Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

For the second time in less than a month, the Steve Smith asteroid has wandered into the Eastern Division solar system and come periously close to landing on planet Predators. Much to the relief of the Highlanders, Freedom, and Opihi, the asteroid headed safely out of the system and into deep space. Predator sky-watchers are hoping for a future fly-by that might end in an impact. Time will tell...


Popes give:

S. Smith (1 year: 1089)

Dodgers give:

S. Holmes (4 years: 275)
T. Jackson (4 years: 220)
2008 2nd round pick


Brian to confirm.

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

Confirmed. I believe this is the third time I entered into negotiations to land Smith. Welcome. I'll post something more interesting and substantial later.

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

FYI, S. Holmes and T. Jackson to go to my Taxi Squad. Space being opened up in separate Cut threads.

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

meh, the Preds will fire a missle at asteroid Smith the next time he flys by.

;)

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

So you traded....

QB Matt Hasselbeck
RB Brandon Jacobs
2008 Popes 1st Rounder
2008 Absolut 1st Rounder


for

QB Jake Delhomme
QB Brady Quinn
QB Tavarias Jackson
WR Santonio Holmes
2008 2nd rounder

I'm just glad I got the picks!

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

You conventiently left out a first rounder I acquired in the trade to get Smith, making that seem way more lop-sided than it is ;)

Also, where did Quinn come from???

I'll post my assessment/reasoning in a bit.

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

I suspect most people will think I’m making a bad trade anytime I trade a first round pick because of how I view the draft and its relation to team-building. First round picks is not my preferred way to build my team. I spoke a bit about “on the cusp” players in the other thread, but here’s a bit more explanation on my view, because it's really key to why I make the trades that I make.

A first round pick has to clear many hoops to become a worthy FF starter:
1. have skills that can actually translate from college to the NFL
2. make their NFL squad w/o getting cut
3. work their way up the NFL depth chart
4. eventually crack the starting NFL lineup
5. advance to a position where they can actually get the bulk of starter touches to even to be in a position to put up enough FF points
6. and finally, actually perform as needed.

I prefer to trade for guys who have already cleared the first 5 hurdles. All that remains is the last one. I look at it this way: why would I want to draft a guy who has to clear 6 hurdles (when most fail to), when I can take a guy who's cleared 5 and is 80% of the way there? I look at it like odds in poker. You never know if that card will hit, but all you can do if play the highest percentage game and in the long-run, you’ll be successful. This is why I traded the 1.1 for Benson and Davis. This is why I’d rather have Holmes in this deal than the 1st I gave up to get Smith. I realize that most people in this league probably think Holmes is not even worth a first (maybe same for Benson and Davis). I think each of them is worth more than a first. As always, we’ll find out down the road who’s right. This is my first time playing in a dynasty league, so maybe I’m way off. But that’s how I’m building until reality tells me I’m wrong and then I’ll adapt.

OK, on to this specific trade.

IMO, I gave up a 1st, a 2nd/3rd, and B. Jacobs for Smith (the QBs are a wash, given their salaries). Bear in mind that while I traded a 2008 1st away (mine, which with the acquisition of Smith, looked to fall in the 1.7-1.12 range) and got a 2007 1.13 back (and it was a deep draft). That's a 2nd/3rd to account for that difference. So, I started with a baseline of Smith = 1st, 2nd/3rd, and Jacobs.

Here’s how I equate that to the trade I just made:

S. Holmes = the 1st
Brian’s 2nd = the 2nd/3rd
T. Jackson = B. Jacobs

I was hesitant to deal Smith and break up the “Win in 2007” lineup I had constructed, but I think I can regain the majority of those starter points elsewhere in my lineup and I liked the idea of increasing my “future plans” from just Benson/Davis (which I had limited it to, by trading all my higher draft picks) to Benson/Davis/Holmes/T. Jackson.

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

I just looked at who was picked 1.13 forgot you traded down. That's where I got Quinn from, instead it should be Gonzo

QB Matt Hasselbeck
RB Brandon Jacobs
2008 Popes 1st Rounder
2008 Absolut 1st Rounder


for

QB Jake Delhomme
QB Tavarias Jackson
WR Santonio Holmes
WR Anthony Gonzalez
Dodgers 2008 2nd rounder
Return of your 2008 2nd rounder

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

Ahh, that makes sense - I guess you didn't forget my 1.13 :)

I traded my returned 2008 2nd (+ 2007 3.08) for 2007 2.06, which became Jason Hill. If you want to take it one step further, it would be:

QB Matt Hasselbeck
RB Brandon Jacobs
2008 Popes 1st Rounder
2008 Absolut 1st Rounder
2007 Popes 3.08

for

QB Jake Delhomme
QB Tavaris Jackson
WR Santonio Holmes
WR Anthony Gonzalez
WR Jason Hill
Dodgers 2008 2nd rounder

That would be the final result. Like I said, I fully expect most people to think I made bad deals, due to the 1sts. I am happy with this. We'll see who's right...

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

I suppose you are more willing to trust Tavarias Jackson than myself. When I heard you were trading Smith for 2 on the cusp prospects I thought you were taking players who have ACTUALLY shown production in the NFL.

Jackson is a 2nd year QB, 1st full year starting, and has who to throw too? They'll be pounding the rock with AD and Taylor.

I like Holmes, Gonzo, and getting a 2nd in return is nice but I wouldn't trust Jackson. I mean if Holmes or Gonzo devlop into fantasy WR2 then the deal is a wash, but I just felt more could have been gotten for Steve Smith.

IN the end, I like this deal for myself b/c it weakens tyour team for this year and I have your 1st rounder!

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

Actually, I'm with you. Tarvaris was the big question mark for me. He's got the physical tools and the starting job, but we have zero idea if he will be great, good, decent, or horrible. He doesn't really quite meet my "on the cusp" criteria, because I generally prefer some indication of production from the prior year. Two reasons I took him despite that:

- a bit of homerism
- I was comparing him to Brandon Jacobs and I personally don't think Jacobs will ever be a 20 carry a week guy. Jacobs has put up some production, but I don't think he'll ever get enough touches. Tarvaris will get the touches, but we don't know about the production possibilities. Hence I considered them equivalent. I'd rather have Tarvaris and take a shot that he can perform (down the road, I mean, I won't be playing him this year other than as a backup/bye week guy).

I know Brian has zero confidence in Chili's offense, but I think we might have a respectable offense come 2008. I also think Adrian Peterson catching some swing passes and going the distance with them might look really good for Tarvaris down the road.

Re: Popes/Dodgers trade for the third time
 

Fair enough. I felt the homerism was the only way you'd do the deal for Jackson.