Bills/Bucs Reworked

[Deleted]

Bills give
Alex Smith $3,300,000
1.18
Bucs Give
Vincent Jackson $9,500,000 2016
Ryan Fitzpatrick $1,000,000 2015
2015 Texans Third Roujd Pick
We reworked this deal. I feel trading V-Jax for a first is just what I was looking for and I get a QB.

[Deleted]

Bucs said

I don't see how this can be vetoed. If he's supposed to give more for Jackson and I'm supposed to give more for Smith doesn't that balance out? I've been shopping him for months and this was the best offer I got. Considering guys like Maclij and golden Tate went for $5M+ Jackson's salary isn't that ridiculous.

Ok, I had to post this and would like to ask for a clarification from TAB here, because what the Bucs said is right on the money.

2 of the 3 vetos specifically say that V-Jax is worth more than the Bills are giving, and in the SAME sentence, they say that Bills are giving up a better QB, and offer no other explanation.

Wha-?

I agree with ya Bucs, thats a complete contridiction, and should make the trade balanced.

Personally, I saw nothing at all that would upset the balance of the league in this trade, it seems to me it boils down to how people value V-Jax. Sorry for venting, but this TAB nitpicking opinions, instead of simply avoiding collusion and way overbalanced trades really gets on my nerves and makes me glad I'm no longer a part of it.

[Deleted]

I agree 110%, add into the fact that our dear commissioner Laura's explanation made no sense.....Vjax is worth more and he's giving a better QB is what we said when that clearly isn't the case lol

[Deleted]

Exactly. I tried to get more for V-Jax but no one would give me more than what I got.

[Deleted]

I'm not sure vjax is worth 1.18 at that price and contract length. He's getting old and will not be worth 9.5m in a year or two. And Smith is vastly superior to fitzmagic...

[Deleted]

I understand if you think 1.18 is too much cuz of his price but people are saying that he's worth more. If he's worth more than the 1.18 I will gladly accept an offer for him. Also people are saying he's overpriced. While he is expensive, he's a top 15 reciever and guys like Golden Tate Anquan Boldin Jeremy Maclin and Eric Defker were just signed for $5-6 mil. So although Jackson is overpriced, it's not by much. Also the explanation that V-Jax is worth more than the 1.18 and that I got the better QB makes no sense. That was the whole point of the trade! I have up V-Jax for less and got Smith to balance it out.

[Deleted]

Look I know I'm not very active and all but that shouldn't be a reason why the trade isn't approved. I want to build around WR and trading for Jackson and signing Decker is how I wanted to do this. Giving the 18th overall pick for a proven reciever like Jackson is even a little underpaying in my opinion. He wanted a QB so I took Fitzpatrick (who is going to start in Houston, who else will start Tom Savage?) and gave Smith. Smith expires next year for both me and the Chiefs so his future is uncertain. To basically get a starter for this year and get a late pick for him was fine with me.

[Deleted]

Also this doesn't upset the balance of our league. If anything I think the trade for the 1.01 is worse than this and it got approved 3-1. He got a late 2nd, two mid to late first and two so-so defensive players while giving up the number one overall pick and a starting QB? How is that approved 3-1 and this trade is vetoed?

[Deleted]

I don't get it either personally, the owners both want to do it and the deal isn't out of whack. Heck Fitzy might score just as much as alex smith this year anyway.

[Deleted]

I thought it was passable thats why i voted that way.

[Deleted]

I thought Houston still had a young QB named Case Keenum there that started the last half of the season last year? Fitzpatrick hasnt been able to hold onto a starting QB gig in 2yrs. VJax is def NOT worth 1.18 with a draft this heavy in WR talent. I would much rather get a very good rookie signed for FIVE years and about 7.5M LESS than VJax. Also, KC LOVES ASmith so that part is way off.

I also do agree that that trade for the #1 pick was awful and passed rather easily.

[Deleted]

It is impossible to veto this deal if the deal for the first overall pick was approved. No consistency with the TC if otherwise.

[Deleted]

I dont think its impossible as "new" owners have always been given a shorter leash in initial trades. Is it completely right? Probably no, but it is for the protection of some teams as there have been circumstances where some new owners make terrible trades right off the bat, realize their dreadful mistakes and bail leaving the team in shambles for another newbie to try and clean up. Thats why there is the 7day trade rule, which im sure gets ignored all the time.

The consistency comes when there are the same 5-6 people voting and making decisions on trades and league order. There seems to be change in the TAB EVERY year since the league started.

[Deleted]

I think the new trade is even worse than this one...

[Deleted]

If Keenum was going to start O'brian wouldn't have brought in Fitzpatrick. It's not like Keenum looked great last year either. Fitzpatrick looked better than him last year. And Raiders why is the new trade worse than the old one?