OT RipCityTwo Fantasy Football

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
trailblazer18 said:
T to the Y! Hilton is averaging 17.6 points per game played and Reed is averaging 15.1 points per game played, so it is not that far off. I would possibly throw in a bench filler. I know you want Reed, you have been asking often.
Click to expand...
I will give you two lesser WRs that would act as your WRs 2 and 3. Or maybe Pryor. Like I said I have too much depth and need to consolidate it to upgrade my starters, not downgrade one position to upgrade another.
 
Is two of Marshall, Moncreif, and C.Coleman not enough?
 
I still think Ingram, Hilton, and Marshall would be a good trade both read l ways for Leveon Bell tbh. You'd upgrade your WRs big time. But I know he's your guy lol.
 
KeepOnRollin said:
Matthew Berry chimes in on to veto or not (hint; it is always not unless there is collusion):
http://www.espn.com/fantasy/footbal...tball-picks-sleepers-busts-trade-talk-week-11
Click to expand...

"There's a special place in hell reserved for the people who veto just because it's a deal that didn't involve them or because "it's part of their strategy." That's not strategy, that's being a jerk. It's being a coward. It's, frankly, not being good enough to win on your own. Someone beat you to a good deal? It is what it is -- part of the game, same as beating another player to the waiver wire or getting a win with the second-lowest score of the week because you happen to face the lowest scorer.

And if you are a commissioner and you don't enforce this rule -- you allow vetoes to happen, or worse, you veto them yourself -- you wipe away any of the good you have done by being a commissioner."

From the article. Bones you have a lot of soul searching to do...haha
 
trailblazer18 said:
"There's a special place in hell reserved for the people who veto just because it's a deal that didn't involve them or because "it's part of their strategy." That's not strategy, that's being a jerk. It's being a coward. It's, frankly, not being good enough to win on your own. Someone beat you to a good deal? It is what it is -- part of the game, same as beating another player to the waiver wire or getting a win with the second-lowest score of the week because you happen to face the lowest scorer.

And if you are a commissioner and you don't enforce this rule -- you allow vetoes to happen, or worse, you veto them yourself -- you wipe away any of the good you have done by being a commissioner."

From the article. Bones you have a lot of soul searching to do...haha
Click to expand...
Haha normally that's how it is but what is a trade as egregious as that one was then it has to be vetoed.
 
BonesJones said:
What about Landry?
Click to expand...
Landry is slumping. By trading Reed I am downgrading that position, so I want a solid upgraded WR to pair with Green. Not worried about depth. If I can't get that upgraded WR, I'll stand pat, and hope Doug Martin can fulfill his potential and run with 2 WR's the rest of the way.
 
BonesJones said:
Tevin Coleman will be my starter. Not trying to trade a starter for a bench player. Trying to consolidate for a better player.
Click to expand...
Bench player? Hyde was a stud before he got injured. I guess I will reap the benefits of him coming back healthy :)
 
T.Y. Hilton is available. Looking to package T.Y. with Ingram or Coleman for a good 2nd RB.
 
Does anyone wanna work a 3-Team Deal? Willing to send two of Hyde/Ingram/T.Coleman and one of Marshall, Moncreif, C.Coleman, Parker for a top 10 RB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top