Mountain Lions and Bloodsucker trade

Flaxwless · April 27th, 2005, 12:19 PM

Insects send
1.5, 2.8, 3.3, 5.3

Mountain Lions send
1.4, 2.9, 3.4, 6.9?

Nittany Dodgers · April 27th, 2005, 12:19 PM

Confirmed. Explanation to be posted shortly.

Preds · April 27th, 2005, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Confirmed. Explanation to be posted shortly.

damn ethics :furious j/k ;)

Philadelphia Freedom · April 27th, 2005, 12:29 PM

Quote:

damn ethics

Huh?

Preds · April 27th, 2005, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philadelphia Freedom

Huh?

you'll see

Brian, you gonna pick at 1.5 or are we gonna wait for yet another deal?

Nittany Dodgers · April 27th, 2005, 12:31 PM

OK, here’s the story (I feel I owe one since I decline 3 better offers for the 1.4). Frank was working a trade with Matt to move down to the 1.5 from the 1.3. Frank wanted to know who I was targeting with the 1.4. I didn’t want to show my cards so I decline to let him know. He told me the two players he wanted (Bensen and Arrington), and wanted to see if he would be safe in getting one at the 1.5. I told them neither of them was my top pick, so he would be safe dropping down to the 1.5. As soon as their trade was posted, I started to get offers for the 1.4. Two teams initially gave me offers (one team didn’t indicate, but I assumed, and the other indicated for sure they wanted the player left that Frank wanted). After giving Frank the assurance he would be safe in moving down to the 1.5, I didn’t feel good about trading the 1.4 to someone who was going to take the player I basically assured he would be able to get. Yes, I could have played blood sport and taken the best deal I was offered. That’s just not the way I play fantasy football.

Philadelphia Freedom · April 27th, 2005, 12:34 PM

Another reason why the Frenzy and SAC'D are among the best if not the best leagues I have had the pleasure of being a part of.

BTW, a similar thing happened a few years ago when I traded up to grab the 1.1 (Charles Rogers). Not sure who the other party in that deal was but it was similar situation. Hope this works out better than that did for me;).

keepers · April 27th, 2005, 12:34 PM

Is this ever a happy trading bunch. As the only one who has held on to his pick so far I am feeling somewhat inadequate.

Nittany Dodgers · April 27th, 2005, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philadelphia Freedom

This same thing happened a few years ago when I trade up to grab Charlie Rogers. Not sure who the other party in that deal was but it was similar situation. Hope this works out better than that did for me;).

Well, I stayed away from the Detroit receiver this time.

keepers · April 27th, 2005, 12:48 PM

Ethics be damn, Brian must have wanted Williamson. Frank had to know that the RBs were going to be highly sought after in the first four picks. It is fine that he asked Brian if he was targeting one of them but once he decides to take the chance of trading down he is at risk that Brian may trade out of the pick.

Preds · April 27th, 2005, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keepers

Ethics be damn, Brian must have wanted Williamson. Frank had to know that the RBs were going to be highly sought after in the first four picks. It is fine that he asked Brian if he was targeting one of them but once he decides to take the chance of trading down he is at risk that Brian may trade out of the pick.

But Brian is a nice guy that's true to his word... me on the otherhand... :evilgrin

keepers · April 27th, 2005, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Preds

But Brian is a nice guy that's true to his word... me on the otherhand... :evilgrin

Brian would still be true to his word by trading out of the pick to another team.

Nittany Dodgers · April 27th, 2005, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keepers

Brian would still be true to his word by trading out of the pick to another team.

Unfortunately, when Frank and I were talking, the wording in my PM to him, when he asked if I would take either Benson or Arrington at 1.4 was "you would be guaranteed at least one of those two players."

Yes, I should have worded it differently, but after stating that, I don't think I would have been true to my word by trading out of the pick.

randilover · April 27th, 2005, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Yes, I should have worded it differently, but after stating that, I don't think I would have been true to my word by trading out of the pick.

Glad you're a man of your word. Kind of locked yourself in there (unintentionally, obviously). Glad you stuck with it.

Mutts · April 27th, 2005, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

Unfortunately, when Frank and I were talking, the wording in my PM to him, when he asked if I would take either Benson or Arrington at 1.4 was "you would be guaranteed at least one of those two players."

Yes, I should have worded it differently, but after stating that, I don't think I would have been true to my word by trading out of the pick.

Unbelievable - especially considering Frank mislead me by telling me he was after either a RB or WR by trading down to 1.5 (indicating to me that he wasn't consumed with getting Arrington). I guess the amazing concern for ethics wasn't shared by both parties in this trade.

Preds · April 27th, 2005, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutts

Unbelievable - especially considering Frank mislead me by telling me he was after either a RB or WR by trading down to 1.5 (indicating to me that he wasn't consumed with getting Arrington). I guess the amazing concern for ethics wasn't shared by both parties in this trade.

C'mon now, a little deceit has to be expected. I hvae no problem with how either of them handled it. I mighta been more ruthless, but then you all know how I can be! :evilgrin

Mutts · April 27th, 2005, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Preds

C'mon now, a little deceit has to be expected. I hvae no problem with how either of them handled it. I mighta been more ruthless, but then you all know how I can be! :evilgrin

Hey, I've got no problem with gamesmanship. Frank was just quite lucky to be able to play games and also find a trade partner who was willing to work in exactly the opposite way and be honest to a fault.

Nittany Dodgers · April 27th, 2005, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutts

Hey, I've got no problem with gamesmanship. Frank was just quite lucky to be able to play games and also find a trade partner who was willing to work in exactly the opposite way and be honest to a fault.

I'm confused as to your role in the situation. What conversations did you have with Frank, where it really mattered who he was or wasn't targeting?

Mutts · April 27th, 2005, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

I'm confused as to your role in the situation. What conversations did you have with Frank, where it really mattered who he was or wasn't targeting?

Its really not a big deal - Frank worked a great deal and you still got who you were targeting. I asked Frank yesterday who he was after and he said he had a RB and WR in mind. When you told me this morning that you were waiting to hear from Frank, I figured he wouldn't be too excited to make a move because obviously one of the 2 players he said he was targeting would be available at 1.5 Little did I know he had disclosed to you that he was really only focused on a RB. It only affected me because I waited till now to try and trade down my 1.6 because I thought there was a good chance I could move up.

In the end it didn't matter because I never had a shot to trade up.

Again, not a big deal at all... but :jealous (Though Braylon at 1.6 isn't looking bad at all!)

Nittany Dodgers · April 27th, 2005, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutts

Its really not a big deal - Frank worked a great deal and you still got who you were targeting. I asked Frank yesterday who he was after and he said he had a RB and WR in mind. When you told me this morning that you were waiting to hear from Frank, I figured he wouldn't be too excited to make a move because obviously one of the 2 players he said he was targeting would be available at 1.5 Little did I know he had disclosed to you that he was really only focused on a RB. It only affected me because I waited till now to try and trade down my 1.6 because I thought there was a good chance I could move up.

In the end it didn't matter because I never had a shot to trade up.

Again, not a big deal at all... but :jealous (Though Braylon at 1.6 isn't looking bad at all!)

Yeah, it's too bad I didn't get any inquiries on the 1.4 prior to my conversation with Frank. It could have prevented me from issuing the guarantee. Live and learn I guess (that's directed at me).

Flaxwless · April 27th, 2005, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mutts

Unbelievable - especially considering Frank mislead me by telling me he was after either a RB or WR by trading down to 1.5 (indicating to me that he wasn't consumed with getting Arrington). I guess the amazing concern for ethics wasn't shared by both parties in this trade.

Sorry if you felt mislead, but I didn't mean to. At 1.5 I liked Benson/Arrington or Mike Williams... but it just so happens I like JJ more a lot more. So when Brian offered me a chance to secure JJ, I took it, but had Brian traded the pick and someone took JJ, I wouldve gladly taken BMW.

I appreciate what Brian did, giving me a chance to trade up for the 1.4 to snag JJ, but I also would've understood had he traded that pick. In respect to what he did for me, I chose to pick right away instead of fielding offers for the selection.

Sorry Jake if you felt misled, but I was honest when I said at 1.5 I was targeting RB (Arrington) and WR (Williams) as those were the two players I was looking at.

and one last time, Thanks Brian.

Nittany Dodgers · April 27th, 2005, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flaxwless

and one last time, Thanks Brian.

:drinktoge

April 27th, 2005, 12:19 PM	#1
Flaxwless Feeding Frenzy Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Bay Area, California Posts: 6,050	Mountain Lions and Bloodsucker trade Insects send 1.5, 2.8, 3.3, 5.3 Mountain Lions send 1.4, 2.9, 3.4, 6.9? __________________ Bay Area Bloodsucking Insects - 1st EVER Feeding Frenzy Champion Bay Area Bloodsuckers 2008 SAC'D Champions - 2nd Worst to First in Year! 2011 SAC'D Champions - #5 seed, # 2 power rankings, #1 in the end!

April 27th, 2005, 12:19 PM	#2
Nittany Dodgers Feeding Frenzy Moderator Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Maplewood, MN Posts: 5,204	Re: Mountain Lions and Bloodsucker trade Confirmed. Explanation to be posted shortly.

April 27th, 2005, 12:31 PM	#6
Nittany Dodgers Feeding Frenzy Moderator Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Maplewood, MN Posts: 5,204	Re: Mountain Lions and Bloodsucker trade OK, here’s the story (I feel I owe one since I decline 3 better offers for the 1.4). Frank was working a trade with Matt to move down to the 1.5 from the 1.3. Frank wanted to know who I was targeting with the 1.4. I didn’t want to show my cards so I decline to let him know. He told me the two players he wanted (Bensen and Arrington), and wanted to see if he would be safe in getting one at the 1.5. I told them neither of them was my top pick, so he would be safe dropping down to the 1.5. As soon as their trade was posted, I started to get offers for the 1.4. Two teams initially gave me offers (one team didn’t indicate, but I assumed, and the other indicated for sure they wanted the player left that Frank wanted). After giving Frank the assurance he would be safe in moving down to the 1.5, I didn’t feel good about trading the 1.4 to someone who was going to take the player I basically assured he would be able to get. Yes, I could have played blood sport and taken the best deal I was offered. That’s just not the way I play fantasy football.

April 27th, 2005, 12:34 PM	#7
Philadelphia Freedom Feeding Frenzy Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Posts: 6,098	Re: Mountain Lions and Bloodsucker trade Another reason why the Frenzy and SAC'D are among the best if not the best leagues I have had the pleasure of being a part of. BTW, a similar thing happened a few years ago when I traded up to grab the 1.1 (Charles Rogers). Not sure who the other party in that deal was but it was similar situation. Hope this works out better than that did for me;).

April 27th, 2005, 12:34 PM	#8
keepers SAC'D Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 465	Re: Mountain Lions and Bloodsucker trade Is this ever a happy trading bunch. As the only one who has held on to his pick so far I am feeling somewhat inadequate.

April 27th, 2005, 12:48 PM	#10
keepers SAC'D Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 465	Re: Mountain Lions and Bloodsucker trade Ethics be damn, Brian must have wanted Williamson. Frank had to know that the RBs were going to be highly sought after in the first four picks. It is fine that he asked Brian if he was targeting one of them but once he decides to take the chance of trading down he is at risk that Brian may trade out of the pick.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)