LM Needs Help with Trade Fairness ASAP

Discussion in 'Fantasy Football Advice' started by football2814, Nov 24, 2015.

  1. football2814

    football2814 Rookie

    There was a trade that was proposed and accepted in my league but the majority of the league does not think the trade is fair. Here is the breakdown of the trade and some background about the teams.

    Team #1:
    Trades Phillip Rivers
    Trades Martavis Bryant

    Team #2:
    Trades Cam Newton

    Important Background Information:
    Team #2's starting quarterback is Tom Brady and has stated that he is going to start him over Cam Newton for the remainder of the season. Therefore, the fantasy value for Cam Newton on team #2 is zero. Team #2 needs to win his matchup this week to make the playoffs. Team #1 has enough good wide receivers to give up Martavis Bryant and needs a better QB for the playoffs. Although a straight up trade of Cam Newton for Martavis Bryant and Phillip Rivers might be a little one sided if Cam Newton happened to be team #2's starter instead of Tom Brady, how does it change the fairness of the trade considering he is team #2's back up for the remainder of the season? Is it a fair trade? I really need the feedback with my league's deadline tomorrow at noon. Please try and back up your opinions with factual evidence to give your responses some substance. Thank you all in advance!
     
  2. PeteTheGreek

    PeteTheGreek Super Moderator Staff Member Fantasy Guru

    1) what the rest of the league thinks doesn't matter. I HATE the concept of vetoing trades UNLESS there is obvious collusion (team out of playoffs gives up all their good players to team in playoffs, etc.)
    2) On any level, this trade is totally fair.

    The trade should stand.
     
  3. PeteTheGreek

    PeteTheGreek Super Moderator Staff Member Fantasy Guru

    You can "hate" a trade because it helps both teams get better, but that's absolutely why the Veto power should never be used. Teams have a RIGHT to improve themselves,
     
  4. Samson

    Samson Lifetime Member Premium Member

    He absolutely should have gotten more at the WR postion casue rivers is meaningless to him as a back up. Since, back up QBS are stupid. I only have one for my bye last week and may unfortunately have to keep him to block someone else from getting a top 10 QB.

    That doesn't mean I block the trade if it is fair by that I mean improves both sides. If he needs a WR and has an extra QB it improves him. Even as garbage vaule he gets compared to what he could get.

    He may want rivers to back up Brady in case they shut him down which if Cam stays perfect he also could get shut down for the championship game week 16. I still think it is stupid casue if they are perfect at that point they will go for it even though it didn't help them last time....

    Long and short of it the owner is an terrible negotiator and in general an idiot, but it does improve his team so you cannot veto. Next time I suggest being the one to offer a trade to this guy casue it could pay dividends.
     
  5. SNPokc

    SNPokc DEZ NUTS 2016 Premium Member

    If he could only get rivers and bryant for cam then let that trade go through. Could have easily gotten a better wr for just cam.
     
  6. Kurt

    Kurt That Server Guy Staff Member Fantasy Guru

    That's some BS but close enough to let stand.