As someone who has consistently downgraded Vick because of injuries, I think you’re too dismissive of the injury risk. It isn’t simply counting how many games a guy lost to injury over his career, but rather a projection of what to expect coming up this year. Vick fails in the sense that his style of play has a much, much higher risk of injury than Matthew Stafford (or almost any other QB). Vick ran the ball 76 times last year, 100 the year before that, and has over 700 carries in his career. By simple numbers, that means he’s getting tackled roughly 50 more times a year or almost 500 times more than Stafford (giving him some credit for getting out of bounds or sliding), who has 56 carries his entire career. And when you combine those hits with his slight frame (he’s 6 feet, 215 lbs compared to Stafford’s 6’3" 232) and age (32 to Staffords 24), he’s clearly more of a risk to suffer an injury than Stafford is.
That’s not to say he will get injured (I think he will), or that Stafford won’t. It’s simply acknowledging that he is at a higher risk of injury. I completely understand if you think that risk is acceptable, you obviously do. But I think it’s silly to ignore it completely.
The trade doesn’t make sense for this week. However, I just picked up Cedric Benson,I’m also very high on Jacquizz Rodgers, as I think Turner will take a back seat as the season goes on.
I’m very bullish on Cutler, Thursday’s game as a huge exception. I’d much rather have him than Freeman, who I dropped.
I think I just need to switch to a full on Baltimore team. They’re the only ones putting up decent points for me (unfortunately Jacoby Jones is on my bench)
I don’t know if anyone else in the league thinks the trade was league-breaking, but if I have to I can retroactively throw in McGahee or Greene or something if that’ll make everyone feel better.
Keep in mind that’s retrospect - CJ Spiller is not some great proven commodity, and it was unclear if he just had one big fluke game at the time.
Whooo…
I can’t say it’s league-breaking, but it doesn’t make me feel great about the prospects of my team.
However, we’ve been clear for a few years now that any trade that can be rammed through, is good enough, so good enough, and congratulations on your early lead.
I didn’t “ram it through” really - I only shaved a few hours off the natural 48 hour period since the trade was agreed to Friday afternoon. If there were serious objections, we could’ve debated the merits of the trade, that’s how this thing works.
But yeah, the league essentially has a history of being hands-off with trades. No one here is colluding or deliberately tanking, so we let people do what they want even if it strikes us as a bad trade. In fact, I think in all of the 20ish league-years of the various SDMB leagues, we’ve only ever mustered up support for objecting to one or two trades - one was almost nonsensical (in the dynasty league involving a mediocre defense for another mediocre defense + 2 players with potential), and I want to say we vetoed another one at some point but I can’t remember the specifics - I remember the David Carr for Steven Jackson trade of '06(?) going through despite being pretty ridiculous - it was at that point, early on, that we pretty much figured out we’d be allowing anything.
That said, I’m always willing to go the extra mile and concede things that I have no business conceding in order to avoid the possible look of anything not being legit - I always err on the side of hurting myself because the last thing I want is for anyone to think I’m abusing being the commish/organizer. I don’t know how that would apply in that case - except if you thought I used the commish approval on trades to my advantage - but it’s consistent that we’ve operated this way for years now. Had there been serious objection (Jules tends to gripe about every single trade I make - I can look up the posts if you want proof - so I interpreted it as griping rather than a formal objection/review) I’d have held off on it, or possibly retroactively reversed it.
That said, I’m willing to retroactively throw Shonn Greene into the trade so that it turns into something that I don’t think anyone could seriously object to. I don’t have to do this, but as I said I’m willing to go the extra mile to make sure no one could possibly look at anything I’ve done as anything but legit.
No way. We’re big boys who make big boy trades and Spiller for Cutler wasn’t something I would do, it was a valid trade and there’s no real reason to undo it. Unless I find out that you released dale’s mother from your basement or your giving him sexual favors with your loveseat, then I might have a problem.