Yahoo Fantasy Football League

[PuRock]

[quote name='XxSizzleXx' timestamp='1284583834' post='478049']
[b]Why do such a thing?[/b] Give the man who he wants at QB lol!

EDIT - It's because I'm in your Div isn't it?
[/quote]

Now you've given me three reasons to hate this trade.

Seriously, JO, why do you want Garrard so bad? Romo is considered to be part of that elite 8 at QB.

[Ed_Reed20]

Romo for Garrard?! I'm voting against it.

[PuRock]

[quote name='Ed_Reed20' timestamp='1284584560' post='478058']
Romo for Garrard?! I'm voting against it.
[/quote]

Now would you vote against it if the guy you are playing is the guy that's going to get Garrard? That's my dilemma.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='PuRock' timestamp='1284584955' post='478064']
Now would you vote against it if the guy you are playing is the guy that's going to get Garrard? That's my dilemma.
[/quote]

Yes. The trade makes no sense at all.

[T-ray]

I'll trade Andre Johnson and Aaron Rodgers for David Garrard and Mike Thomas due to their points last week haha jk jk

[PuRock]

[quote name='T-ray' timestamp='1284585622' post='478077']
I'll trade Andre Johnson and Aaron Rodgers for David Garrard and Mike Thomas due to their points last week haha jk jk
[/quote]

And I would hose you.

[XxSizzleXx]

Wow ****s weak, he's the one who offered the trade and it's not like anyone here would decline it if it was offered to them.

[PuRock]

[quote name='XxSizzleXx' timestamp='1284585810' post='478081']
Wow ****s weak, he's the one who offered the trade and it's not like anyone here would decline it if it was offered to them.
[/quote]

We aren't attacking you. We are waiting for JO's justification behind the proposal. I'd take it in a heart beat and try and convince all of you as well.

[T-ray]

[quote name='PuRock' timestamp='1284585986' post='478086']
We aren't attacking you. We are waiting for JO's justification behind the proposal. I'd take it in a heart beat and try and convince all of you as well.
[/quote]

I'd definitely take the trade. No amount of criticism of unfair play would change my mind about it. If you're stupid enough to offer a bad trade that makes your team worse, the blame should be on you. If you're accepting it, that only shows a practical use of common sense mixed with knowledge.

[XxSizzleXx]

I don't think anyone is attacking anyone I just don't see the reasons for the veto. I mean ya Romo is the better QB but Garrard has the potential to put up some pretty close numbers. The Jags also play in a division that is easier to pass the football. Honestly I can say if this trade was happening somewhere else I wouldn't have a problem with it. League must be pretty HC.

[T-ray]

[quote name='XxSizzleXx' timestamp='1284586826' post='478101']
I don't think anyone is attacking anyone I just don't see the reasons for the veto. I mean ya Romo is the better QB but Garrard has the potential to put up some pretty close numbers. The Jags also play in a division that is easier to pass the football. Honestly I can say if this trade was happening somewhere else I wouldn't have a problem with it. League must be pretty HC.
[/quote]

True that. I'm just glad I could get him and drop Alex Smith as my backup Qb. Makes me rest just a little bit easier in case Rodgers goes down for a little while.

[JO_75]

[quote name='PuRock' timestamp='1284585986' post='478086']
We aren't attacking you. We are waiting for JO's justification behind the proposal. I'd take it in a heart beat and try and convince all of you as well.
[/quote]

The reason behind it is simple, I don't want Romo and seeing what happened Sunday I think Garrard can get me more points and help me win more than what Romo can. Plus I think it's a good trade, I mean yes you can say it's unfair and that it is unfair to me for proposing the trade since Romo is a top QB and Garrard isn't, but you have to remember I proposed the trade, so I'm basically ripping myself off here. I know what I'm doing guys... don't Veto the trade and it looks like it will take 5 days for the trade to go through so I'll have Romo another week it seems.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='JO_75' timestamp='1284590509' post='478165']
The reason behind it is simple, I don't want Romo and seeing what happened Sunday I think Garrard can get me more points and help me win more than what Romo can. Plus I think it's a good trade, I mean yes you can say it's unfair and that it is unfair to me for proposing the trade since Romo is a top QB and Garrard isn't, but you have to remember I proposed the trade, so I'm basically ripping myself off here. I know what I'm doing guys... don't Veto the trade and it looks like it will take 5 days for the trade to go through so I'll have Romo another week it seems.
[/quote]

But do you really think it's wise to judge what a QB can do for you based on one week? Unless proven otherwise, the only player Garrard has around him superior to anyone in Romo's supporting cast is MJD.

[XxSizzleXx]

Shouldn't the decision ultimately be decided by him considering it is his Fantasy team. Also I'm curious as to why you guys veto'd the trade. I laid out my explanation and so did JO, so lets here yours.

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='XxSizzleXx' timestamp='1284595177' post='478239']
Shouldn't the decision ultimately be decided by him considering it is his Fantasy team. Also I'm curious as to why you guys veto'd the trade. I laid out my explanation and so did JO, so lets here yours.
[/quote]

Of course the decision is his. I'm simply trying to understand why he wants to make the trade based on week of football.

I vetoed the trade because a QB whose been among the top fantasy producers at his position for years is being traded for one who hasn't. Granted, past production doesn't have much bearing on this year but a glance at the talent on the Cowboys and Jaguars suggest Romo will have a better season.

[PuRock]

[quote name='XxSizzleXx' timestamp='1284595177' post='478239']
Shouldn't the decision ultimately be decided by him considering it is his Fantasy team. Also I'm curious as to why you guys veto'd the trade. I laid out my explanation and so did JO, so lets here yours.
[/quote]

Tony Romo 2009 4,483 yds, 26 TD, 9 INT
David Garrard 2009 3,597, 15 TD , 10 INT

Nearly 1000 more yards and 11 more tds with the same INTs.

Sure Tony Romo struggled against the Redskins. But that was the same like our game. A tough divisional night game on the road. Overall Tony Romo is on an explosive offense and will be tossing up a lot more TDs. I expect him to eclipse his 2009 numbers.

Garrard, while having a nice first game, went against a Denver D who had a crippled front 7. No pass rush at all. Probably also taking it easy on MJD who was in his first game back. They will rely upon MJD heavily as the season progresses. Plus they were at home in a non-divisional game.

ADPs
Romo - 39.3
Garrard - 179
And this was only 1 game ago.

[PuRock]

[quote name='XxSizzleXx' timestamp='1284595177' post='478239']
Shouldn't the decision ultimately be decided by him considering it is his Fantasy team. Also I'm curious as to why you guys veto'd the trade. I laid out my explanation and so did JO, so lets here yours.
[/quote]

And ofcourse it is his team, but it is also a team that plays in our league. And the reasons why the league votes is to make sure we don't create an unfair advantage or disadvantage to the other league members.

[T-ray]

How about I trade Andre for Mike Thomas?? I mean, Thomas has Garrard throwing to him, and he also had a TD more than Johnson did, and he also caught more passes for more yards. Sounds like a good trade to me!

[PuRock]

[quote name='T-ray' timestamp='1284597533' post='478274']
How about I trade Andre for Mike Thomas?? I mean, Thomas has Garrard throwing to him, and he also had a TD more than Johnson did, and he also caught more passes for more yards. Sounds like a good trade to me!
[/quote]

Speaking of which, now is a great time to make a blockbuster trade to pick up Andre Johnson. Buy Low.

[JO_75]

Also to PU, I was looking at the pending trade and the trade would reflect the WEEK 3 Roster so if this goes through you will still have to face Romo this week and whomever faces me in Week 3 will have Garrard so it's not like it would reflect this week's roster.

Now to ER, I understand where your coming from. I shouldn't be basing it off week 1 results but it's just that I would feel more confident with Garrard as my starter over Romo and hey if it comes back to be quiet so be it, but if Romo can do enough to where I can beat PU and be 2-0 I'm good.

I mean I still think Romo is over rated as a QB, and the only reason why he is even known is because he starts in Dallas. Would we know who Romo is if he started in Buffalo.... or even Oakland? No we would not. That's just my opinion on Romo.

[PuRock]

[quote name='JO_75' timestamp='1284598077' post='478279']
Also to PU, [b]I was looking at the pending trade and the trade would reflect the WEEK 3 Roster so if this goes through you will still have to face Romo[/b] this week and whomever faces me in Week 3 will have Garrard so it's not like it would reflect this week's roster.

I mean I still think Romo is over rated as a QB, and the only reason why he is even known is because he starts in Dallas. Would we know who Romo is if he started in Buffalo.... or even Oakland? No we would not. That's just my opinion on Romo.
[/quote]

Your not helping your cause with the first point. You should have lied and told me Garrard would be starting against me. Romo should have a decent game against da bears.

He is a bit overknown because he plays for Dallas, but he is still a great QB. In 2009 he avg 8.2 yards per throw. Which is between Rodgers and Schaub. Threw for 4,483 yds (3rd) between Manning and Rodgers. With an overall passing rating of 97.6

[XxSizzleXx]

I'm confuzzled, so me obtaining Romo would give me an unfair advantage??

[Elmo]

I'm not vetoing this trade... By all means and appearances this is a trade made by 2 independent players who both feel they'll benefit from it. I, like JO, would reserve the right to value players based on my gut feeling of what they can do... My own gut-feeling actually tells me that Romo will go down within the next 2 games... Which would make JO's trade a virtual rip-off

In my view, the veto is here to make sure completely one-sided deals aren't happening, eg. you can't trade Troy Smith for Aron Rodgers ... With these 2 players, allthough Romo is historically better, the significance of the difference however isn't that big, and you can't deny that both players are the QB of a competetive team. I see way to many fantasy deals vetoed, because people thinks one of the players in the deal got lucky, and not because the deal objectively was unfair...

[PuRock]

[quote name='XxSizzleXx' timestamp='1284618366' post='478503']
I'm confuzzled, so me obtaining Romo would give me an unfair advantage??
[/quote]

In my eyes, sure. Because according to ADP's, it's like you would have 2 2nd round picks (in a 18 team league) for a 10th rounder.

We've only played one game so far, that makes the ADPs still relevant. I agree that the difference isn't too great because the drop off from an elite QB to an average QB isn't that great. But 1000 yards and 11 extra TDs is pretty substantial.

The one reason why I would want to accept this trade is because JO_75 missed the draft (I think this is the one). So Romo is not his guy. He obviously does not like Romo at all. But Garrard?

But hey, I'm just one guy, the overall league might feel differently, like Elmo above.

[XxSizzleXx]

[quote name='PuRock' timestamp='1284645971' post='478604']
In my eyes, sure. Because according to ADP's, it's like you would have 2 2nd round picks (in a 18 team league) for a 10th rounder.

We've only played one game so far, that makes the ADPs still relevant. I agree that the difference isn't too great because the drop off from an elite QB to an average QB isn't that great. But 1000 yards and 11 extra TDs is pretty substantial.

[b]The one reason why I would want to accept this trade is because JO_75 missed the draft (I think this is the one). So Romo is not his guy. He obviously does not like Romo at all. But Garrard?
[/b]
But hey, I'm just one guy, the overall league might feel differently, like Elmo above.
[/quote]

I missed the draft as well, I think my first pick was Chester Taylor in round 11 or something lol. To each their own though I guess.

[JO_75]

[quote name='PuRock' timestamp='1284645971' post='478604']
In my eyes, sure. Because according to ADP's, it's like you would have 2 2nd round picks (in a 18 team league) for a 10th rounder.

We've only played one game so far, that makes the ADPs still relevant. I agree that the difference isn't too great because the drop off from an elite QB to an average QB isn't that great. But 1000 yards and 11 extra TDs is pretty substantial.

T[b]he one reason why I would want to accept this trade is because JO_75 missed the draft[/b] (I think this is the one). So Romo is not his guy. [b] He obviously does not like Romo at all. [/b] But Garrard?[/quote]


Actually I don't mind Romo at all, just I feel like I can win more games with another QB than Romo.

Yes I missed the draft but I want someone to tell me that they could offer me a better starting QB over Garrard. It just wouldn't happen so I went and instead of being a laughing stock trying to get a Aaron Rodgers or Eli Manning for Romo, I went with a trade that would be much easier for it to accept, and I decided that trading for Garrard or Kyle Orton were my best options.

[PuRock]

You know what I don't like about Yahoo. Is when looking for free agents there is no way to sort guys by targets and attempts. IMO, these are the two most important aspects in picking up a free agent.

I want the danglers who touch the balls the most (that sounds perv).

[lowrider]

Most points for this week. That's right. Lowrider in the house!! Not to brag or anything. Unless this is a different Yahoo league

[Ed_Reed20]

[quote name='PuRock' timestamp='1285010533' post='483999']
You know what I don't like about Yahoo. Is when looking for free agents there is no way to sort guys by targets and attempts. IMO, these are the two most important aspects in picking up a free agent.

I want the danglers who touch the balls the most (that sounds perv).
[/quote]

You'd think they'd add targets by now considering how important a statistic it is. Last season, I remember there being a weekly target column but they don't appear to be doing it this year.

[i]Danglers who touch the balls the most[/i]...

[JO_75]

It's Official, Tony Romo has been traded and David Garrard is my new Starting QB. All I have to say is yes you can laugh now at that trade... but if the Cowboys continue to struggle I will have looked smart. Love it when things could possibly turn you from a laughing stock to a smart man.

Ok Question, a guy sent me a trade proposal... he wants Reggie Wayne and in return he will send me Mike Sims Walker and Michael Crabtree.... now I'm going to decline the trade but is that fair value at all?