FF Q

Travis · 06-09-2003, 10:17 AM

Okay, I have a semi quandry on my hands right now. In the keeper league that I'm a part of (and consider my 'biggest' FF league of the year), we're encouraged to make off season moves as doing so results in being able to keep an extra player that was acquired through trade.

Now I currently have Holt, D. Jackson, Stallworth and Galloway as active wideouts, with David Boston on IR.

We get to keep 4 players as a base (which will be McNabb, S. Alexander, Holmes and a WR from the aforementioned list). I'm looking to deal for Koren Robinson to be my extra keeper for this season, but really don't know what WR to keep from my current team (Holt and Boston are my top 2, but Stallworth is an interesting spot too). Needless to say, I need some trade fodder, so any suggestions are welcomed.

Team is as follows:

QB: McNabb, T. Green
RB: S. Alexander, Holmes, Barber
WR: Holt, Boston, Galloway, D. Jackson, Stallworth
TE: Franks, A. Crumpler
K: Edinger, M. Gramatica
D/ST: St. Louis, Seattle

Fritz · 06-09-2003, 11:40 AM

holmes may be a good guy to dangle, if there are people who would bite

scooper · 06-09-2003, 11:49 AM

I'd want more than K. Robinson for Holmes, though. Can draft picks be included as well?

Travis · 06-09-2003, 12:32 PM

Well, I'm leaning towards keeping Holmes, as I really think he'll be back in top form, and really, I don't expect a big drop in his numbers. Maybe a few less TD's as I think Gonzales will pick it up this year, but I digress.

Basically, I'd keep Boston and Holt as my lineup is, but I can only keep 4 players if I don't make a trade. To keep a 5th player, it has to be somebody I acquired through a trade, so I'll be including either Holt or Boston in any deal I propose for Robinson.

ie: Green, Boston and Jackson for Robinson and a 2nd rounder or something like that. I have no use for any other players, so if I package deal, I'll be looking for extra picks, but it could end up being a Holt or Boston straight up for Robinson proposal if they don't need any 'extra' players.

scooper · 06-09-2003, 12:38 PM

So if you trade Holt or Boston for Robinson, you can keep whichever one is leftover AND Robinson? Or on the other hand, without a trade, you only get to keep one of Holt/Boston? In that case, I would consider a straight up trade as otherwise, you would have to cut the other anyway. If you feel keeping that fifth player strengthens your roster, go for it.

Under your rules, that Green/Boston/Jackson trade does not look bad, especially if you can get something of value with that second rounder.

Your rules are unique. They definately make things interesting.

Travis · 06-09-2003, 12:40 PM

Yeah, you've got the idea of it. The rule was brought into the league to promote interaction among the owner's of the league, so that instead of just cutting guys and looking to get them back in the 1st round, you can trade and have a (hopefully) stronger team.

So yes, at most I can keep Holt or Boston, then Robinson on top of that if I can acquire him for some variety of my other players.

Samdari · 06-09-2003, 01:40 PM

Travis,

I would seriously consider trading Holmes for Koren Robinson if I were you. If your options are

Holmes/McNabb/Alexander/Boston (or Holt)

or

Barber/McNabb/Alexander/Robinson/Boston (or Holt)

I would take the second one every time.

To pick up an extra player of Robinson's caliber without giving up a spot in your draft, and still keep two stud RBs would be a coup of huge proportions. FYI, having recently gone through a large draft, I read a lot of fantasy football literature, and Robinson was thought of as a top 5 WR by many, and a top 10 by virtually all.

I guess to be fair, I'd need to know more about the scoring system, but I actually think Barber is more valuable than any of your current wideouts. If you are really committed to Holmes, then offer Barber for Robinson. Unless the guy has stud RBs already, Barber would improve most teams.

Travis · 06-09-2003, 05:25 PM

Here's the possibly options I'm looking at, then what they'd be with Holmes thrown in for the trade.

Just for arguement's sake, let's say I can get Koren Robinson for David Boston.

My keeper list would look like this:

McNabb, Alexander, Holmes, Holt, Robinson

If I were to throw Holmes in the deal, then I'd be left with:

McNabb, Alexander, Barber, Holt or Boston, Robinson

Then I'd either have to cut Barber and keep 3 WR's, or cut one of Holt or Boston.

Really, the entire situation as far as I can tell is this, who's going to be better next year, Boston or Holt, as I think I can package one or the other to get Robinson. If I trade Holmes, then I weaken myself at RB (as I'd rather keep a Boston/Holt/Robinson combination and cut Barber instead of losing Holt or Boston for nothing).

Vince · 06-09-2003, 06:01 PM

If you're just going to cut him anyways, why not Boston + Barber for Robinson? I just don't know about the other person's willingness to take the deal in an x-for-1 scenario, because like someone pointed out, someone has to be cut.

Travis · 06-09-2003, 06:03 PM

That's my basic plan, but what I'm basically throwing out for discussion is for somebody to convince me on who's going to have the better year/career from here on out, Boston or Holt? As it'll be one of those two that I'll have to trade away or cut anyways.

And yes, if possible, I'll package up Trent Green, Stallworth, Jackson and/or Barber to try and pick up an extra pick or two in the earlier rounds.

TroyF · 06-09-2003, 06:17 PM

Better year and career for Boston vs. Holt?

Holt in a <3beat.

Better offensive system. He's been durable. Never even a hint of off the field trouble that I'm aware of. Better hands.

I know Boston has the potential to make my comments look stupid. . . but I think this is a no brainer.

TroyF

Samdari · 06-10-2003, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TroyF
Better year and career for Boston vs. Holt?

Holt in a <3beat.

Better offensive system. He's been durable. Never even a hint of off the field trouble that I'm aware of. Better hands.

I know Boston has the potential to make my comments look stupid. . . but I think this is a no brainer.

TroyF

I also think that keeping Barber over any WR not named Harrison Owens or Moss is a no-brainer.

sterlingice · 06-10-2003, 04:18 PM

There's a ton of concern about Holmes here. The drafting of Johnson puts up a huge red flag that they don't think he's going to be ready for this season.

SI

revrew · 06-10-2003, 04:33 PM

Holt or Boston? I agree with Troy -- a no brainer.

Boston caught everything when he was his QB's security blanket. Holt, meanwhile, was catching scores and yards when he was splitting with Bruce and Faulk. He doens't have to be the go-to guy to grab 1000 and 10. With Faulk getting banged up, and Bruce getting older, I think Holt will be the next Owens or Harrison. Meanwile, Boston has injury concerns, new system concerns, and a RB carrying the rock way too much.

Holt in a landslide.

06-09-2003, 11:40 AM	#2
Fritz Lethargic Hooligan Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: hello kitty found my wallet at a big tent revival and returned it with all the cash missing	holmes may be a good guy to dangle, if there are people who would bite __________________ donkey, donkey, walk a little faster

06-09-2003, 12:32 PM	#4
Travis Pro Rookie Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Canada eh	Well, I'm leaning towards keeping Holmes, as I really think he'll be back in top form, and really, I don't expect a big drop in his numbers. Maybe a few less TD's as I think Gonzales will pick it up this year, but I digress. Basically, I'd keep Boston and Holt as my lineup is, but I can only keep 4 players if I don't make a trade. To keep a 5th player, it has to be somebody I acquired through a trade, so I'll be including either Holt or Boston in any deal I propose for Robinson. ie: Green, Boston and Jackson for Robinson and a 2nd rounder or something like that. I have no use for any other players, so if I package deal, I'll be looking for extra picks, but it could end up being a Holt or Boston straight up for Robinson proposal if they don't need any 'extra' players. __________________ "I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it." - Rogers Hornsby

06-09-2003, 12:40 PM	#6
Travis Pro Rookie Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Canada eh	Yeah, you've got the idea of it. The rule was brought into the league to promote interaction among the owner's of the league, so that instead of just cutting guys and looking to get them back in the 1st round, you can trade and have a (hopefully) stronger team. So yes, at most I can keep Holt or Boston, then Robinson on top of that if I can acquire him for some variety of my other players. __________________ "I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it." - Rogers Hornsby

06-09-2003, 01:40 PM	#7
Samdari Roster Filler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Cicero	Travis, I would seriously consider trading Holmes for Koren Robinson if I were you. If your options are Holmes/McNabb/Alexander/Boston (or Holt) or Barber/McNabb/Alexander/Robinson/Boston (or Holt) I would take the second one every time. To pick up an extra player of Robinson's caliber without giving up a spot in your draft, and still keep two stud RBs would be a coup of huge proportions. FYI, having recently gone through a large draft, I read a lot of fantasy football literature, and Robinson was thought of as a top 5 WR by many, and a top 10 by virtually all. I guess to be fair, I'd need to know more about the scoring system, but I actually think Barber is more valuable than any of your current wideouts. If you are really committed to Holmes, then offer Barber for Robinson. Unless the guy has stud RBs already, Barber would improve most teams. __________________ http://www.nateandellie.net Now featuring twice the babies for the same low price! Last edited by Samdari : 06-09-2003 at 01:42 PM.

06-09-2003, 05:25 PM	#8
Travis Pro Rookie Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Canada eh	Here's the possibly options I'm looking at, then what they'd be with Holmes thrown in for the trade. Just for arguement's sake, let's say I can get Koren Robinson for David Boston. My keeper list would look like this: McNabb, Alexander, Holmes, Holt, Robinson If I were to throw Holmes in the deal, then I'd be left with: McNabb, Alexander, Barber, Holt or Boston, Robinson Then I'd either have to cut Barber and keep 3 WR's, or cut one of Holt or Boston. Really, the entire situation as far as I can tell is this, who's going to be better next year, Boston or Holt, as I think I can package one or the other to get Robinson. If I trade Holmes, then I weaken myself at RB (as I'd rather keep a Boston/Holt/Robinson combination and cut Barber instead of losing Holt or Boston for nothing). __________________ "I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it." - Rogers Hornsby

06-09-2003, 11:49 AM	#3
scooper College Benchwarmer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Cinn City	I'd want more than K. Robinson for Holmes, though. Can draft picks be included as well?

06-09-2003, 12:38 PM	#5
scooper College Benchwarmer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Cinn City	So if you trade Holt or Boston for Robinson, you can keep whichever one is leftover AND Robinson? Or on the other hand, without a trade, you only get to keep one of Holt/Boston? In that case, I would consider a straight up trade as otherwise, you would have to cut the other anyway. If you feel keeping that fifth player strengthens your roster, go for it. Under your rules, that Green/Boston/Jackson trade does not look bad, especially if you can get something of value with that second rounder. Your rules are unique. They definately make things interesting.

06-09-2003, 06:01 PM	#9
Vince Pro Starter Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Willow Glen, CA	If you're just going to cut him anyways, why not Boston + Barber for Robinson? I just don't know about the other person's willingness to take the deal in an x-for-1 scenario, because like someone pointed out, someone has to be cut. __________________ Every time a Dodger scores a run, an angel has its wings ripped off by a demon, and is forced to tearfully beg the demon to cauterize the wounds.The demon will refuse, and the sobbing angel will lie in a puddle of angel blood and feathers for eternity, wondering why the Dodgers are allowed to score runs.That’s not me talking: that’s science. McCoveyChronicles.com.

06-09-2003, 06:03 PM	#10
Travis Pro Rookie Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Canada eh	That's my basic plan, but what I'm basically throwing out for discussion is for somebody to convince me on who's going to have the better year/career from here on out, Boston or Holt? As it'll be one of those two that I'll have to trade away or cut anyways. And yes, if possible, I'll package up Trent Green, Stallworth, Jackson and/or Barber to try and pick up an extra pick or two in the earlier rounds. __________________ "I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it." - Rogers Hornsby

06-09-2003, 06:17 PM	#11
TroyF Coordinator Join Date: Oct 2000	Better year and career for Boston vs. Holt? Holt in a <3beat. Better offensive system. He's been durable. Never even a hint of off the field trouble that I'm aware of. Better hands. I know Boston has the potential to make my comments look stupid. . . but I think this is a no brainer. TroyF

06-10-2003, 04:18 PM	#13
sterlingice Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Back in Houston!	There's a ton of concern about Holmes here. The drafting of Johnson puts up a huge red flag that they don't think he's going to be ready for this season. SI __________________ Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!"

06-10-2003, 04:33 PM	#14
revrew Team Chaplain Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Just outside Des Moines, IA	Holt or Boston? I agree with Troy -- a no brainer. Boston caught everything when he was his QB's security blanket. Holt, meanwhile, was catching scores and yards when he was splitting with Bruce and Faulk. He doens't have to be the go-to guy to grab 1000 and 10. With Faulk getting banged up, and Bruce getting older, I think Holt will be the next Owens or Harrison. Meanwile, Boston has injury concerns, new system concerns, and a RB carrying the rock way too much. Holt in a landslide. __________________ Winner of 6 FOFC Scribe Awards, including 3 Gold Scribes Founder of the ZFL, 2004 Golden Scribe Dynasty of the Year Now bringing The Des Moines Dragons back to life, and the joke's on YOU, NFL! I came to the Crossroad. I took it. And that has made all the difference.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)