WXV Trade Talk

[GoLions]

Agree Holz. I did think about that trade and reckon Lloyd is better than Myers, but at the end of the day I just cant see how it could be negged

Surprised our Belcho for Clark trade is getting votes - really?

How many times do I have to remind you...

[Holz]

Agree Holz. I did think about that trade and reckon Lloyd is better than Myers, but at the end of the day I just cant see how it could be negged

Surprised our Belcho for Clark trade is getting votes - really?

something needs to be cleared up.

If a big trade is slightly one sided it gets negged.

If a small trade is much more one sided then it passes.

its tough as the lloyd trade was the most neg worthy of the bunch in my opinion but goes through without a word. Then again all trades should have been. So do you vote for whats is correct or what the standard is being set

[RaisyDaisy]

You just need to come to terms with the fact that each person see's trades differently and values them differently to you

There is no right or wrong answer, but the sooner you accept that people see things differently and each coach is entitled to their opinion, the sooner you can stop doing your own head in hehe :)

I think Lloyd is slight win, but not as much as you do. See, that's each person having an opinion. Myers has had a bad run with injuries  but is capable of going 85+

We've said it previously. We should only be negging the trades that are clearly one sided and unfair to one of the teams or even comp

[Holz]

We've said it previously. We should only be negging the trades that are clearly one sided and unfair to one of the teams or even comp

what does that even mean though.

i see double standards every where.

Mexico is trading in Stanton a old but very solid player. They just won the flag and have been top 3, 4 years in a row. last year I got called out for bad for the comp for this type of deal so surely this one has to fail. but then its unfair to london who want to rebuild. So do we vote for whats best for the comp, whats best for rebuilding teams or whether its a fair deal or not.

Going by how my votes are treated then its a easy neg vote.

Im trading out old guns in my trade this so surely that has to pass as thats good for the comp?


precedence have been set.

I know what will happen though. Mexico trade passes, Dublin trade fails and I wont understand one bit. As its a complete backflip on whats happend in the past with roles reversed. 

[Ricochet]

Yeh i actually think Myers is now an important cog in the Bombers midfield and could go 85-90+.

But can understand why some may not rate him as much

[Ringo]

it is interesting that trades this week are attracting votes yet some of the trades that have passed previously in my opinion were far more neg worthy than most of these this week.  Just have a look at the passed trades and compare to this weeks.

Realise each coach sees trades differently but to be fair coaches have to be consistent in their ratings which I am not seeing with some of the comments being made in this thread.

We voted for the coaches to vote on trades and we have to live with that until change is made and then have to realise the imperfections this system brings including biases.

[RaisyDaisy]

We've said it previously. We should only be negging the trades that are clearly one sided and unfair to one of the teams or even comp

what does that even mean though.

i see double standards every where.

Mexico is trading in Stanton a old but very solid player. They just won the flag and have been top 3, 4 years in a row. last year I got called out for bad for the comp for this type of deal so surely this one has to fail. but then its unfair to london who want to rebuild. So do we vote for whats best for the comp, whats best for rebuilding teams or whether its a fair deal or not.

Going by how my votes are treated then its a easy neg vote.

Im trading out old guns in my trade this so surely that has to pass as thats good for the comp?

precedence have been set.

The way I see it, yes Mexico is bringing in Stanton but they have had to give up Sam Gray and Pick 19, their first rounder

Mexico will be cactus in a few years time. Look at the list - it's all old, but JROO is obviously deciding to ride the rush now and fight out a few more years up top before eventually bottoming out

London cant win a flag now, so getting Gray and 19 makes perfect sense to them - they're building and should be right up there just when Mexico starts declining

You're trade is the other way around, because you're giving 2 oldies to a team that wont win the flag and getting Pick 5. The trade is great for you because it allows you to get a gun and keep on top (which is totally fine and the aim of the game) but the value of your guys is not high IMO as they will retire soon, hence Pick 5 is worth much more IMO

[meow meow]

You're trade is the other way around, because you're giving 2 oldies to a team that wont win the flag

Rio would be a contender with Thommo + SJ. Their best XV would average about 150 which puts them in the top 4. From there anything can happen. You don't have to have the best team to win. Like when I whooped Dublin in the Champions League final (even without Sam Mitchell).

[Holz]

We've said it previously. We should only be negging the trades that are clearly one sided and unfair to one of the teams or even comp

what does that even mean though.

i see double standards every where.

Mexico is trading in Stanton a old but very solid player. They just won the flag and have been top 3, 4 years in a row. last year I got called out for bad for the comp for this type of deal so surely this one has to fail. but then its unfair to london who want to rebuild. So do we vote for whats best for the comp, whats best for rebuilding teams or whether its a fair deal or not.

Going by how my votes are treated then its a easy neg vote.

Im trading out old guns in my trade this so surely that has to pass as thats good for the comp?

precedence have been set.

The way I see it, yes Mexico is bringing in Stanton but they have had to give up Sam Gray and Pick 19, their first rounder

Mexico will be cactus in a few years time. Look at the list - it's all old, but JROO is obviously deciding to ride the rush now and fight out a few more years up top before eventually bottoming out

London cant win a flag now, so getting Gray and 19 makes perfect sense to them - they're building and should be right up there just when Mexico starts declining

You're trade is the other way around, because you're giving 2 oldies to a team that wont win the flag and getting Pick 5. The trade is great for you because it allows you to get a gun and keep on top (which is totally fine and the aim of the game) but the value of your guys is not high IMO as they will retire soon, hence Pick 5 is worth much more IMO

thats fine and dont take this as an argument but a discussion.

how come Rio arent allowed to trade in older premos but you were last year with Duffield and SJ. Both SJ and Thommo could play two more years.

how about when i trade pick 12 + 21 (my first rounder and a early first rounder i traded for) + S.Grigg + L.Delaney + N.Jetta + S.Frost + G.Hewett for Chapman and Swan

it got this

Admin Comments: Feel that this trade is bad for the competition.

Is the difference with people thinking Mexico is gun but old and Dublin is gun bot not as old? remember they have been gifted Rocky + Bennell

[Holz]

You're trade is the other way around, because you're giving 2 oldies to a team that wont win the flag

Rio would be a contender with Thommo + SJ. Their best XV would average about 150 which puts them in the top 4. From there anything can happen. You don't have to have the best team to win. Like when I whooped Dublin in the Champions League final (even without Sam Mitchell).

100% agree with you Meow. Its why im doing the trade. I have realised that being the number 1 team in the comp means nothing. i was clearly the best team in Worlds and walked away with no premiership or champs medal.

losing thommo and SJ severely weakens my team and pulls me back to the pack. But helps me stay in the top 4 for longer.

Rio are a major major threat and im probably most scared of them after Mexico as they have the super high ceiling,.

[Ricochet]

Stanton trade and Pick 5 trade are exactly the same in terms of value

One is giving up 1 oldie with a 1 year contract for a late first rounder
The other is giving up 2 oldies with a 1 year contract for an earlier first rounder (plus a pick upgrade later, plus an old depth spud)

[Holz]

Stanton trade and Pick 5 trade are exactly the same in terms of value

One is giving up 1 oldie with a 1 year contract for a late first rounder
The other is giving up 2 oldies with a 1 year contract for an earlier first rounder (plus a pick upgrade later, plus an old depth spud)

agree

both trades are basically the same.

the only differing factor is in one trade a top team is giving away older players and in the other deal a top team is getting older players.

basically both should pass, both should fail or the stanton one fails based of bad for the comp.

[RaisyDaisy]

how come Rio arent allowed to trade in older premos but you were last year with Duffield and SJ. Both SJ and Thommo could play two more years.

Of course Rio are allowed to trade in oldies - I have no problem with that at all and if it makes them a contender than great - that doesn't even come into my decision, and nor should it. I just think Pick 5 is worth more than what they are getting, and that's my opinion which I am entitled to.

Is the difference with people thinking Mexico is gun but old and Dublin is gun bot not as old? remember they have been gifted Rocky + Bennell

They have not been gifted Bennell. That's just incorrect. To say that Lewis, Grigg and SDT for Bennell is him being gifted is just ignorant and disrespectful to us

Stanton trade and Pick 5 trade are exactly the same in terms of value

One is giving up 1 oldie with a 1 year contract for a late first rounder
The other is giving up 2 oldies with a 1 year contract for an earlier first rounder (plus a pick upgrade later, plus an old depth spud)

How is that the same? Stanton having a one year contract doesn't mean much to me. He is only 29 and one of their best players still. If they don't resign him each year, another club will. Thommo and SJ are much older. If Stanton is worth 19 with a few years left in his career, then SJ and Thommo are not worth 5 IMO

[meow meow]

Can someone please explain why my trade got a vote?

Jobe will be 31 years old in round one next year and has played 14 and 12 games in the past two seasons. He can score very well when he's on and realistically when you factor all that in he's worth pick 10-15.

10, 12 for 2, 26, 46 is unfair?

[RaisyDaisy]

When I am valuating a trade, I don't consider if the trade will make a top team stay on top, or a bottom team improve etc. Some coaches might, but I don't. I don't think any team should have to pay more, or lose more based on their position in the comp. I don't buy into that at all

I simply look at who and what is involved in the deal, base my own value on each player (career history, age, potential etc) and then decide if they are even and fair for both teams

If it was Beijing offering SJ and Thommo and Cairo offering Pick 5, I would still vote the exact same. I value Pick 5 more than those guys, and that's all there is to it. There is nothing personal in the way I valuate trades.