- 2,106
- 447
That was why i put the stats and info.Can't stand owners who veto trades based solely on "name factor". Cases can be made for both sides of that trade.
On one side, a guy is getting rid of Gronk who has severely underperformed thus far. Who knows if he'll return to form.
On the other side, the guy is willing to accept that risk and get rid of two guys who have sort of overperformed. Will they continue to overperform? Who knows, but both sides of the trade make complete sense right now.
vetoing trades on name value is pure garbage.
could not agree more with you on this.
Gronk has done nothing all year and could continue to do nothing.