Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems
Log In Create Account

Grade my superstar trade

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Fantasy Sports ▸ Grade my superstar trade
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 20, 2012 2:38 PM
Want your opinions

I give up:

Jay Cutler and Arian Foster

I get:

Aaron Rodgers and Jamaal Charles

Rest of my team:

RB: T-Rich
RB: S-Jax
WR: Percy Harvin
WR: Stevie Johnson
TE: Fleener

Bench:
Brandon LLoyd
Brandon Lafell
Pierre Garcon
Ben Tate
Malcom Floyd
Russell Wilson
Sep 20, 2012 2:38pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Sep 20, 2012 3:01 PM
I think you lost. I would have done that trade with one of your other RBs and Cutler.

Rodgers has not been that great yet this year and Charles has sucked. If you gave up TRich and Cutler I'd say you won a close one. You lost big time in my opinion.

Foster is one of the only 3 "must start every week" backs. You have to be getting something HUGE to give him up.
Sep 20, 2012 3:01pm
Raw Dawgin' it's avatar

Raw Dawgin' it

Just Ain't Care

11,466 posts
Sep 20, 2012 3:21 PM
Dumb - i give it a C
Sep 20, 2012 3:21pm
Rotinaj's avatar

Rotinaj

Senior Member

7,699 posts
Sep 20, 2012 3:32 PM
Cutler and Charles have both been very disappointing this season. Pretty much a foster for Rodgers trade. I probably wouldn't have done it but its not terrible.
Sep 20, 2012 3:32pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 20, 2012 4:03 PM
jmog;1276137 wrote: Foster is one of the only 3 "must start every week" backs.
And Aaron Rodgers led the league I'm in in points last year, I'd say that qualifies as a must start. Plus I still have Tate if/when Foster goes down. Even without that, Tate had 24 points last week.
jmog;1276137 wrote:You have to be getting something HUGE to give him up.

So Aaron Rodgers isn't huge. K. Duly noted.
Sep 20, 2012 4:03pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 20, 2012 4:06 PM
Rotinaj;1276171 wrote:Cutler and Charles have both been very disappointing this season. Pretty much a foster for Rodgers trade. I probably wouldn't have done it but its not terrible.
I needed a QB really badly. I'm convinced that I'm fine with T-rich, S-Jax, Tate, Charles and my set of WRs as long as Rodgers puts up 20+ every week. But Cutler almost cost me this week after the rest of my team went off (and S-Jax getting pulled for showing frustration).
Sep 20, 2012 4:06pm
gorocks99's avatar

gorocks99

Senior Member

10,760 posts
Sep 20, 2012 4:13 PM
lhslep134;1276201 wrote:I needed a QB really badly. I'm convinced that I'm fine with T-rich, S-Jax, Tate, Charles and my set of WRs as long as Rodgers puts up 20+ every week. But Cutler almost cost me this week after the rest of my team went off (and S-Jax getting pulled for showing frustration).
Rodgers didn't get to 20+ last week, so be careful. If he can get back to 25 points a week, like last year, I think you should be in OK shape. But Charles is exhibiting no signs of returning to form, T-Rich is still somewhat unproven, and SJax has the injury bug. Foster was a sure thing in a sea of question marks at RB for you. I think it could work in your favor, but I'm not convinced it will.
Sep 20, 2012 4:13pm
Laley23's avatar

Laley23

GOAT

29,506 posts
Sep 20, 2012 4:21 PM
Dont like it, based on the rest of your team. Lots of questions. Foster was the most sure thing, even more than Rodgers.

It could work out very well though, but its a risk.
Sep 20, 2012 4:21pm
Rotinaj's avatar

Rotinaj

Senior Member

7,699 posts
Sep 20, 2012 4:25 PM
gorocks99;1276205 wrote:Rodgers didn't get to 20+ last week, so be careful. If he can get back to 25 points a week, like last year, I think you should be in OK shape. But Charles is exhibiting no signs of returning to form, T-Rich is still somewhat unproven, and SJax has the injury bug. Foster was a sure thing in a sea of question marks at RB for you. I think it could work in your favor, but I'm not convinced it will.
Sjax has the injury bug but foster is a sure thing?
Sep 20, 2012 4:25pm
Iliketurtles's avatar

Iliketurtles

Senior Member

8,191 posts
Sep 20, 2012 4:34 PM
Count me in as another who doesn't like it. I'm wondering what the scoring is like in your league though? If Charles ever gets back to how he was 2 years ago then yeah you're trade will be a good one but I don't see that happening lol.
Sep 20, 2012 4:34pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Sep 20, 2012 4:46 PM
lhslep134;1276198 wrote:And Aaron Rodgers led the league I'm in in points last year, I'd say that qualifies as a must start. Plus I still have Tate if/when Foster goes down. Even without that, Tate had 24 points last week.




So Aaron Rodgers isn't huge. K. Duly noted.
Think about it, if Rodgers was a better option than Foster, wouldn't Rodgers go higher than Foster in fantasy drafts? On top of that, after 2 games Foster has been as expected and Rodgers has been a little "down" compared to last year.

You ask a question and pretty much everyone is agreeing with me, but if you want to keep arguing have at it.

Unless your league is a start 2 QB league or gives 6 pts per passing TD (most leagues are 3 or 4) then I truly feel you could have made the same trade but gave away TRICH or SJAX instead of Foster.

Maybe in that trade you take a little lower RB than Charles but your starting lineup is much better.
Sep 20, 2012 4:46pm
Laley23's avatar

Laley23

GOAT

29,506 posts
Sep 20, 2012 5:13 PM
Rotinaj;1276218 wrote:Sjax has the injury bug but foster is a sure thing?
I dont think so, no. Last year he missed 2 games early with injury and the last game cause they had clinched. Per game (so average, not total for the year) he was the #1 back and was BETTER than his 2010 breakout season. Foster (I dont wanna jinx him lol) is the most trusted player in fantasy football, imo.

Jackson has always had injury issues. Foster has missed 2 games. in his career (again, not counting 2009 before he was on peoples radar).
Sep 20, 2012 5:13pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 20, 2012 8:36 PM
jmog;1276226 wrote:Think about it, if Rodgers was a better option than Foster, wouldn't Rodgers go higher than Foster in fantasy drafts? On top of that, after 2 games Foster has been as expected and Rodgers has been a little "down" compared to last year.

I'm not arguing anyone who says Foster is better than Rodgers because I agree. I'm arguing with you because you say if I'm going to trade Foster I need to get something huge, you're implying that Rodgers isn't huge.
Sep 20, 2012 8:36pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 20, 2012 8:42 PM
Laley23;1276212 wrote:Dont like it, based on the rest of your team. Lots of questions. Foster was the most sure thing, even more than Rodgers.

It could work out very well though, but its a risk.
Totally agree with this post.

My thought process: Foster/Rodgers are sure things. I'd rather take the risk at a position where I already have two starters (RB), and hope that he could work his way back to anyone of value, than take a weekly risk of having Cutler at QB. I think Cutler will put up top 10 year end numbers, but Rodgers doesn't have any 2.14 weeks, and Cutler's almost cost me.

Call it the "owner gets pissed off at a player so trades him in a questionable blockbuster" move.
Sep 20, 2012 8:42pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Sep 20, 2012 9:03 PM
lhslep134;1276300 wrote:Totally agree with this post.

My thought process: Foster/Rodgers are sure things. I'd rather take the risk at a position where I already have two starters (RB), and hope that he could work his way back to anyone of value, than take a weekly risk of having Cutler at QB. I think Cutler will put up top 10 year end numbers, but Rodgers doesn't have any 2.14 weeks, and Cutler's almost cost me.

Call it the "owner gets pissed off at a player so trades him in a questionable blockbuster" move.
The guy who now owns Foster probably had bad RBs correct (since he took Rodgers in the 1st)? I bet he would have taken the same deal for Cutler and SJax or TRich (especially after Richardson's game last week).

All I have said, the whole time, is that you gave up too much.

I'll make it easier to understand.

After 2 games in standard scoring Rodgers has scored 25.98 pts, Cutler has scored 15.36. So at QB you gained just over 10 pts (or 5 pts per game).

Foster has scored 40.2 pts and Charles has scored 10.9, so at RB you nearly gave up 30 pts or 15 pts per game.

I know its only 2 weeks and a small sample size, but you gave up 10 pts per game in this trade, of course the other guy is extremely happy right now.
Sep 20, 2012 9:03pm
S

sportchampps

Senior Member

7,361 posts
Sep 20, 2012 9:26 PM
I like it only because I think Charles will pick it up over the next few weeks.
Sep 20, 2012 9:26pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 20, 2012 9:38 PM
jmog;1276317 wrote:The guy who now owns Foster probably had bad RBs correct (since he took Rodgers in the 1st)? I bet he would have taken the same deal for Cutler and SJax or TRich (especially after Richardson's game last week).

All I have said, the whole time, is that you gave up too much.

I'll make it easier to understand.

After 2 games in standard scoring Rodgers has scored 25.98 pts, Cutler has scored 15.36. So at QB you gained just over 10 pts (or 5 pts per game).

Foster has scored 40.2 pts and Charles has scored 10.9, so at RB you nearly gave up 30 pts or 15 pts per game.

I know its only 2 weeks and a small sample size, but you gave up 10 pts per game in this trade, of course the other guy is extremely happy right now.
You're assuming I'm putting Charles into my lineup. I explicitly said that in my thought process I'm not. Charles is on my bench. I'll be moving T-Rich from the flex and inserting Lloyd (or Garcon when healthy), or Malcom Floyd (28.5 pts) into the flex.

I'm not downgrading from Foster to Charles, I'm upgrading from Cutler to Rodgers and losing Foster and inserting one of my WRs into the flex.

So your math is wrong.
Sep 20, 2012 9:38pm
hasbeen's avatar

hasbeen

Excuse me, Flo?

6,504 posts
Sep 20, 2012 9:47 PM
lhslep134;1276334 wrote:You're assuming I'm putting Charles into my lineup. I explicitly said that in my thought process I'm not. Charles is on my bench. I'll be moving T-Rich from the flex and inserting Lloyd (or Garcon when healthy), or Malcom Floyd (28.5 pts) into the flex.

I'm not downgrading from Foster to Charles, I'm upgrading from Cutler to Rodgers and losing Foster and inserting one of my WRs into the flex.

So your math is wrong.

Replacing foster with Rodgers still has you losing ~7.5 points per game. The point stands you possibly could have upgraded your QB without losing the #1 or 2 fantasy RB.
Sep 20, 2012 9:47pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Sep 20, 2012 11:08 PM
lhslep134;1276334 wrote:You're assuming I'm putting Charles into my lineup. I explicitly said that in my thought process I'm not. Charles is on my bench. I'll be moving T-Rich from the flex and inserting Lloyd (or Garcon when healthy), or Malcom Floyd (28.5 pts) into the flex.

I'm not downgrading from Foster to Charles, I'm upgrading from Cutler to Rodgers and losing Foster and inserting one of my WRs into the flex.

So your math is wrong.
So, you are giving up a 20+ ppg RB and moving to a WR that in standard scoring...

Floyd has 23.5 pts (11.75 ppg)
Lloyd has 12.9 pts (6.45 ppg).

So you still only gain 5 ppg at QB and lose 9-14 in the Foster to a WR at flex move.

So yes, my math is correct, you still are behind in the trade and due to moving up all your other guys you actually weaked your bench for bye weeks.

For those that think Charles is in for a comeback...he's in RBBC hell right now, 3 RBs fighting for carries and is still less than 1 year from a torn ACL.
Sep 20, 2012 11:08pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Sep 20, 2012 11:08 PM
hasbeen;1276340 wrote:Replacing foster with Rodgers still has you losing ~7.5 points per game. The point stands you possibly could have upgraded your QB without losing the #1 or 2 fantasy RB.
Exactly my point, truly could have made the same trade giving up TRich or SJax.
Sep 20, 2012 11:08pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 21, 2012 10:35 AM
jmog;1276397 wrote:Exactly my point, truly could have made the same trade giving up TRich or SJax.
So now you're an expert on the people in my league that I have to trade with? If I could have gotten a good QB giving up Cutler and S-Jax I would have. But NO one in my league wanted Cutler, for the same reason I don't, so I had to give someone up if I wanted to get a good QB.
Sep 21, 2012 10:35am
G

Gblock

Sep 21, 2012 10:42 AM
I dont think it was a good trade...there is a reason he wants to give up rodgers. cutler will end up doing fine. he had 1 bad game. he blew up in week 1. you seem to be panicking and are assuming rodgers is going to throw 5 tds a game like last year, but its like anything else when teams get enough tape on you they find ways to take away what you like to do. I have rodgers and if i had to go back i would have taken foster or ray rice
Sep 21, 2012 10:42am
Rotinaj's avatar

Rotinaj

Senior Member

7,699 posts
Sep 21, 2012 12:29 PM
jmog;1276317 wrote:The guy who now owns Foster probably had bad RBs correct (since he took Rodgers in the 1st)? I bet he would have taken the same deal for Cutler and SJax or TRich (especially after Richardson's game last week).

All I have said, the whole time, is that you gave up too much.

I'll make it easier to understand.

After 2 games in standard scoring Rodgers has scored 25.98 pts, Cutler has scored 15.36. So at QB you gained just over 10 pts (or 5 pts per game).

Foster has scored 40.2 pts and Charles has scored 10.9, so at RB you nearly gave up 30 pts or 15 pts per game.

I know its only 2 weeks and a small sample size, but you gave up 10 pts per game in this trade, of course the other guy is extremely happy right now.
Nobody would ever trade Rodgers Charles for cutler trich or sjax. Unless they are complete morons. It's been 2 weeks, whatever math you're using doesn't matter. Sample size is MUCH 2 small. It could be a good trade or a bad 1, who knows. It's certainly not as bad as you think it is.
Sep 21, 2012 12:29pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Sep 21, 2012 1:24 PM
Gblock;1276609 wrote:cutler will end up doing fine.
I think you missed my post where I said I think Cutler will put up top 10 year end numbers.

I made the trade because I can't win a fantasy championship with Cutler. There is way too high of a chance that he has a sh*tty ass game in week 15 or 16.
Sep 21, 2012 1:24pm
G

Gblock

Sep 21, 2012 1:31 PM
lhslep134;1276772 wrote:I think you missed my post where I said I think Cutler will put up top 10 year end numbers.

I made the trade because I can't win a fantasy championship with Cutler. There is way too high of a chance that he has a sh*tty ass game in week 15 or 16.
if you really believe that then that makes the trade really bad...you gave up the top running back in fantasy to move up a few spots on the quarterback rankings if rodgers ends up out of the top 4 qb's
Sep 21, 2012 1:31pm