I'm good with 2 minutes, as was mentioned earlier, if there is a guy being targeted, you best be on talking a "potential" trade up, "if" your guy is still there. I don't thing there will be many instances where, a team goes on the clock and BOOM there's a guy you just suddenly realize you want and start talking trade with 1 minute left on the pick time. I can tell you this, if I go on the clock and I haven't heard from someone about a potential trade, I will be making a pick. It's hard enough trying to make you pick decision, without fielding potential trade negotiations at the same time. If you do your homework, you should know who you are picking, I don't see how it should be any different with trades.
Looks like 2 minutes it is. Both co-commissioners agree. I defer the final decision to the Commissioner.
Lol with the trade of someone just picked up yesterday. Beach must have missed him. P.S. we should probably pin this thread instead of the draft thread.
Am I missing something? How does a trade get through that involves a guy trading Michael Thomas for Treadwell and a 3rd?
It was a 3 way trade that sent Langford, Jones and Davis to Kickass - Treadwell and a third to Bombers - Thomas and a 4th to Fishers. Is there an issue? Fort Kickass receive Jeremy Langford Chandler Jones Sean Davis from Fishers BOMBERS receive Laquon Treadwell from Fort Kickass 2017 3rd round pick #11 35th overall from Appalachian Fishers Appalachian Fishers receive Michael Thomas from BOMBERS 2017 4th round pick #4 40th overall from Fort Kickass
It is essentially a 2-part trade here. Kickass traded Treadwell and a 4th for 2 defenders and Langford. It seems steep but I won't argue that. But then Fishers trades Treadwell and a 3rd to Bombers for Thomas and. Even with preferences how can that work?
Everybody remember to sign up for SoCal's first annual suicide contest - http://live4sportnetwork.com/forumlist/viewtopic.php?id=8309
Nothing as long as we don't have to use the recent draft we had as a value reference. Which apparently we don't as learned through our last PM exchange. If that is so then there is no issue. It just seemed weird with the draft that happened and all. This trade would not have been cool on draft day.
Even if we did use it as a value reference it would have been my choice to overpay for Thomas. And what possible scenario has this trade going down on draft day, unless I'm sending Langford to KT for the #4 overall and selecting Thomas ahead of Treadwell to begin with? EDIT: I have to make a phone call. I'll be back in a few.
I wasn't talking about the 3-way trade. This trade is 2 separate trades by your team just put into one as you wouldn't have one without the other. All Bombers is doing is trading his #13 pick for #5 and a 3rd. If this happened at the draft how could that possibly been allowed? I mean you could just take Thomas at 5 and kept the 3rd. If your overpayment seems fine then that is fine. If anything it's weird because my argument is for helping you. You can like whatever player you want and decide values amongst you and your trade partner. It was just that on the outside and looking at the draft itself it seemed like a lot. But I guess training camps can change things as well. I have no problem with people having choices on who and what to trade for. It just seemed very strange essentially trading up in the draft but instead of giving picks he is receiving picks. No way that could fly in the draft but if it can at this point with draft values being irrelevant then I have no argument against it.
Couple things - These players are no longer draft picks. This trade doesn't happen on draft day unless KT takes Langford for the #4 overall and I select Thomas outright. However, if I had my original first round pick I would have given up a third to move up a couple spots to guarantee Michael was on my roster on draft day. I traded Langford, Davis and Jones along with moving back a half round to acquire Michael Thomas. Kickass traded Treadwell and a 4th to acquire Langford, Davis and Jones. Will traded Thomas to receive Treadwell and a third. There is no '2 trade' thing happening. I did not and would not have traded those 3 players and slid back a few picks in the draft to acquire Treadwell. My trade was to acquire Thomas. Kickass sent Treadwell to the Bombers and I iced it with the addition of the pick. If you go to trades on fleaflicker you can select up to 3 teams to make a trade. There was no second trade, only one trade happened. It's only an overpayment by your evaluation. No one was screwed over in making this deal happen. I honestly cannot understand why you have an issue with this trade.
I don't think you get what I was saying but it's moot. I accepted your explanation and got my answer. I'd rather not continue talking about it if it doesn't matter anymore.
EDIT: You know what, I changed my mind and if you no longer want to continue with the conversation that's fine. I've had a really fucked up day and I'm in the mood to argue so now is probably not the best time to discuss this. If you ever want to discuss it again we can pick up where we left off.
I said you gave me the reason already and it is "above board". Values aren't static even this close after the draft. I can accept that. What I'm saying now is you may not think there is no 2 trade thing happening but while it is a three-way trade it was really a two-part trade. Most 3-way trades are essentially one team getting something from one team and then trading that to another. That is two separate trades just being put together as one for simplicity, or because one trade wouldn't happen without the other. Bombers may have gotten Treadwell from Kickass but in following the details he really didn't deal with him at all. They both dealt with you one after the other. You could have done them separately and gotten the same result. That doesn't make anything weird btw. But the 2nd part of that trade was weird because of the reason I said before of a pick and higher drafted player in the last draft going to a team for a lower one. I think that is really weird and was wondering if it was legit to do. You said it was and pretty much said the values aren't the same anymore. That answered my question and the argument was over.
I think you're missing my point regarding what my trade actually was, but I don't see how you can put values on players post draft to influence trading. That makes no sense. Rosters are fluid post draft and player values are already moving prior to the preseason. It's not only impractical, but it is impossible to use those players draft positions to place value on them once they are on someone's roster. We would all have to have the exact same warboard to claim that someone's trade is unfair due to worth of player/pick. Is this closer to what you are trying to relay?
Close enough. But as I said a few times already you already answered that and I accepted it. But it's still a two-part trade (which isn't illegal or anything. More stubbornness that I want you to notice it). I honestly feel as if you think I still don't accept it and just want to end it. you DID answer my concern.
Eh, like I said, it's been a rough day. I may be looking to go a few rounds. I'm looking at it from what I gave up personally to acquire Thomas. I doubt we can agree on it because I don't view Treadwell as being on my roster. The trade doesn't happen without my acquiring Michael and I know what I paid for him. I don't like letting things between friends hang out there. I got the impression you were upset by what I went on and it irritated me to a degree but like I said, it could just be on me today. If I came off like a dick that was not my intention. I just honestly can't see an issue with it.
All I wanted to do is point out it was weird and may have gone under the radar in a 3-team trade. You can't say it doesn't look weird on the outside, especially just after the draft. I just wanted to make sure it was okay. Also if I had any agenda I would have stfu since if I wanted to hinder someone it would be you instead of the other team. I just wanted to clear up the trade situation for now and future reference.
