Colts Eagles trade

[jskinnz]

Both teams.

Fleece me once, shame on you, fleece me twice, shame on me. Why would I ever entertain any future offer you might make?

Suffice to say I disagree with your view, and think it's overly simplistic.

Grigson's job is to do what he thinks is best for the Colts. Simple as that. He has to do that part of his job without regard to the feelings of another organization. He has been dealing with the Eagles because he has familiarity with their players and thinks they can help. That is it.

He traded for the fullback because he thinks he can help the Colts not as a favor or because of the relationship to his former team. They did the same thing. Both parties are only trying to help their teams.

If a team as it turns out makes a bad trade, that is on them not the team that traded the player.

[jskinnz]

It doesn't matter whose fault it was; the team that feels fleeced will still harbor bad feelings and be less willing trade partners in the future.

Well for one trades are rare anyway so not sure how big a deal that is. But I keep going back to the team that got "fleeced" and the fact that the fleecing is on them and no one else. If team is trading a player because of salary, attitude, or productivity issues and then he goes to the new team and those same issues are evident, why is that the team who traded him fault? The team getting the player had to do research and decided the risk/offer was worth it. If that turns out to be wrong, again same question - whose fault is that? Their own which is why I think that Grigson could not care less about relationships with other teams. If that scenario I described happened and then there was another potential deal that both sides think they could benefit from, why wouldn't they do it?

[IndyColtScout]

We should have just kept Felton. I know it was a different offense, but it never hurts to have a guy who can lead block even if only in goal line sets.

[schwamm]

Grigson's job is to do what he thinks is best for the Colts. Simple as that. He has to do that part of his job without regard to the feelings of another organization. He has been dealing with the Eagles because he has familiarity with their players and thinks they can help. That is it.

He traded for the fullback because he thinks he can help the Colts not as a favor or because of the relationship to his former team. They did the same thing. Both parties are only trying to help their teams.

If a team as it turns out makes a bad trade, that is on them not the team that traded the player.

I agree it is a GMs job to make his team better. I agree that he got a fullback for need and not as a favor. And I agree that a trade that doesn't work out isn't something that should be held against anyone.

Where we part ways is that I'm saying there are short term and long term needs at play, and any GM worth his salt is balancing both. I'm also saying there is a difference between executing a fair trade, and having one side of it not pan out over time... vs. entering a trade with intent to swindle.

[Colts Fan In L.A.]

When you said you enjoyed watching him at USC I thought you were talking about Geathers. I mean he did play at the real USC, University of SC that is. I couldn't resist giving you a little jab there especially considering Spurrier was just in the news running his mouth why ESPN was in So Cal rather than at our place for pro day

I saw that on ESPN. I've met a few Gamecock alums who HATE being confused for Trojans. I'll tell you this much..I'd love to see a USC vs USC football game for name bragging rights

[Superman]

I'm a USC fan, and Stanley was the most dynamic and talented FB we've had in a decade probably.  He is light on his feet and athletic.  Catches the ball naturally and runs well after the catch.  Fits perfectly in what Pep will do with the offense.  He was lighter at USC about 220 lbs. and didn't block all that much, but he has beefed up apparently and I think it is a great pick up for almost nothing, or at least for a player that was expendable.  He can even run the ball out of the tailback position and shows good ability to hit holes, slide, and pick up tough yards.  In the redzone, he will have to be accounted for as a receiver.  Great pick up.

 

Yeah, I remember Havili the same. If he's gotten bigger and is a better lead blocker, then he'd be a nice weapon on offense. Definitely a better receiving option than your typical fullback. He's not Mike Alstott, for sure, but he's got nice hands and is deceptively fast. He's got a great chance to make the roster.

 

It's been said already, but if we run Spider 3 Y Banana and Havili gets the ball in space, it's a solid gain for sure.

 

And all we gave up was a guy that wasn't going to make the roster anyways. Good move.

[Superman]

I agree it is a GMs job to make his team better. I agree that he got a fullback for need and not as a favor. And I agree that a trade that doesn't work out isn't something that should be held against anyone.

Where we part ways is that I'm saying there are short term and long term needs at play, and any GM worth his salt is balancing both. I'm also saying there is a difference between executing a fair trade, and having one side of it not pan out over time... vs. entering a trade with intent to swindle.

 

I would hope that if any team offered us a trade that was heavily weighted in our favor that Grigson would jump all over it and not look back. Feelings be darned, do what makes the team better.

[schwamm]

I would hope that if any team offered us a trade that was heavily weighted in our favor that Grigson would jump all over it and not look back. Feelings be darned, do what makes the team better.

Oh... Now we're talking something else entirely. I was assuming our GM approaching another team... Yeah, if Detroit came to Grigs, offering up Megatron for Satele, straight up, I wouldn't worry about how Detroit would feel about that later.

[jskinnz]

 

I agree it is a GMs job to make his team better. I agree that he got a fullback for need and not as a favor. And I agree that a trade that doesn't work out isn't something that should be held against anyone.

Where we part ways is that I'm saying there are short term and long term needs at play, and any GM worth his salt is balancing both. I'm also saying there is a difference between executing a fair trade, and having one side of it not pan out over time... vs. entering a trade with intent to swindle.

 

So if Grigson offers a 7th rounder and the ghost of Curtis Painter for Shady McCoy and the Eagles take it, he should decline because it is not a fair exchange?

How would there be intent to swindle? If the Colts are hiding an injury, the Eagles have the player take a physical for the trade to go through. If the Colts are hiding an attitude problem with a guy, it is up to Philly to discern the risk. If money is an issue, that is certainly known in advance and there is an idea of the $$ it will take to sign a guy to the extenstion.

Superman said it much better than I. Grigson job is to get the best deal he can while giving up as little as possible. It is the nature of the league.

[jskinnz]

 

Oh... Now we're talking something else entirely. I was assuming our GM approaching another team... Yeah, if Detroit came to Grigs, offering up Megatron for Satele, straight up, I wouldn't worry about how Detroit would feel about that later.

 

Maybe you and I are not on the same page because I don't see how this is different than what we have been debating. If I fail to understand something, apologies in advance.

[Superman]

Oh... Now we're talking something else entirely. I was assuming our GM approaching another team... Yeah, if Detroit came to Grigs, offering up Megatron for Satele, straight up, I wouldn't worry about how Detroit would feel about that later.

 

I don't know, I think trades get initiated a bunch of different ways, and finalized a bunch of different ways. However that works, if a team loses a trade, that's on the decision maker for that team. It would be petty of that team or decision maker to decide not to work with the team they did the bad trade with on account of their own mistake (and I'm not putting it beyond any decision maker to be petty).

 

If we're talking about an injury concern, teams do a complete physical whenever they agree to a trade. If we're talking about a personality issue, that's for the team to decide. I could see the Eagles being leery of Grigson if they feel like he lied to them about a player's condition or attitude issues, but I would still expect them to consider any serious offers from him in the future.

[schwamm]

I don't know, I think trades get initiated a bunch of different ways, and finalized a bunch of different ways. However that works, if a team loses a trade, that's on the decision maker for that team. It would be petty of that team or decision maker to decide not to work with the team they did the bad trade with on account of their own mistake (and I'm not putting it beyond any decision maker to be petty).

If we're talking about an injury concern, teams do a complete physical whenever they agree to a trade. If we're talking about a personality issue, that's for the team to decide. I could see the Eagles being leery of Grigson if they feel like he lied to them about a player's condition or attitude issues, but I would still expect them to consider any serious offers from him in the future.

I suppose I'm biased by playing fantasy football. There are some ff team owners who have very impractical approach to trading, and it doesn't take long before nobody will trust any offer made by them, no matter how even handed.

I suppose the Pats seem to continue to find ways of fleecing whoever they trade with, and teams keep going back to them, so...

[Superman]

I suppose I'm biased by playing fantasy football. There are some ff team owners who have very impractical approach to trading, and it doesn't take long before nobody will trust any offer made by them, no matter how even handed.

I suppose the Pats seem to continue to find ways of fleecing whoever they trade with, and teams keep going back to them, so...

 

I notice the same thing in fantasy football, but the main league I play in is mostly the same guys every year. We know who deals in good faith and who is impossible. And we know who has a legitimate chance to win every year, and who doesn't.

 

In the NFL, though, I can't imagine a GM who would be dismissive of another GM's trade proposal just because they lost on the last trade. You build the best team you can, without regard for how you feel about the other guy.

[DarkHorseColts]

I don't see who got fleeced here. Neither player was likely to make the final roster of their respective team - Colts have a logjam at interior D-line & Kelly reportedly prefers H-backs to pure fullbacks. Each team gets a player they think can help going forward without doing the FA dance. Win/win.

[bahhummbug]

I really like the trade.If for no other reason as to keep Allen from being beat up as Fb.doesnt make sense to use Allen as FB with the hands he has,plus this FB can come off of a block and catch.

[needanoline63]

Sounds good. We have been waiting for long, athletic defenders here for years. Hopefully it works out.

Slightly off topic but Colts-Eagles trade related: what do you guys think of Jeremy Maclin? There's some speculation that guy might end up being Maclin.

Maclin is good, but we need a big fast physical receiver who can go up and get it

[needanoline63]

The guy we got has pro bowl potential. We def got the better end of the deal

[ColtsArmy84]

Nice trade! and we didnt lose any draft picks!

[bahhummbug]

Maclin is good, but we need a big fast physical receiver who can go up and get it

We have 2 Allen and Fleener

[needanoline63]

Receiver not tight end

[braveheartcolt]

This is a 'win-win' trade, or a 'win-lose' trade, or a 'lose-win' trade or a 'lose-lose' trade. That's how excited I am about it.

[needanoline63]

We have 2 Allen and Fleener

Receiver not tight end

[needanoline63]

And if u think about it. Eagles offensive line was battling injuries all year. They had several 100+ rushing performances. Attribute that to Stanley

[bahhummbug]

Receiver not tight end

They are receivers?And more?

[PrincetonTiger]

I don't see who got fleeced here. Neither player was likely to make the final roster of their respective team - Colts have a logjam at interior D-line & Kelly reportedly prefers H-backs to pure fullbacks. Each team gets a player they think can help going forward without doing the FA dance. Win/win.

agreed

[ColtsLegacy]

"Fleece" is The Word of the Thread.

 

The Word of the Thread brought to you by "Depends" - Depends for the adult who doesn't want to "fleece" their own pants.

[needanoline63]

They are receivers?And more?

WIDE RECIEVERS, as in u know........WIDE RECIEVERS. Not tight ends. Or let me put it in terms u would understand, we need another guy like fleener and Allen but with more speed

[optimusprimetime]

I don't think if I had a choice I would take DJ or Macklin, Macklin over DJ if I had to....Philly has had tons of issues in the locker room lately...DJ seems like a real show boat type player and Macklin though a great player has had some injury issues.  Then again they r both great talents and if they ended up here I would not be upset, but given the choice I would be looking elsewhere.

[Balzer40]

WIDE RECIEVERS, as in u know........WIDE RECIEVERS. Not tight ends. Or let me put it in terms u would understand, we need another guy like fleener and Allen but with more speed

 

 

 

Fleener is faster than most receivers even close to his size. 

[Bubba]

Yippie, another trade with the Eagles. Are the Eagles the only team we can trade with.

[bahhummbug]

WIDE RECIEVERS, as in u know........WIDE RECIEVERS. Not tight ends. Or let me put it in terms u would understand, we need another guy like fleener and Allen but with more speed

you need to watch more football

[needanoline63]

Fleener is faster than most receivers even close to his size.

I can see how effective he was for us, I want another receiver as in a 3rd legit reciever.

[needanoline63]

you need to watch more football

Seems like you do to, I've played football and have been watching it for years so don't tell me. We need a legit number 3 reciever for depth. Get it? What's the position difference between randy moss and Dwayne Allen? Ehhhhhh.......wrong, ones primary position is reciever another is tight end