Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Commish do you consider entire team when evaluating?


dirtdickens
 Share

Recommended Posts

A guy in my league has lost a nice chunk to inury and traded Lynch away to get Sammy Morris, Moroney and Felix Jones. We dont count return yards, just your regular PPR league. The commish, waiver wire guy/inside trader, okayed the deal for his brother to get Lynch. He is saying he okayed the deal because of the one teams lack of depth.

 

Do you take a full team into consideration when evaluating a trade?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A guy in my league has lost a nice chunk to inury and traded Lynch away to get Sammy Morris, Moroney and Felix Jones. We dont count return yards, just your regular PPR league. The commish, waiver wire guy/inside trader, okayed the deal for his brother to get Lynch. He is saying he okayed the deal because of the one teams lack of depth.

 

Do you take a full team into consideration when evaluating a trade?

absolutely. I can't see myself trading away Lynch for those 3 though..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the entire team should be factored in at all. That's when it gets sketchy. For instance, if one team drafted brilliantly and another one drafted poorly, you would be penalizing the team that drafted brilliantly. In other words, the trade should be evaluated only on the players involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the entire team should be factored in at all. That's when it gets sketchy. For instance, if one team drafted brilliantly and another one drafted poorly, you would be penalizing the team that drafted brilliantly. In other words, the trade should be evaluated only on the players involved.

are you crazy? If I have to start 2 RBs and 4 WRs and I have

LT, Westy, MB3 and Ryan Grant but my WRs are Colston, Galloway, Driver, White, Hilliard

 

and I want to trade LT for Roy Williams it is easy to see why I want to acquire Roy but if you didnt look at my lineup you might say that trade is lopsided blah blah blah....roster composition matters and it matters much more then most realize

 

oh fwiw owners should manage their own teams and not other peoples teams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The true evaluation of a trade is just the players involved..You can't judge someone's team and say he's to loaded after that trade...It's just the people who are being traded period.

no you shouldnt look at it for the reason you are stating but someone could trade a perceived stud for a lesser talent if they feel it helps their starting lineup...see my post above

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no you shouldnt look at it for the reason you are stating but someone could trade a perceived stud for a lesser talent if they feel it helps their starting lineup...see my post above

 

But that's exactly the point, when you start evaluating the entire team and not just the players involved, then you open the door for partiality where a commish can veto a trade because one team would be impossibly "stacked". You can't just pick when it is ok to evaluate an entire team and when it is not. By and large it makes more sense to just evaluate the players involved.

 

As for those who simplistically say that "owners should manage their own teams" are clearly ignoring any existence of collusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the manage your own team mentality. However, there was an issue a few years ago where 3 players(brothers) were trading players to one another for bye weeks and then trading the players back.

 

Some good insight here and I can see where this trade would be hard for a commish to evaluate. On one hand the guy needs players and on the other, the players in question are not equal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's exactly the point, when you start evaluating the entire team and not just the players involved, then you open the door for partiality where a commish can veto a trade because one team would be impossibly "stacked". You can't just pick when it is ok to evaluate an entire team and when it is not. By and large it makes more sense to just evaluate the players involved.

 

As for those who simplistically say that "owners should manage their own teams" are clearly ignoring any existence of collusion.

 

That's not what Keg said. You have to take into account the entire team for the rationale behind a trade.

In Kegs example, he's trying to round out his starters by trading from a position of strength. On the surface the trade might seem slanted towards the other team but it makes sense for his team to do the trade.

You always should judge the entire team and the rationale the owner used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what Keg said. You have to take into account the entire team for the rationale behind a trade.

In Kegs example, he's trying to round out his starters by trading from a position of strength. On the surface the trade might seem slanted towards the other team but it makes sense for his team to do the trade.

You always should judge the entire team and the rationale the owner used.

thank you!

 

oh and we need to talk trade when you get a chance to hit me up on AIM :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the manage your own team mentality. However, there was an issue a few years ago where 3 players(brothers) were trading players to one another for bye weeks and then trading the players back.

 

That's clearly pooling rosters, and by definition collusion. All 3 should be removed from the league.

 

 

 

Some good insight here and I can see where this trade would be hard for a commish to evaluate. On one hand the guy needs players and on the other, the players in question are not equal.

 

If any commish were to set forth in undoing the trade you listed above, it would be my last year in that league. Remember your assertion of a lack of equality if Lynch were to go down to injury next week and how you knowingly damaged that owner.

 

Attention, Football Gods - I am not in any way, shape, or form wishing for any injury. This is a hypothetical

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course all this debate is under the impression that LT is still the overall top RB stud... funny how every year people go out of their way to believe that the top stud will always be thee stud. Just like Alexander, Larry Johnson, Priest Holmes, Ricky Williams, Marshall Faulk, etc. regardless of age, injury history, and/or watching his downfall during a season.

 

Now I am not saying that LT is on his downward slide... but I not stupid enough to say that he might not be. The smart (lucky) owners are the ones that get the gut feeling that the top stud is winding down, and trades him away for top value... and are proven correct.

 

Of course I would also be smart enough to get someone a lot better than just Driver for LT.

 

Von

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we let people manage their own teams

 

A-men!

 

There isn't a trade in my league where a couple Owner aren't bitching. And there not even bitching about collusion, which is the ONLY reason to ban a trade. They're saying one team didn't get enough in return (just a "bad" trade, not a shady one) and so it should be voided.

 

I approve every trade that comes to my vote (because guys in my league aren't the type that would collude, IMO) without a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that trade is fine.

 

Moroney is/was a starting QB. He is young and he could turn it around at any time. Just look at the playoffs last year. Sammy Morris strengthens this pickup.

 

Felix Jones could be a monster if Barber goes down and with Barber's style of running the thought isn't too much of a stretch.

 

Whatever the case - an owners depth affects his perception of need. A commish should not take depth into consideration when making a trade, but an owner should and the commish should trust that owner to make the moves that he believes is right for his team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I laugh everytime I read topics like this one.

 

I once had a guy in my league pick up Walter Payton the year he DIED!! He did so because Sweetness was his favorite player of all time. It made absolutely no since to anyone but him. And for what it is worth that guy finished second in the league that year and tripled his money, obviously despite sweetness not because of him.

 

I tell that story to illustrate a point. Who knows why anyone makes the deals they make? What may seem like an idiot deal to one guy may make perfect sense to the next.

 

All you have to do to avoid these situations is have league rules in place to govern them.

 

I have been running my local money league for close to 10 years and since day one we have had the following rules governing trades.

 

Trades involving 1 player from each team go through as soon as the two owners decide to make the trade, no questions asked.

 

Trades involving more than 1 player from each team get presented to the league for a vote. If a majority of the 10 owners not involved in the trade veto the trade then the trade does not go through.

 

Now Keggerz before you start on me about managing other owners teams let me add this.

 

NO MULTI-PLAYER TRADE HAS EVER BEEN VETOED IN THE HISTORY OF OUR LEAGUE.

 

When I wrote the above rule I had two thoughts in mind.

1 - if the owners involved know that a trade can be vetoed then they will be less liekly to make a trade just to load up someone else's roster

 

2 - since owners know that a trade can be vetoed then they will be less likely to vote against someone else's trade in fear of their own trade being votred against as retribution.

 

In other words by addressing this up front, in the beginning we have had nearly 10 years of very active yet fair and balanced trading. Some people have not liked some trades but none have ever been denied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This trade looks acceptable...owners are allowed to speculate. Some owners, however, buy the hot player of the week (Felix). Let 'em, what if Lynch gets hirt for the season and you just vetoed the guys speculation and ruined his team b/c someone got Lynch and you didn't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information