I have got this situation going in my “legacy league” – we are in our 16th year of operation, and I do not recall any trade ever stirring up so much furor among the 18 owners.
The roster only plays one QB, but offers 6 points for all TDs (pass,run,catch), plus 6 more for 50+ yard TDs. I started at 0-3 but third in points scored, and my strength is a QB squad of Kellen Moore, Bryant Moniz of Hawaii and Alex Carder of Western Michigan.
With the absence of Case Keenum, I stockpiled Terrance Broadway of Houston also and planned to make aggressive trades of my QB depth in order to improve my team. I identified my main weakness at WR, and the owner that lost Keenum had Hawaii WR Kealoha Pilares (who I have called one of the five elite WRs of 2010 given evidence so far). I offered Carder, he replied “Maybe for Moore but I don’t think you would do it.” Yes, yes I would.
So we consummated the Moore for Pilares deal, both of us were happy and we set our lineups. Commence crap storm.
The chatroom heated up immediately.
You trade a QB projected to put up 35 tds and 3500 yds to someone that just lost a QB….hmm… and you get back a wr lucky to get 800 yds and 8 td’s….yeah a fair trade…my ass!
Do you think the trade should be denied? (a) Um, hell yea. This trade would not be allowed in previous years (b) Desperate times, desperate measures (c) If someone offered you a Mercedes for your Kia, would you refuse?
- Inter-positional valuation is more dynamic than you care to realize. Even if Moore finishes as QB1, I fell like I got a WR3 and I have bupkus in that postion. even after the deal, I have the Houston starter and two top 20 QB. You think I am in bad shape? You have to look at more than absolute FP and think of it relative to the position. Much easier to replace a QB in this league than a WR.
- It is not about points – it is about points relative to the position on your starting lineup. Given your position, one would stock up on QB and D even if you cannot start all of them? If this were a 2QB start league, one should NEVER make this deal. Since only one can be started, it devalues QB relative to RB and WR even if they score more points because the points are easily replaceable. Take a snapshot of my roster – I have 2 top ten QB and the Houston starter, now can play Pilares instead of Jheranie Boyd or Jameel Owens. Advantage me AND Tim.
It went on to the point where a friend suggested collusion as if I were giving up on my season, and that hurt even if it was just to fire up the masses. This trade cannot be looked at as Moore for Pilares, It is my QB + Pilares versus Moore + Boyd or Owens.
So help me out here – I certainly took a risk few others would, and maybe making a large deal when I am the third highest scoring team is ill advised regardless of record. I also feel confident in my rationale above – heck, for years Drew and I have guided readers through “QB commodity, RB/WR premium” philosophy. This should not be a question of fairness, it is one of valuation that I still feel I am ahead of the curve on despite preaching this strategem for years.
What are your views on the trade? Take any angle you wish.