Board 8 > Board 8 National Football League League (B8NFLL) Season 9: FA + preseason

(+) Yeah! (+)

Well I've done all I can. Its in your hands now Ben Olson.
---

ScareChan posted...

Trade to announce

Wildcats recieve

WR Todd Walker
49ers 4th round pick

49ers recieve

WR Gonzie Massey

Bringing this back for review now that it's a one step trade.
---

Well I've done all I can. Its in your hands now Matt Ryan.

---

I somehow feel less comfortable knowing it will be in the hands of Grossman or Cutler or Griffin (I am assuming Gant is an in game regen so probably the most reliable of the 4)

I am super thin this year so preseason could destroy me if I'm unlucky.
---

I got a decent amount of people in free agency. Watch half of them go down in the pre-season...
---

Emeraldegg posted...

Well I've done all I can. Its in your hands now Ben Mauk and rookie RB Doug Martin.

---

profDEADPOOL posted...

ScareChan posted...

Trade to announce

Wildcats recieve

WR Todd Walker
49ers 4th round pick

49ers recieve

WR Gonzie Massey

Bringing this back for review now that it's a one step trade.

Not sure if Scare needs to re-confirm this or not, but the Bills will preemptively vote against it as we're still not clear how this is good for the Wildcats and there was never any explanation provided when we asked last time.

If it's just about cap space, the Wildcats could just as easily trade Fitzgerald who is 5 years older and would cut their cap penalty on the trade in half.

Or they could keep their top-tier talent and just cut some of their excess players to get under the cap since they're currently at the max roster limit, meaning they have several unnecessary players that aren't as good/young as Massey they could cut to get under the cap.

The Giants would also like to go on record being against this deal as currently constituted.
---

As are the Titans.

He is interested in picks, I gave him my next best reciever and a pick
---

On mobile, so sorry for any sloppiness.

I think that they are more concerned with how both sides came up with the parameters of the trade and not the reasons for the trade. The valuation of WRs via trades this off-season have been all over the place, so I suspect that seeing the 8th highest-rated WR in the game and one of two from the top 20 to be 28 or younger has caused confusion to spill over into this one.

Since I did away with the hard count of vetoes many seasons ago and replaced it with a general sentiment criteria, things aren't looking good for this trade's survival. Three people have vetoed while nobody has supported it.

I know that my trade with the 49ers "legally" makes Scare's top three picks untouchable, but if something like the 49ers 2nd (in addition or in lieu of the 4th) going to the Wildcats would be more palatable to the league, I would be willing to suspend the clause of the 49ers if they do land in the Top 10 for a later season (like S12 instead of S10) if nobody objects.
---

The trouble is mostly that that 4th round pick has almost no chance of materializing into a piece worth what he's giving up in lost value.

A 2nd in lieu of the 4th is far more acceptable.
---

Looking at that trade, I am completely against it even if it was a second involved for 2 reasons

1. If a 92 WR became available in RFA for a 1st and 3rd then a ton of people would be all over it. As is or even with the 2nd, it represents worse value than an RFA return than a ton of people would be willing to pay. So if they are willing to pay it in RFA, they would pay it out of RFA if not more

2. I was offering half the league last season obscene trades for WRs and couldn't get anybody to come remotely close to biting on far better deals for far worse players. I was offering 82 WR plus other players plus a 2nd to move up to like an 85 or 86. Now granted situations change but if I had been offering for a 92 WR last year I'd have been giving multiple high round picks plus players. And was in fact offering that with no interest for lesser, older players

theawesomestevr posted...

profDEADPOOL posted...

ScareChan posted...

Trade to announce

Wildcats recieve

WR Todd Walker
49ers 4th round pick

49ers recieve

WR Gonzie Massey

Bringing this back for review now that it's a one step trade.

Not sure if Scare needs to re-confirm this or not, but the Bills will preemptively vote against it as we're still not clear how this is good for the Wildcats and there was never any explanation provided when we asked last time.

If it's just about cap space, the Wildcats could just as easily trade Fitzgerald who is 5 years older and would cut their cap penalty on the trade in half.

This sums it up for me. Massey is a 25 y/o 90+ rated player, that should go for a way higher premium even with cap issues. Far be it from me to tell prof how to run his team, which is why I'm not going to take into account which players he "should" be cutting, but fitz makes more sense from a player-caliber standpoint and a cap standpoint due to the lesser cap hit for next year. There is no way I see massey's value as anything less than a mid-1st round pick, in terms of picks.

I am not really a fan (as I alluded to in a previous post) of some of the new trade moves being done, in this case if something is legally binding then I don't think it should be overwritten unless both parties agree to it. IE before the "clause" (which I don't even remember what the deal is with this really) is suspended, I think KCF and Scare (the 2 previous trade parties) should agree to it.
If scare agrees then I would agree with eddv's assessment of being more palatable, though I still don't think it's fair as far as value, but I made a trade myself purely for cap reasons that wasn't equal value-wise so I get that that kind of trade is kind of held to a different standard.
If scare doesn't agree then they should try to work something else out, as I don't think he should be forced to do it. Not that I believe KCF would do that, because I don't, but I just want to make my stance clear since his post doesn't explicitly say "I would be willing to suspend the clause IF scare agrees to it"
---

I'm also sure that now people know a 92 WR is available, they would be willing to offer more than what he's getting in that deal.

ShatteredElysium posted...

I'm also sure that now people know a 92 WR is available, they would be willing to offer more than what he's getting in that deal.

I don't quite think this should be used as points against a trade though, it seems like a bit of a slippery slope to me. At that point we would have to put every trade on hold to make sure they're getting the fairest offer.
---

The point on Fitzgerald is actually a good one.

If anyone is interested in either since it seems Scare's offer isn't good enough please get in touch with me.

I'd also be interested in a defensive upgrade as part of the trade.
---

Emeraldegg posted...

ShatteredElysium posted...

I'm also sure that now people know a 92 WR is available, they would be willing to offer more than what he's getting in that deal.

I don't quite think this should be used as points against a trade though, it seems like a bit of a slippery slope to me. At that point we would have to put every trade on hold to make sure they're getting the fairest offer.

Oh I agree it shouldn't be used as a point to veto. It was just worth mentioning is all. Like I think in cases like this we should always try find a way for the original trade to be upheld with revisions rather than extra teams getting involved

With Scares high picks tied up, maybe a third team getting involved is what might be needed to make this work though

Without glancing at financials, maybe if the Bills got involved with one of their extra DTs going to Toronto along with some sort of pick and Scare was willing to part with his back up QB to the Bills?

WRT to financials the max cap hit I am interested in is roughly ~3 mil for a DT or OLB so only one the Bills have is Roy Miller. Course if @ScareChan isn't interested in spending more(entirely possible he isn't) then if someone else wants to pick up a great WR in exchange for picks+a DT or OLB in that cap range please lemme know. Keep in mind the trade would need to be posted for approval by Sunday afternoon at the latest.
---

Maybe something like

Toronto receive
DT 82 Roy Miller (Or Raji)
WR 85 Todd Walker
Bills 2nd
49ers 2nd

49ers receive
WR 92 Gonzie Massey

Bills Receive
QB 85 Michael Turner

49ers then have to snag a QB from FA or Bill send a lesser QB.

Toronto gets a replacement WR, a better very cap friendly DT to start plus 2 picks to build in future

49ers get a stud WR who is still very young whilst not giving up a whole lot (their starting QB is 90+ and only 31)

Bills get a QB for the future who is better than their starter and very young still whilst basically only giving up a 2nd since the DT was their 4th stringer

ShatteredElysium posted...

DT 82 Roy Miller (Or Raji)

Much more interested in Roy there. Raji's cap hit is too high for me.
---

oh sure now people like to veto

didnt know I was getting Chris Paul! lol
---

Well to be fair he is the joint 5th highest rated WR in the league from what I can see. And every person rated higher than him is either 32 or 34 whilst he is only 25.

He's an elite level talent who may still improve and probably has a good 8-10 years left. For that type of player you should be paying a very high premium.

he is the one that asked for a 4th just floating that out there
---

I opened with Walker and one of the draft picks KCF was giving me, e countered at a 4th and I said yes right away
---

ScareChan posted...

oh sure now people like to veto

didnt know I was getting Chris Paul! lol

@ScareChan they mentioned it being an issue before it was cancelled to wait for it to actually be possible anyways.

Are you still interested in trying to make them accept it or not?

EDIT:

ScareChan posted...

I opened with Walker and one of the draft picks KCF was giving me, e countered at a 4th and I said yes right away

Uh

An almost certainly late fifth round pick doesn't seem worth the drop to me. Would you be willing to part with a fourth round?

Is what I said in response. It should have been obvious I misunderstood what you meant by the picks from KCF because I clearly thought you were fucking referring to fifth round pick(tho I also did underestimate how much the WR rating difference was clearly based on what other people have said anyways.)
---

Lets see what everyone has to say since Im not sure what I have to offer else right now
---

To be fair to prof, just because both sides accept (even in a misunderstanding) doesn't necessarily mean it's automatically fair. Trades are often trial and error since the value of players can be rather nebulous. If it did mean they were fair then there would be no need for the veto system that's in place. But to be fair to you, scare, I don't think anyone here thinks you're trying to bamboozle prof on purpose or anything.
---

Oh yeah, I'm not trying to say Scare was trying to hoodwink him. I'm sure anyone would agree to that trade if offered and usually when something is that lopsided it's because the person on the bad end of the deal suggested it. Prof probably just didn't realize what he was trading away was more valuable than what he was asking for

I think what I presented was fair if you can get Steve to agree to it. And is probably in his interests too

So that 49ers/Wildcats trade totally did not pass peer review, in case anyone wanted official word from me. While I am not convinced that stevr will step in facilitate things as people might be hoping, I do hope that things work out in the end. Because I do not allow pick trading with AI teams, I don't think that I could get teams like the Pumpkins or Bengals involved.
---

In the meantime, we have another trade

Titans receive:
LT Travelle Wharton
Dolphins S11 7th round pick

Dolphins receive:
RT Jon Jansen
Titans S10 protected 1st round pick
Titans S11 protected 1st round pick

*If Titans pick in Top 10, Dolphins instead receive their 2nd + 3rd round picks

This trade is now under 24 hour peer review and Stan will need to confirm it.
---

Clearly I don't think I've done enough like ya'll.

I confirm.

I thought there was a rule you couldn't trade picks past next year?
---

I swear you said this last time and during the draft when the Pats/Bills had future draft picks traded. You can totally trade future picks. It is rare and can make things complicated, but the only rule is that you have to ensure that each team gives up and receives something for each season in question.

Because S10's draft picks are now opened up, I can immediately trade Wharton for Jansen + Titans 1st. This time next season, I can trade Dolphins 7th for Titans 1st because that is in when S11's draft picks open up.
---

Sorry, I'm still not used to the, I guess, verbiage, of these pay it forward type trades. I did not realize this was the same thing as that. My bad.
---

Trade to announce:

Packers receive:
Red Bryant
Robert Polite

Buccaneers receive:
Joe Goosby
3rd Round Draft Pick
---

confirm
---

Before this gets vetoed like I expect it to, you might want to explain why the Bucs are giving up an elite DT for a SS that they don't need and a 3rd round pick.
---

DIFFERENT TRADE.

Wildcats give
WR Larry Fitzgerald (92)

Titans give:
ROLB Lance Briggs (82)

AND either their first round pick if picking in the top 10 OR their second and third round picks if picking outside of the top 10.

Advantages for me: Getting a starter OLB(better than any currently on my team), freeing up cap space with a older WR who I don't necessarily need, and a high end pick or two good ones.

Titans side should be fairly obvious >_>
---

Ive started madness
---

Just to confirm, you get the 1st round pick if it's top 10 right? Cause usually protection works the other way around so just want to be sure you posted it right. Either way I don't see an issue with that one.

Other trade I'll check out when I'm not on mobile. Google drive doesn't like phones.

ShatteredElysium posted...

Just to confirm, you get the 1st round pick if it's top 10 right? Cause usually protection works the other way around so just want to be sure you posted it right. Either way I don't see an issue with that one.

Other trade I'll check out when I'm not on mobile. Google drive doesn't like phones.

Yeah. I either get top 10 first round, or 2nd and 3rd otherwise.

This is because KCF is getting Stan's 1st round unless Stan finishes in the top 10 assuming no one tries to argue against that trade.

KCF0107 posted...

In the meantime, we have another trade

Titans receive:
LT Travelle Wharton
Dolphins S11 7th round pick

Dolphins receive:
RT Jon Jansen
Titans S10 protected 1st round pick
Titans S11 protected 1st round pick

*If Titans pick in Top 10, Dolphins instead receive their 2nd + 3rd round picks

This trade is now under 24 hour peer review and Stan will need to confirm it.

The other trade that's why that's happening w/ the picks for reference.
---

KCF0107 posted...

In the meantime, we have another trade

Titans receive:
LT Travelle Wharton
Dolphins S11 7th round pick

Dolphins receive:
RT Jon Jansen
Titans S10 protected 1st round pick
Titans S11 protected 1st round pick

*If Titans pick in Top 10, Dolphins instead receive their 2nd + 3rd round picks

This trade is now under 24 hour peer review and Stan will need to confirm it.

This trade is official
---

I assume this means Stan is sticking with the Titans then? >_>

Oh, and if anyone is interested in 82 OVR DT Roy Miller for like a 80+ CB or draft picks, let the Bills know!

So Stan is basically like fuck picks, I'll just get already developed players instead? I like it!

He also seems to be doubling down on that all-offense approach. Because of the current trade proposal between he and Prof, it made me wonder if having 3 90+ WRs could potentially be bad for Stan/anyone.

I'm hoping KCF can fill me in here if he's risking having one of his 3 WRs forcing a trade due to not starting or if he's safe there.

No issues with that trade though just curious if it has potential to backfire on Stan.

For the Packers/Bucs trade, I'll echo KCF's sentiments from his earlier post.

Well he drafted a WR with the no 4 pick when he already had 2 great WRs so it's in line with his past behavior!

Yeah I will wait for a reasoning but as much as I would like red bryant out the division it doesn't look fair for the bucs at all. They're basically getting 2 backup players for an elite DT.
---