[Official] TGP ESPN Fantasy Football League

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

I tend to look at the difference in points its going to give that team, not just how good the players are, and thus you win this trade by a long shot.

 

Romo and Brown going to Graeme is not going to help him all that much. He already has a capable QB and a decent backup. Foster going to you replaces the only weakness on that team, a questionable starting RB, with a top-5 fantasy superstar. You then find a backup QB to replace Romo, which would not be all that much of a drop-off, 100 points at most, and you come out way ahead of Graeme in the deal.

 

Graeme is essentially upgrading his backup QB from Andy Dalton to Tony Romo, while sticking Antonio Brown in the flex instead of DeMarco, and replacing Arian Foster with DeMarco Murray in the RB2 slot. Overall, not that great of a difference in points.

 

You are getting a fantasy stud, to fix the only hole on the team, while having to replace Tony Romo with another QB. Which will be a point drop, but not much of one. Compared to the difference between Foster and Wells, it's a huge upgrade for you, while its a minor upgrade, at best, for Graeme- and that is assuming DeMarco lives up to the ridiculous hype that is coming his way after a few great games.

 

It is not a good trade from Graeme's perspective and makes you too strong.

 

Obviously, just my opinion. If enough people think the same, then it won't go through. If they agree with you, then fine, it'll go through. I just think it's a really dumb trade for Graeme to make, and you come out way ahead of him, thus the veto.

 

If you look at the difference in points, Graeme has the advantage. Yet you veto because it makes my team too strong.

 

Not sure if you read my last post at all, or if you are just trying to troll us by arguing with your own logic.

[Thanatos 2,847]

If you look at the difference in points, Graeme has the advantage. Yet you veto because it makes my team too strong.

 

Not sure if you read my last post at all, or if you are just trying to troll us by arguing with your own logic.

 

You misunderstand.

 

I mean the difference in points for each team compared to before the trade and after the trade. Simply comparing straight points in a trade would be an asinine way to judge the trade's worth, because then an average QB would be evaluated to be as good as a great RB/WR.

 

Your team

Gains: Arian Foster. Starting instead of: Beanie Wells. Points gained: A lot.

Loses: Tony Romo. Starting instead of: ??. Points lost: Not all that much, as explained earlier.

Loses: Antonio Brown. Starting instead of: Brown wasn't starting. Points lost: None, only depth.

 

Overall: Major point gain.

 

Graeme's team

Gains: Tony Romo. Starting instead of: Not even sure if Romo is starting. If he is, it will be ahead of Vick, thus- Points gained: Very few. Does add insurance over Andy Dalton, but even then, points gained would not be all that much.

Gains: Antonio Brown. Starting instead of: Well, he'd probably go in the flex spot where Murray was. Points gained/lost: Complete toss-up, depending on whether Murray lives up to the hype.

Loses: Arian Foster. Starting instead of: DeMarco Murray. Points lost: Variable, depending on how Murray does. Almost certainly will be a significant loss.

 

Overall: Very little point gain, if any, increasing to moderate point gain (difference between Romo and Dalton), should Vick go down during the course of the season.

 

You can also look at it like oochymp said: a 4th rounder and a 6th rounder for the #2 overall pick. Yeah. That is a completely fair trade.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Thanatos19

[oochymp 2,393]

If you look at the difference in points, Graeme has the advantage. Yet you veto because it makes my team too strong.

 

Not sure if you read my last post at all, or if you are just trying to troll us by arguing with your own logic.

yeah, but QBs in general score more points

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

You misunderstand.

 

I mean the difference in points for each team compared to before the trade and after the trade. Simply comparing straight points in a trade would be an asinine way to judge the trade's worth, because then an average QB would be evaluated to be as good as a great RB/WR.

 

Your team

Gains: Arian Foster. Starting instead of: Beanie Wells. Points gained: A lot.

Loses: Tony Romo. Starting instead of: ??. Points lost: Not all that much, as explained earlier.

Loses: Antonio Brown. Starting instead of: Brown wasn't starting. Points lost: None, only depth.

 

Overall: Major point gain.

 

Graeme's team

Gains: Tony Romo. Starting instead of: Not even sure if Romo is starting. If he is, it will be ahead of Vick, thus- Points gained: Very few. Does add insurance over Andy Dalton, but even then, points gained would not be all that much.

Gains: Antonio Brown. Starting instead of: Well, he'd probably go in the flex spot where Murray was. So that's a complete toss-up, depending on whether Murray lives up to the hype.

Loses: Arian Foster. Starting instead of: DeMarco Murray. Points lost: Variable, depending on how Murray does. Almost certainly will be a significant loss.

 

Overall: Very little point gain, if any, increasing to moderate point gain (difference between Romo and Dalton), should Vick go down during the course of the season.

 

You can also look at it like oochymp said: a 4th rounder and a 6th rounder for the #2 overall pick. Yeah. That is a completely fair trade.

 

Under that logic, nobody can trade any player that is on their bench because it's unfair. I am STACKED at WR. Brown on the bench before a game is even played is not an indicator of value.

 

I don't look at the names of a player. I look at point production. I layed out clearly that over the course of the season, Romo and Brown are going to score 80 points more than Foster is.

 

All you guys see is Arian Foster... You aren't actually looking at what is being given and receive. Remove names. Look at points.

 

Also, you claim that losing Romo isn't a big deal for me... Yet I would be starting Christian fucking Ponder.... lol. The difference is massive.

 

yeah, but QBs in general score more points

 

ABSOLUTELY. That's why this you guys are so confused. I have NOBODY at QB. QBs do score more points. I am giving up a great fantasy QB, a position that scores the most points in the league every year. For a great RB, a position in which scores fewer points.

 

Completely fair.

 

The arguments you guys are setting forth actually prove this is is a legit trade.

[Thanatos 2,847]

The difference is 100 points, at most.

 

It's a minor upgrade, at best, for Graeme, and it is a huge upgrade for you.

 

That's pretty much the end of it in my eyes.

 

Obviously, others agreed, whether for that reason or for others.

 

Tony Romo is not even close to equal in value to Arian Foster. Adding Antonio Brown does not even the scales, not by a long shot.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

The difference is 100 points, at most.

 

It's a minor upgrade, at best, for Graeme, and it is a huge upgrade for you.

 

That's pretty much the end of it in my eyes.

 

Obviously, others agreed, whether for that reason or for others.

 

Tony Romo is not even close to equal in value to Arian Foster. Adding Antonio Brown does not even the scales, not by a long shot.

 

 

Okay.. Here's your problem.

 

You have conceded that it is an upgrade for Graeme. It's an upgrade for me.

 

FAIR TRADE.

 

That is the end of it.

 

 

The veto is not to vote against trades that make both teams better. The veto is to avoid trades that are so obviously lopsided that you just can't possibly let it go through.

 

We're talking Andre Johnson for Randall Cobb or the like.

 

The second you conceded both teams upgrade from this is the second you should retract your veto.

 

If it wasn't my team we were talking about here, using your logic, I would go in and use the LM tools to reverse your vote, because you are abusing the system.

 

EDIT

Tony Romo is not even close to equal in value to Arian Foster. Adding Antonio Brown does not even the scales, not by a long shot.

 

STOP looking at the names. I beg of you. Yes... In real life, Tony Romo and Arian Foster do not compare. In my opinion.. Foster is the best RB in the league. Bar none. No competition. Tony Romo is an above average QB with some nice weapons at his disposal.

 

FANTASY WISE. Both teams in this trade, are being upgraded. Both of us are bettering our teams. By sheer point value alone, Graeme has the edge. Arian Foster must set career highs in yards, TD, receiving yards, and receiving TDs to even come CLOSE to the combination of average seasons for Brown and Romo.

 

Foster must set NFL RECORDS in yards, TDs, receiving yards for a RB, and receiving TDs by a RB to outscore Romo and Brown so much that this trade is lopsided in my favor.

 

EDIT II

 

In the end.. what it boils down to.. Is you vetoing because my team would be too strong. That is such a load of bullshit. Vetoing a trade, not because one side is getting the shaft, but because one team becomes "too good" is insane.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Favre4Ever

[oochymp 2,393]

ABSOLUTELY. That's why this you guys are so confused. I have NOBODY at QB. QBs do score more points. I am giving up a great fantasy QB, a position that scores the most points in the league every year. For a great RB, a position in which scores fewer points.

 

Completely fair.

 

The arguments you guys are setting forth actually prove this is is a legit trade.

but it won't be that hard for you to get a QB who will be close enough to Romo, QBs in the low starter range are pretty interchangeable

 

Now that it's pushed back to the previous page without being addressed I'll bring my draft position argument back up, since they haven't played yet the best way to get comparative rankings is looking at how the players were valued in the draft: Romo was your 4th round pick, Brown your 6th, and you're trying to turn that into the guy who went second overall

 

EDIT: Also, I'm not sure I agree with the premise that it benefits Graeme at all, he's going from Arian Foster starting to Antonio Brown starting (a huge downgrade) and going from a Vick/Freeman/Dalton platoon to a Vick/Romo platoon (a moderate upgrade at best)

Edited August 27, 2012 by oochymp

[Thanatos 2,847]

Okay.. Here's your problem.

 

You have conceded that it is an upgrade for Graeme. It's an upgrade for me.

 

FAIR TRADE.

 

That is the end of it.

 

 

The veto is not to vote against trades that make both teams better. The veto is to avoid trades that are so obviously lopsided that you just can't possibly let it go through.

 

...

 

FANTASY WISE. Both teams in this trade, are being upgraded. Both of us are bettering our teams. By sheer point value alone, Graeme has the edge. Arian Foster must set career highs in yards, TD, receiving yards, and receiving TDs to outscore the combination of average seasons for Brown and Romo.

 

That's bullshit logic.

 

By that reasoning, if one team gets Arian Foster and upgrades his RB core from Mike Tolbert, and the other team has, say, Matt Ryan at QB, and gets Tony Romo, then that is a fair trade because both teams got upgraded.

 

No its not. The upgrade has to be somewhat even. It can't simply be "Oh one team got a little bit better, and the other team got a ton better, but who cares, both teams got better, so its a fair trade."

 

Not to mention, I said its a minor upgrade *at best*. I don't even know that its an upgrade at all.

 

Obviously, you and I have differing interpretations on what can and can't be vetoed. There is no rule on that, so I stand by it. The trade is lopsided enough to warrant a veto.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

but it won't be that hard for you to get a QB who will be close enough to Romo, QBs in the low starter range are pretty interchangeable

 

Now that it's pushed back to the previous page without being addressed I'll bring my draft position argument back up, since they haven't played yet the best way to get comparative rankings is looking at how the players were valued in the draft: Romo was your 4th round pick, Brown your 6th, and you're trying to turn that into the guy who went second overall

 

Also, I'm not sure I agree with the premise that it benefits Graeme at all, he's going from Arian Foster starting to Antonio Brown starting (a huge downgrade) and going from a Vick/Dalton platoon to a Vick/Romo platoon (a moderate upgrade)

 

The ability for me to get a good QB is NOT part of this trade. You are using the logic that my team is too good. Are you afraid of me Oochy? May as well quit the league and hand me the trophy now. You can't veto a trade because my team is too good.

 

No... Where guys are drafted is not a good sense of value at all. Especially being that Graeme is receiving a position that scores more points than any other.

 

Again.. You are just looking at the names of the players.

 

Graeme has the best backfield in the league. He can spare one of those running backs without thinking twice. I on the other hand.. Have the best WR corps in the league. Bar none.

 

He gives me his strength, I give him mine.. Plus the highest scoring position in the game to replace an injury riddled player like Vick and he clearly has the edge.

 

Points wise. Graeme DOES have the edge.

 

None of you are arguing the fact that the points are in graemes favor. Add them up yourselves.. Tell me I have the edge points wise.

 

You can't.

 

All you can do is say.. Hey.. F4E is getting Arian Foster. That's not cool.

 

 

Shame on all 3 of you for being ignorant, petty, and abusing the veto system.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

That's bullshit logic.

 

By that reasoning, if one team gets Arian Foster and upgrades his RB core from Mike Tolbert, and the other team has, say, Matt Ryan at QB, and gets Tony Romo, then that is a fair trade because both teams got upgraded.

 

No its not. The upgrade has to be somewhat even. It can't simply be "Oh one team got a little bit better, and the other team got a ton better, but who cares, both teams got better, so its a fair trade."

 

Not to mention, I said its a minor upgrade *at best*. I don't even know that its an upgrade at all.

 

Obviously, you and I have differing interpretations on what can and can't be vetoed. There is no rule on that, so I stand by it. The trade is lopsided enough to warrant a veto.

 

 

Again.. no numbers to back it up.

 

Show me I have a completely lopsided edge points wise. Give me the numbers. Don't even use the names of the players. Just numbers.

 

You want me to show you?

 

Team A Receives (on a good day)

300 yards passing, 3 TD = 24 points

75 yards receiving, TD = ~13 points

 

Team B Receives

100 yards rushing, 2 TD, 60 yards receiving = 28

 

Per their Averages LAST season

 

Team A Receives

260 passing yards, 2 TD = 19 points

70 receiving yards, .125 td = 8 points

 

Team B Receives

90 rushing yards, .8 td, 50 receiving yards, .125 TD = 20 points

Edited August 28, 2012 by Favre4Ever

[Vin+ 3,121]

but it won't be that hard for you to get a QB who will be close enough to Romo, QBs in the low starter range are pretty interchangeable

 

Romo was the seventh best QB in fantasy last year. That qualifies as low starter?

[Thanatos 2,847]

Your logic is not taking into account who is *already* on Graeme's team. It isn't an upgrade. Just adding points of the players involved is a really dumb way to evaluate a trade. From Graeme's perspective, it simply doesn't make sense. Your way of judging trades would lead to some serious rip-offs.

 

Whether or not you have the strongest WR core has no bearing on the conversation at all, but I don't think yours is the best. Its the deepest, but not the strongest.

 

And who the hell are you to tell me what I can and can't veto? It's not abusing the system to veto a trade that is so obviously lopsided in your favor. I laid out the numbers, in a vague sense, since I'm not going to bother trying to predict how many yards people are going to get this year. Graeme possibly gains very few, if any, points. You gain a lot of points. How is that at all fair?

 

Quit your crying over a veto of a trade, lol.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Thanatos19

[oochymp 2,393]

You are using the logic that my team is too good. Are you afraid of me Oochy? May as well quit the league and hand me the trophy now. You can't veto a trade because my team is too good.

 

All you can do is say.. Hey.. F4E is getting Arian Foster. That's not cool.

 

 

Shame on all 3 of you for being ignorant, petty, and abusing the veto system.

if we're falling to personal attacks I'm done, I can't speak for the others, but my vote had nothing to do with who was making the trade, it's heavily unbalanced IMO, now I'll address the legitimate points you bring up and hopefully you'll see where I'm coming from

 

The ability for me to get a good QB is NOT part of this trade.

it absolutely is, it speaks to the fact that you're trading two fungible commodities (a low end starting QB and a high end #3 WR) for an extremely unique asset (one of the top 3 RBs in the league)

 

No... Where guys are drafted is not a good sense of value at all. Especially being that Graeme is receiving a position that scores more points than any other.

 

Again.. You are just looking at the names of the players.

I don't follow that at all, how is it not a good sense of comparative value to look at where the players were selected overall? If players are valued about the same then wouldn't they go around the same place in the draft? It may not be a great measure, but it's the best one available until we have current stats

 

 

Graeme has the best backfield in the league. He can spare one of those running backs without thinking twice. I on the other hand.. Have the best WR corps in the league. Bar none.

 

He gives me his strength, I give him mine.. Plus the highest scoring position in the game to replace an injury riddled player like Vick and he clearly has the edge.

so he gives from the top of his strength for the bottom of yours, I realize that statement ignores that Romo is part of the trade and I'm not suggesting you would consider a straight up trade of Brown for Foster fair, I'm just saying that in this situation the strength for strength argument doesn't hold water

 

Points wise. Graeme DOES have the edge.

 

None of you are arguing the fact that the points are in graemes favor. Add them up yourselves.. Tell me I have the edge points wise.

 

You can't.

 

if you're making a two for one trade then the total points will always be in favor of the guy getting two players, it doesn't change the fact that the impact on the team is extremely disproportional, we can all agree that going from Foster to Brown is a huge downgrade

[oochymp 2,393]

Romo was the seventh best QB in fantasy last year. That qualifies as low starter?

mid to low, it's still an interchangeable part

[Thanatos 2,847]

I mean, if we're just going to use numbers, I could throw up four or five below-average players to get one superstar, but that would be vetoed as well, I would think.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

No.. You didn't lay out the numbers. Ever.

 

And when I do post the numbers... You cower in the corner and avoid them like the plague. On average last year... Romo and Brown outscored Arian by like 7-8 points a week. That might not mean a whole lot to you, but the edge is there.

 

Graeme doesn't need 5 RBs like I don't need 5 WRs. I have them to spare, as does he. Yes. Brown for Foster straight up isn't fair POINTS-WISE. That's why he gets one of the best fantasy players at the highest scoring position in the league.

 

Romo alone will outscore Foster most weeks. Throw in Brown who is going to be a GREAT Wr... A guy who I wanted to keep badly.. A guy I had on my bench because I was shopping Andre Johnson... And Graeme has the edge. Maybe slightly.. Maybe... But We both get better. We both strengthen our weaknesses.

 

Nobody loses in this trade except our competition.

[Thanatos 2,847]

So obviously if I give someone five below-average players that will outscore one fantasy stud any given week, that is a fair trade.

 

Don't act like you're throwing up stats. You're not. You're projecting. Fine, that's what I did- vaguely. Thus the gaining of points, etc. Sure it wasn't an actual number, but it was a far better way of evaluating a trade than just looking at the raw numbers that they score on average.

Edited August 28, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

I mean, if we're just going to use numbers, I could throw up four or five below-average players to get one superstar, but that would be vetoed as well, I would think.

 

 

It's highly unlikely that your 5 shitty players will actually all be upgrades for your opponent. But you sure can try.

 

I guarantee you, that I am not vetoing.

 

I learned from Blue a couple years ago in fantasy that vetoing is for tools. If two teams think they have a good trade, it should go through. If a trade is lopsided, sure I will make a comment, but I agree that it should go through. Unless you own two teams and are cheating, it's none of my business who you trade to and from your team.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

mid to low, it's still an interchangeable part

 

Please look at me and tell me that Romo and Christian Ponder are interchangeable. Try not to smile.

[Thanatos 2,847]

It's highly unlikely that your 5 shitty players will actually all be upgrades for your opponent. But you sure can try.

 

I guarantee you, that I am not vetoing.

 

I learned from Blue a couple years ago in fantasy that vetoing is for tools. If two teams think they have a good trade, it should go through. If a trade is lopsided, sure I will make a comment, but I agree that it should go through. Unless you own two teams and are cheating, it's none of my business who you trade to and from your team.

 

Then that would allow someone to take advantage of people who, just for example, were new to fantasy, (just pointing out the flaw in your logic, not saying Graeme is new to fantasy).

 

Like I said, obviously we have different opinions of what vetoing is for. And you sure throw around an awful lot of name-calling.

[Thanatos 2,847]

None of you are arguing the fact that the points are in graemes favor. Add them up yourselves.. Tell me I have the edge points wise.

 

You can't.

 

All you can do is say.. Hey.. F4E is getting Arian Foster. That's not cool.

 

Shame on all 3 of you for being ignorant, petty, and abusing the veto system.

 

You have the edge points-wise as far as the difference it makes to your team. Not just an edge, but a huge advantage. Which is what matters.

 

And hey look, calling people names. That really helps with the conversation.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Graeme has been playing fantasy football with us since he joined here. He's one of the most knowledgeable fnatasy players I have EVER competed against. He's almost always at the top of the standings, and I expect him to be again this year even after an auto-draft.

 

He knows what he's doing.

 

If you were looking out for a noobie. I could understand your plight.

 

But a trade between two veteran fantasy owners that make us both better, and your veto coming because you are afraid my team is too awesome?

 

Ya... That's kind of pathetic.

[oochymp 2,393]

No.. You didn't lay out the numbers. Ever.

 

And when I do post the numbers... You cower in the corner and avoid them like the plague. On average last year... Romo and Brown outscored Arian by like 7-8 points a week. That might not mean a whole lot to you, but the edge is there.

 

Graeme doesn't need 5 RBs like I don't need 5 WRs. I have them to spare, as does he. Yes. Brown for Foster straight up isn't fair POINTS-WISE. That's why he gets one of the best fantasy players at the highest scoring position in the league.

 

Romo alone will outscore Foster most weeks. Throw in Brown who is going to be a GREAT Wr... A guy who I wanted to keep badly.. A guy I had on my bench because I was shopping Andre Johnson... And Graeme has the edge. Maybe slightly.. Maybe... But We both get better. We both strengthen our weaknesses.

 

Nobody loses in this trade except our competition.

okay, I will admit that I may be a little low on Romo and low end starter might not be entirely accurate, but there's no way he can be considered "one of the best" fantasy QBs

 

alright, here's a look at the numbers you posted (I'm going with last year's numbers:

Per their Averages LAST season

 

Team A Receives

260 passing yards, 2 TD = 19 points

70 receiving yards, .125 td = 8 points

 

Team B Receives

90 rushing yards, .8 td, 50 receiving yards, .125 TD = 20 points

so, team B goes from a RB who scored 20 points per week to a WR scoring 8 points a week, a drop of 12 points per week or 192 points over the season, and picks up a QB scoring 19 points per week, but let's keep in mind that he has a QB who only played 13 games but scored 17 points per week when he played, so he's gaining two points per week those 13 weeks and 19 the other three, for a total of 83 points gained over the season, so he's got a net loss of 109 points. I will grant that Antonio Brown might be better this year than last, but not by 109 points, he did have 1100 yards last year and you would have to replace Romo, but I also don't think that will be enough to make up the difference since you will probably be able to deal a good bench player for a low end starting QB and only lose 30-40ish points in the QB spot.

Edited August 28, 2012 by oochymp

[Thanatos 2,847]

Quit posting a straw-man argument. That isn't what I said in the slightest, and you have to know it. Either that or you aren't reading my posts at all.

 

I vetoed because the trade is incredibly lopsided in your favor, it has nothing to do with whether or not he's a noobie, I *specifically* spelled that out as simply being a flaw in your logic. Yet you ignore it, and on top of that twist my words to make it seem like I'm saying something I'm not.

 

You obviously aren't interested in actually debating, merely tossing around names and trying to spin people's words to say something they aren't saying.

 

So I'm done.

 

You wanna stick the trade through again, fine, do so. I won't touch it. It's not worth dealing with the massive QQ that you're spewing.

 

I play fantasy football to have fun, not to deal with bullshit drama.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

You are comparing Brown's production to Arian Fosters? That's not the trade. And as stated previously. Graeme has a BUNCH of really good backs. He's not going to feel the loss of Foster as much as you or I would.

 

You are also inferring that Vick is going to play the entire season... Obviously Graeme, being on auto-draft isn't comfortable with that. The hesitation on injury prone players has to be considered. It's also probably why he declined Andre Johnson and swapped Brown in.

 

And what do you mean Tony Romo isn't one of the best fantasy players?

 

In a typical 12 team, 16 roster draft. 192 players will be selected. Tony Romo was the 9th highest scoring player in ESPN formats last year. NINTH. 183 drafted players scored less than Romo.

 

That's pretty damn good.