TB/KC

[Deleted]

seriously... guys. I think TAB is getting Veto happy. Cards say that Spiller can't stay healthy but he's missed 3 games in 4 years... the year before last he averaged 6 YPC on over 200 carries and had over 1700 yds. He could easily turn things around this year and be worth a FT next year or a TT and he'd net 2 1sts. And whether you guys like it or not, Quinn has alot of value. He could easily net a 1st rounder or more from SOMEONE in this league. Spiller had 1700 yds on 250 touches in 2012... Who's to say he doesn't get 300 touches and 2000 yds this year? And who's to say Quinn doesn't match his production from last year? These are not far fetched ideas by any means... and I think the people that vetoed this trade will look very bad if that happens.

I didn't see the Packer's trade as really veto-able either besides for the fact that the Packers is a savvy veteran owner and KC was brand new. Problem is, this trade is between 2 new owners so I think it should be passed. It's more cut and dry when there are picks involved imo... but this trade is mostly just players... the 2 3rds are just a small throw in.

[Deleted]

Mar 1, 2014 18:23:38 GMT @goebel02 said:

seriously... guys. I think TAB is getting Veto happy. Cards say that Spiller can't stay healthy but he's missed 3 games in 4 years... the year before last he averaged 6 YPC on over 200 carries and had over 1700 yds. He could easily turn things around this year and be worth a FT next year or a TT and he'd net 2 1sts. And whether you guys like it or not, Quinn has alot of value. He could easily net a 1st rounder or more from SOMEONE in this league. Spiller had 1700 yds on 250 touches in 2012... Who's to say he doesn't get 300 touches and 2000 yds this year? And who's to say Quinn doesn't match his production from last year? These are not far fetched ideas by any means... and I think the people that vetoed this trade will look very bad if that happens.

I didn't see the Packer's trade as really veto-able either besides for the fact that the Packers is a savvy veteran owner and KC was brand new. Problem is, this trade is between 2 new owners so I think it should be passed. It's more cut and dry when there are picks involved imo... but this trade is mostly just players... the 2 3rds are just a small throw in.

I think they're right to veto its a bad trade. Spiller is banged up every year, I don't think he's ever had a 100% healthy year. Quinn is good but him and a one year back that has injury issues isn't enough for McCoy a top 3 RB. And everyone keeps saying he can FT Spiller but TB said he did this for cap, no one wants cap for one year and then next year he'll end up with less than this year because of the tag price. 

[Chiefs GM (Anthony)]

I have to
Agree with Oakland I didn't think mine and packs was any where close to a vetoable trade and I once again don't think this one is. Spiller battled an injury all year and was still the 25th beat back that's a solid rb2. He's not injury prone or he would of sat those games. I believe this coming year, and you guys may think I'm
Crazy but I think he will be in that 10-15 range for running backs. That's what I value spiller as, and I value Quinn as a top 3 Dl whose young and cheap . It seems these bigger blockbuster deals should just be avoided all together which I don't think is right. Both owners in both the trades agreed that the deal made sense for there teams, and for both to be shut down potentially makes things tough

[Deleted]

I will say I think the KC/GB trade should have passed but I just don't think this one should.

[Deleted]

Wow...with the passing of this trade...it gives even more reason why the KC/GB trade should have passed. If not for one lucky afternoon (how long until he does it again) against the Raiders when Charles scored 70 points, McCoy and Charles are relatively the same back in fantasy points. McCoy is younger and has an additional year under contract than Charles in our league. Too offset the salary, two first round picks and two players that averaged 24 points per game were also offered.

McCoy (26.381 pts / week) signed thru 2016 vs Charles (31.250 pts / week) signed thru 2015
Spiller (13.363 pts /week) signed thru 2014 vs Rudolph (11.037 pts /week) signed thru 2015
Quinn (16.125 pts /week) signed thru 2015 vs Ellerbe (13.267 pts /week) signed thru 2015
two third round picks vs two first round picks

[Deleted]

Although my trade passed, I'm in agreement with the Packers in that our trades are relativity equal, with his possibly being the better trade depending how you value Spiller

[Deleted]

Mar 4, 2014 0:17:42 GMT @wizofozaukee said:

Wow...with the passing of this trade...it gives even more reason why the KC/GB trade should have passed. If not for one lucky afternoon (how long until he does it again) against the Raiders when Charles scored 70 points, McCoy and Charles are relatively the same back in fantasy points. McCoy is younger and has an additional year under contract than Charles in our league. Too offset the salary, two first round picks and two players that averaged 24 points per game were also offered.

McCoy (26.381 pts / week) signed thru 2016 vs Charles (31.250 pts / week) signed thru 2015
Spiller (13.363 pts /week) signed thru 2014 vs Rudolph (11.037 pts /week) signed thru 2015
Quinn (16.125 pts /week) signed thru 2015 vs Ellerbe (13.267 pts /week) signed thru 2015
two third round picks vs two first round picks

Spiller and Rudolph aren't even close in value regardless of the points.

[Deleted]

Mar 4, 2014 13:05:52 GMT @jags said:

Mar 4, 2014 0:17:42 GMT @wizofozaukee said:

Wow...with the passing of this trade...it gives even more reason why the KC/GB trade should have passed. If not for one lucky afternoon (how long until he does it again) against the Raiders when Charles scored 70 points, McCoy and Charles are relatively the same back in fantasy points. McCoy is younger and has an additional year under contract than Charles in our league. Too offset the salary, two first round picks and two players that averaged 24 points per game were also offered.

McCoy (26.381 pts / week) signed thru 2016 vs Charles (31.250 pts / week) signed thru 2015
Spiller (13.363 pts /week) signed thru 2014 vs Rudolph (11.037 pts /week) signed thru 2015
Quinn (16.125 pts /week) signed thru 2015 vs Ellerbe (13.267 pts /week) signed thru 2015
two third round picks vs two first round picks

Spiller and Rudolph aren't even close in value regardless of the points.

It depends on who is valuing them my friend. Rudolph is only 24 years old. As soon as Norv Turner was named the OC in Minnesota, I magically received multiple inquiries on the availability of Rudolph. Turner loves to utilize the tight ends in his offenses and Rudolph is primed for a good year.

[Deleted]

Mar 4, 2014 18:04:58 GMT @wizofozaukee said:

Mar 4, 2014 13:05:52 GMT @jags said:

Spiller and Rudolph aren't even close in value regardless of the points.

It depends on who is valuing them my friend. Rudolph is only 24 years old. As soon as Norv Turner was named the OC in Minnesota, I magically received multiple inquiries on the availability of Rudolph. Turner loves to utilize the tight ends in his offenses and Rudolph is primed for a good year.

I agree... I'd take Spiller any day of the week over Rudolph, even with Norv. Also you can't compare ppg between different positions... especially DL vs LB. A DL scoring 16 ppg is insane... a LB scoring 16 ppg is solid. I'm not saying Rudolph doesn't have value, but RBs are just a scarcity and Spiller has immense potential. I think both players have TE1/RB1 potential, but a RB1 is worth much more than a TE1.