|
|
Post by sdchargers on May 30, 2011 23:42:15 GMT -5
SD trades:
Sherrod Martin : .48M (2011) - .565M (2012)
3m for 2011
IND trades:
LaDanian Tomlinson - $2.425 M (2011)
This is the opposite of every deal I've done so far. I gain 5m in salary and lose on contract length. But I get a RB. And I checked rotoworld and they said that 31 year old RBs that publicly announce that another guy will be the feature back on his team ALWAYS have breakout years...right?
I'm just going to hold my breath and hope for a couple injuries.
|
|
|
|
Post by Indianapolis Colts on May 30, 2011 23:46:52 GMT -5
I accept. Get some cap room. Get rid of an aging Rb on a 1 year deal. and get a safety that can start once the injury to Bob Sanders happens (cause we know it will).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack on May 31, 2011 5:25:52 GMT -5
APPROVE
|
|
|
|
Post by Smurphy on May 31, 2011 9:04:34 GMT -5
your explanation is bs liam....lol
you rape this deal and u know it
veto .. achillie he may be old is worth more
|
|
|
|
Post by marioskazbah on May 31, 2011 14:52:39 GMT -5
Sherrod Martin is pretty good... not that anyone cares. Colts shed some cap and gets some of Liam's cap . How even does a trade have to be for this league to approve it? I understand y'all love vetoing and that its apparently very fun. But if one guy needs a safety and one guy needs a rb, who should they trade and for who? IMO Colts gets very good value for LT here. But go ahead and veto it anyway for the sake of the league, because obviously if this trade is allowed to pass the balance of power would forever be tainted and the league would suffer by the power of grayskull. I approve.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kansas on May 31, 2011 15:05:23 GMT -5
Veto from me maybe this will get another Approve but we'll see.
|
|
|
|
Post by blacksunshine3006 on May 31, 2011 15:24:16 GMT -5
Veto, While LT is an aging RB, RBs are a premium position here, and he demonstrated he still has some left in the tank. Martin is a decent safety and we all know Sanders will get hurt I still think this is an unbalanced trade taking into account team needs.
|
|
