Vikings/Dolphins Trade (cancelled)

Vikings Give:
(Picks)
#182
#209
#217
#247
(Players)
WR Patrick Clayton - 82
WR Bobby Wade - 78
DT Pat Williams - 92

Dolphins Give:
WR Chris Chambers - 86

This trade was agreed on by both of us. I'd like to make it clear that this is the CURRENT HIGH BID and I will be looking at any outbid attempts on him.

Please, if you feel you want ot outbid this trade post it here and I will agree or decline it.

Code:

EXPLAINATION
182, 209, 217, 247 roughly equals the 150th pick in the draft
Patrick Clayton and Bobby Wade will be high 70s, low 80s
Pat Williams will be 90+ but he is 35.
Bobby Wade and Patrick Clayton are young, and are improvable.
Pat Williams will be used for as a need

So technaically, its a 65+80+80+91 for a 86-87.

I agree.

poeticpyro wrote:

Vikings Give:
(Picks)
#182
#209
#217
#247
(Players)
WR Patrick Clayton - 82
WR Bobby Wade - 78
DT Pat Williams - 92

Dolphins Give:
WR Chris Chambers - 86

This trade was agreed on by both of us. I'd like to make it clear that this is the CURRENT HIGH BID and I will be looking at any outbid attempts on him.

Please, if you feel you want ot outbid this trade post it here and I will agree or decline it.

Code:

EXPLAINATION
182, 209, 217, 247 roughly equals the 150th pick in the draft
Patrick Clayton and Bobby Wade will be high 70s, low 80s
Pat Williams will be 90+ but he is 35.
Bobby Wade and Patrick Clayton are young, and are improvable.
Pat Williams will be used for as a need

So technaically, its a 65+80+80+91 for a 86-87.

umm i would call wade a 78, and crayton a 79....

69, 67, 66, 64m 78, 79, 91 for 87?

i would say that is approvable.

yea i like it

wouldnt it be fair just williams for chambers?

SimsZilla wrote:

wouldnt it be fair just williams for chambers?

no

This is way too much for Chambers IMO...Williams has a couple, maybe 3 years left and is still considered a great run stuffing DT...Crayton and Wade are still decent WR's will some upside...

a couple of 80 WR's and a 90's DT for an 87 (overrated) WR? Plus a bunch of late round picks? How is that fair? If anything, the late round picks need to be added with Chambers to make this one fair...

You guys can do what you wish, but that is just my opinion on the deal

cav_fan2 wrote:

This is way too much for Chambers IMO...Williams has a couple, maybe 3 years left and is still considered a great run stuffing DT...Crayton and Wade are still decent WR's will some upside...

a couple of 80 WR's and a 90's DT for an 87 (overrated) WR? Plus a bunch of late round picks? How is that fair? If anything, the late round picks need to be added with Chambers to make this one fair...

You guys can do what you wish, but that is just my opinion on the deal

You gotta remember Pat is 35 years old.

This trade is unfair even though hes old hes a 90 and hes also giving like 2 80s.

Pat Williams for Chambers and pick is fair enough

Well, so far I see 2 admins approve of the trade.

What I'm not getting is, I don't see how the trade isn't far when WR's are so highly valued in this league as Sox said....and on top of that, I'm not really seeing how its to much when he offered that, there was no counter offer and he told me what explanation to put so its not like I forced an overpay.......

I think this deal is better if a player is taken out. Chambers had a down year. Therefore resulting in a lower rating. Crayton is actually a good WR and really underrated. And Wade provides a spark in the specail teams. Pat is old but REALLY valuable. I would approve this deal is Wade or Crayton is taken out.

DC wrote:

I think this deal is better if a player is taken out. Chambers had a down year. Therefore resulting in a lower rating. Crayton is actually a good WR and really underrated. And Wade provides a spark in the specail teams. Pat is old but REALLY valuable. I would approve this deal is Wade or Crayton is taken out.

i mean, its fine also if all the picks are taken out, it would be close enough... but if crayton/wade were taken out, i would approve this too

Not sure I'd approve with a player removed.

I'm giving up a tall, physical, fast WR with stats matched to Andre Johnson (compare them if you want, minus the OVR) for two 2nd string WRs, some LATE round draft picks and a good starter for about a year or two.

poeticpyro wrote:

Not sure I'd approve with a player removed.

I'm giving up a tall, physical, fast WR with stats matched to Andre Johnson (compare them if you want, minus the OVR) for two 2nd string WRs, some LATE round draft picks and a good starter for about a year or two.

You cant compare Chambers to Andre Johnson, because it isnt even fair. They arent even close to being the same player. Johnson is way better.

look at the attribute ratings...thats all that matters in a SIM League.

poeticpyro wrote:

Not sure I'd approve with a player removed.

I'm giving up a tall, physical, fast WR with stats matched to Andre Johnson (compare them if you want, minus the OVR) for two 2nd string WRs, some LATE round draft picks and a good starter for about a year or two.

Not to be nit picky, but 5'11'' is not tall, nor is he that physical. He is very quick, I'll give you that and he too is almost 30 years old (29 on the 12th), so he isnt a spring chicken...

The deal is no where near fair as is...I like DC's comment the best...he pretty much said it all. Take out Crayton and I can live with it. I still think that its too much for an average, underachieving, grease fingers receiver with decent potential.

Im willing to take out Crayton.

Guys, if I took out Crayton would this be fair? Because Im desperate for a WR. If not, its denied.

yayanjl wrote:

Guys, if I took out Crayton would this be fair? Because Im desperate for a WR. If not, its denied.

i talked to the dolphins GM earlier and he said if you took out crayton, he didnt accept.

SoxNats07 wrote:

yayanjl wrote:

Guys, if I took out Crayton would this be fair? Because Im desperate for a WR. If not, its denied.

i talked to the dolphins GM earlier and he said if you took out crayton, he didnt accept.

S***, then cancel it.