy who drafted Cook for WR depth.

[kilroy69 993]

I like to literally ignore these. 

[LaChup 154]

2018

Hopkins 115 rec 1,572 yds 11 tds

Fitzgerald 69 rec 734 yds 6 tds

Jackson 41 rec 774 yds 4 tds

Funchess 22 rec 549 yds 4 tds

Fitz + Jackson + Funchess = 132 rec 2057 yds 14 tds > Hopkins

It boils down to how many WRs you can start and whether or not those other 2 guys get any playing time. Not a horrible offer, but I think it would be a horrible mistake.

[FantasyRetard 49]

6 hours ago, LaChup said:

2018

Hopkins 115 rec 1,572 yds 11 tds

Fitzgerald 69 rec 734 yds 6 tds

Jackson 41 rec 774 yds 4 tds

Funchess 22 rec 549 yds 4 tds

Fitz + Jackson + Funchess = 132 rec 2057 yds 14 tds > Hopkins

It boils down to how many WRs you can start and whether or not those other 2 guys get any playing time. Not a horrible offer, but I think it would be a horrible mistake.

The league starts 3 WR's, so you really have to add the totals from WR2 and 3 with Hopkins to get an adequate view:

Hopkins 115-1,572-11

Golladay 70-1,063-5

Anderson 50-752-6

Total with Hopkins- 235 rec, 3,387 yards, 22 TD's.

Not very close, statistically.

[Law 220]

7 hours ago, LaChup said:

Fitz + Jackson + Funchess = 132 rec 2057 yds 14 tds > Hopkins 

It boils down to how many WRs you can start and whether or not those other 2 guys get any playing time. Not a horrible offer, but I think it would be a horrible mistake.

WOW! Is that really how it works? You can play those 3 WRs or just the 1? You could play Hopkins and another 2 WRs?

Saying the production of 3 WRs is > than the production of 1 WR, as if that's all done in a vacuum, is really disingenuous. And that's generous!

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

13 hours ago, FantasyRetard said:

The draft had 22 rounds, but I took Singletary in the 13th round.  The reason is plain and simple, the other two RBs in Buffalo are over 30.  I'm also think it's a possibility that Shady gets cut at some point during training camp, making Singletary a much more viable player.  An injury to either McCoy or Gore also increases his value.  As for Mattison, he only becomes relevant if Cook gets hurt.  I might try and swing a trade to the guy who drafted Cook for WR depth.

Oh, I'm not saying you're wrong in your reasoning for taking the players, I'm simply saying that not everyone shares your opinion.  Like I said in my original post, the guy who offered you the deal might think that both Singletary and Mattison are zero's and are throwaway's.  I am very, very skeptical about virtually every rookie drafted this year.  If more than two end up even being viable weekly starters this year, I'll be surprised.  The backfield in Buffalo certainly could open the door for Singletary, no doubt.  The difference lies where you think he'll take advantage of the situation and be good, where as I think he'll be at best a mediocre RB and probably will be replaced in next years NFL draft.  Certainly, you could be right and I could be wrong, I don't ignore that possibility.  That said, not everyone has the same value on players.  It's why I stated that I don't think the trade was as bad as you thought it was.

 

When my draft comes around, I won't avoid Singletary for the same reasons you did.  That said, I'm not very optimistic about his future.  If someone offers me a deal and wants Singletary, I would count that as gravy.  My take would be that I'm throwing in a loser to get a player I want.

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

8 hours ago, LaChup said:

2018

Hopkins 115 rec 1,572 yds 11 tds

Fitzgerald 69 rec 734 yds 6 tds

Jackson 41 rec 774 yds 4 tds

Funchess 22 rec 549 yds 4 tds

Fitz + Jackson + Funchess = 132 rec 2057 yds 14 tds > Hopkins

It boils down to how many WRs you can start and whether or not those other 2 guys get any playing time. Not a horrible offer, but I think it would be a horrible mistake.

 

1 hour ago, FantasyRetard said:

The league starts 3 WR's, so you really have to add the totals from WR2 and 3 with Hopkins to get an adequate view:

Hopkins 115-1,572-11

Golladay 70-1,063-5

Anderson 50-752-6

Total with Hopkins- 235 rec, 3,387 yards, 22 TD's.

Not very close, statistically.

 

30 minutes ago, Law said:

WOW! Is that really how it works? You can play those 3 WRs or just the 1? You could play Hopkins and another 2 WRs?

Saying the production of 3 WRs is > than the production of 1 WR, as if that's all done in a vacuum, is really disingenuous. And that's generous!

I think Fitz and Jackson's numbers both go up and Golladay's comes down... a tad, nothing of significance though.

With a better QB and system, I think Fitz has 90/1000/8 potential.  Yes, I know he's old, but just look at the prior 3 years, his average was was 108/1100/7.  Jackson put up really solid numbers with Fitzpatrick last year because the two could connect, but he couldn't with Winston.  Wentz is a way better QB than Winston, so I think Jackson's numbers will be better and more consistent.  I can see him posting a 60/1000/6 season.

Golladay, I don't trust.  I don't trust him to be consistent.  I don't trust the Lions at all.  I don't trust Stafford.  If Golladay is my 3, I'm "ok" with that, but not thrilled.  I certainly wouldn't be happy with him as my WR2.

Anderson is who he is.  I don't think he'll be any better or worse than last year.  I would be happy with him as my WR4.

Funchess is a nobody.  I said that initially.  I'd at least listen to the other owner and maybe get someone else in return.  Knowing OP's thoughts on the RB's, keep Singletary and maybe add in a different RB that you think has a lower ceiling.

I certainly wouldn't fault anyone for declining the trade and not even moving forward, but I don't think the offer is as bad as initially stated.

[FantasyRetard 49]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

 

 

I think Fitz and Jackson's numbers both go up and Golladay's comes down... a tad, nothing of significance though.

With a better QB and system, I think Fitz has 90/1000/8 potential.  Yes, I know he's old, but just look at the prior 3 years, his average was was 108/1100/7.  Jackson put up really solid numbers with Fitzpatrick last year because the two could connect, but he couldn't with Winston.  Wentz is a way better QB than Winston, so I think Jackson's numbers will be better and more consistent.  I can see him posting a 60/1000/6 season.

Golladay, I don't trust.  I don't trust him to be consistent.  I don't trust the Lions at all.  I don't trust Stafford.  If Golladay is my 3, I'm "ok" with that, but not thrilled.  I certainly wouldn't be happy with him as my WR2.

Anderson is who he is.  I don't think he'll be any better or worse than last year.  I would be happy with him as my WR4.

Funchess is a nobody.  I said that initially.  I'd at least listen to the other owner and maybe get someone else in return.  Knowing OP's thoughts on the RB's, keep Singletary and maybe add in a different RB that you think has a lower ceiling.

I certainly wouldn't fault anyone for declining the trade and not even moving forward, but I don't think the offer is as bad as initially stated.

I guess I'm one of the few who may be higher on Golladay.  But, I don't expect significantly higher numbers than last year, maybe 80 catches and 1,100 yards, 6 TD's.  That's fine in a deep league with 3 WR spots.

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

31 minutes ago, FantasyRetard said:

I guess I'm one of the few who may be higher on Golladay.  But, I don't expect significantly higher numbers than last year, maybe 80 catches and 1,100 yards, 6 TD's.  That's fine in a deep league with 3 WR spots.

I'm not that far off with you to be honest.  It's just that I don't trust the team.  When you look at his games, he has extremes.  He'll have a 7 for 85 with a score, and then the next week have 2 for 12.  That's too erratic for me.  When I look at his game log and see this...

18.40 - Great
20.90 - Great
17.30 - Great
11.40 - ok
19.80 - Great
5.70 - Terrible
2.20 - Terrible
7.60 - Terrible
19.80 - Great
25.30 - Great
14.00 - Good
8.00 - Terrible
2.50 - Terrible
21.60 - Great
11.80 - ok

I'm not keen on starting that guy as my WR2 when I don't trust the team and QB when as a whole, routinely, the team and QB always seem to underachieve.

[FantasyRetard 49]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I'm not that far off with you to be honest.  It's just that I don't trust the team.  When you look at his games, he has extremes.  He'll have a 7 for 85 with a score, and then the next week have 2 for 12.  That's too erratic for me.  When I look at his game log and see this...

18.40 - Great
20.90 - Great
17.30 - Great
11.40 - ok
19.80 - Great
5.70 - Terrible
2.20 - Terrible
7.60 - Terrible
19.80 - Great
25.30 - Great
14.00 - Good
8.00 - Terrible
2.50 - Terrible
21.60 - Great
11.80 - ok

I'm not keen on starting that guy as my WR2 when I don't trust the team and QB when as a whole, routinely, the team and QB always seem to underachieve.

I get what you're saying, but that's as a rookie.  After a year of learning the system and gaining familiarity with Stafford, I think his numbers will grow.  Also, I think Detroit may be one of the surprise teams this year as Patricia grows into that role of HC.  Don't be surprised if they contend in that very tough division.

[kutulu 1,541]

Galladay is going into year 3

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

38 minutes ago, FantasyRetard said:

I get what you're saying, but that's as a rookie.  After a year of learning the system and gaining familiarity with Stafford, I think his numbers will grow.  Also, I think Detroit may be one of the surprise teams this year as Patricia grows into that role of HC.  Don't be surprised if they contend in that very tough division.

Last year was Galloday's 2nd year, not rookie season.  Also, a lot of his numbers went down last year, when compared to opportunity.  The only thing that really went up, was his targets.  His catch% was practically the same, but his y/c went down, his yards per reception went down, and his TD percentage went down.  Another thing too is, his biggest volatility happened after Golden Tate got traded.  You'd have though his production would have been more along the good to great more often than the bad.  It's very possible that Stafford's injury did impact Galloday's season, so I can buy into the optimism from that perspective, but just watching him play a few times... something's missing in his game.  I don't know, his demeanor seems off.  I've had him in my keeper 

I wouldn't be surprised if they were really good at either offense or defense, but I would be if they were good at both.  The Lions can just never put everything together.

[FantasyRetard 49]

42 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Last year was Galloday's 2nd year, not rookie season.  Also, a lot of his numbers went down last year, when compared to opportunity.  The only thing that really went up, was his targets.  His catch% was practically the same, but his y/c went down, his yards per reception went down, and his TD percentage went down.  Another thing too is, his biggest volatility happened after Golden Tate got traded.  You'd have though his production would have been more along the good to great more often than the bad.  It's very possible that Stafford's injury did impact Galloday's season, so I can buy into the optimism from that perspective, but just watching him play a few times... something's missing in his game.  I don't know, his demeanor seems off.  I've had him in my keeper 

I wouldn't be surprised if they were really good at either offense or defense, but I would be if they were good at both.  The Lions can just never put everything together.

Yea, my bad on the Golladay years.  I forgot last year was year 2.  The drop in production, though, is tied to several factors: Stafford injured and new head coach.  Patricia has a new OC this year, and with a quality RB like Johnson, the play-action becomes much more viable.  I like him going into this year.

Are you a Lions fan, by chance?

[TBayXXXVII 2,105]

1 minute ago, FantasyRetard said:

Yea, my bad on the Golladay years.  I forgot last year was year 2.  The drop in production, though, is tied to several factors: Stafford injured and new head coach.  Patricia has a new OC this year, and with a quality RB like Johnson, the play-action becomes much more viable.  I like him going into this year.

Are you a Lions fan, by chance?

No, I just had a lot of shares of Stafford over the last few years and Galloday the last 2.  I do have friend who's a big time Lions fan though.  He talks about them a lot.  Could Galloday finish as a WR2 by season's end?  Sure.  But I wouldn't draft as such.  I'd draft him as my WR3 with the hope/belief that he'd be a WR2.

[FantasyRetard 49]

Part of problem is my obsession with RB's.  In my first 7 picks, I took 4 (Mixon, Gordon, Jacobs, and Coleman).  Along with that is this league's settings, a Superflex league.  So, QB's start to go early.  I took Cam Newton in the 7th round, the 13th QB off the board.  That made Golladay my 2nd WR, taken in the 5th round.  I could have taken Cooper Kupp, Tyler Boyd, or DJ Moore.  I felt of those 4, Golladay, as a true #1 WR on his team offered the best chance for a higher upside. Kupp has Woods and Cooks, and I wouldn't take Boyd with Mixon.  That left Golladay and Moore, and I thought Golladay offered a higher upside.  However, his selection was more of necessity rather than a true belief that he'll excel.

[Ehlana 25]

I don't really understand people getting worked up over bad trade offers. People make trade offers trying to improve their team, not yours. If you think it's terrible, decline it. If you want to see how much the guy wants Hopkins, counter offer. But ignoring it or countering with your 22nd round pick for their first rounder seems sort of pointless and petty to me. If you react poorly to things like this I think you end up missing out on some good deals.

[weepaws 2,451]

I concur. 

[sderk 1,040]

57 minutes ago, Ehlana said:

I don't really understand people getting worked up over bad trade offers. People make trade offers trying to improve their team, not yours. If you think it's terrible, decline it. If you want to see how much the guy wants Hopkins, counter offer. But ignoring it or countering with your 22nd round pick for their first rounder seems sort of pointless and petty to me. If you react poorly to things like this I think you end up missing out on some good deals.

Because you want to deal with non idiots. Can you imagine if you're a GM of the Texans and the GM from the Skins offers you a crappy FG kicker for Hopkins? Are you just going to say, no, give your next 35 draft picks and I'll think about it.

It's just dumb. 

 

[Ehlana 25]

I don't think that's a particularly valid comparison. I don't blame people for trying to get a good deal or trying to find the idiot in a public league. Everyone values players differently, there's no reason to be a jerk about things. But that's the way the world is going these days I guess. The anonymity of the internet breeds asshattery.

[LaChup 154]

13 hours ago, Law said:

WOW! Is that really how it works? You can play those 3 WRs or just the 1? You could play Hopkins and another 2 WRs?

Saying the production of 3 WRs is > than the production of 1 WR, as if that's all done in a vacuum, is really disingenuous. And that's generous!

"The three of them combined won't put up the same totals as Hopkins." - His quote, not mine. Don't lay down the law with me law dog. 

[Super Cubs 132]

I don't know whats worse the stupid trade or owners not replying to trade?

[FantasyRetard 49]

4 hours ago, Super Cubs said:

I don't know whats worse the stupid trade or owners not replying to trade?

Ain't that the truth!  I proposed 3 on Sunday night and only 1 has responded.

[Beyond Chaos 75]

On 8/13/2019 at 5:59 PM, Ehlana said:

I don't think that's a particularly valid comparison. I don't blame people for trying to get a good deal or trying to find the idiot in a public league. Everyone values players differently, there's no reason to be a jerk about things. But that's the way the world is going these days I guess. The anonymity of the internet breeds asshattery.

The person making the terrible trade offer is the jerk.  If you waste someone else's time, don't get mad when they waste yours.

[Ehlana 25]

2 hours ago, Beyond Chaos said:

The person making the terrible trade offer is the jerk.  If you waste someone else's time, don't get mad when they waste yours.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Does it really waste your time to decline a trade offer? It takes what 5 seconds? I dunno, I get that everyone thinks their time is more important than everyone else's, it just seems like people overreact to a lot of stuff these days. I guess maybe I'm just oversensitive since I've had trade offers shunned that didn't seem that ridiculous to me. Seems like communicating what you do or do not like about the offer is better than just turning your nose in the air and telling yourself how much better than the other person you are.

[kutulu 1,541]

Nothing wrong with not responding to any trade. It's part of the game. Just withdraw the trade proposal if yer getting butt hurt cause of no response. 

[weepaws 2,451]

Let them sit and ponder the stupidity of the offer. 

Then look at their team and return a offer that’s just as silly. 

Just like posted above, it’s just a part of the fun of ff. 

 

[Super Cubs 132]

11 hours ago, kutulu said:

Nothing wrong with not responding to any trade. It's part of the game. Just withdraw the trade proposal if yer getting butt hurt cause of no response. 

Just common courtesy to respond. Nothing to do with being butt hurt. It's more about knowing where you stand and not wasting anyone's time.

[nospk 230]

The guy must think he’s dealing with some kind of a fantasy retard

[Frozenbeernuts 1,652]

I have been publicly called out for making bad offers from people who make continuous bad offers.