They would rather bench him and pay for him not to play than give him to us. Trade would be at least a 1 minimum for us. We won't get the friend price. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
They would rather bench him and pay for him not to play than give him to us. Trade would be at least a 1 minimum for us. We won't get the friend price.
Since we've been fucking them in the ass all these years do we get a friends with benefits price? [Reply]
While I find it hard to believe Oakland would trade to us it’s encouraging to hear he’s on the block coincidentally right when we are clearly in the market [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
While I find it hard to believe Oakland would trade to us it’s encouraging to hear he’s on the block coincidentally right when we are clearly in the market
Give you something to dream about at least. Like buying a lottery ticket. You know you aint winning, but at least for a brief moment in time you can distract yourself with the "what could be". [Reply]
Originally Posted by ToxSocks:
Give you something to dream about at least. Like buying a lottery ticket. You know you aint winning, but at least for a brief moment in time you can distract yourself with the "what could be".
For now my guess is they want to use as leverage to make the market for some other team. With the timing of this, I’d have to imagine they are at least open to listening. So I’ll take that as a small win [Reply]
Originally Posted by TheGuardian:
Pipe dream. We could offer up 3 firsts and they would say no
This entire “they won’t trade to division rival” is such nonsense. They know their season is over, they need to do everything possible to get the most out of Adams. They’re going to trade to him whoever is the highest bidder.
Do you think they’ll take 2 first rounders over our 3? Would be fucking stupid to say no just bc we’re in the same division [Reply]