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 This theme may be out of date.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.]]

Outrageous (IMHO) trade


ControlFreak
 Share

Recommended Posts

Father and son in my league pulled off two trades this week (neither one is me, it's my BIL and nephew). Combining them together, can ANYBODY justify what the son did here? Dad is 2-0, son is 0-2 in the season so far.

 

Dad gets Tony Romo, Maurice Jones-Drew, Brandon Marshall and (from the first trade) Jason Witten.

Son gets Kyle Orton, Steven Jackson, Darren McFadden and (from the first trade) David Akers.

 

As far as I can tell, the son originated both trades, and dad took advantage. Witten is significant in our scoring system because TEs get 1 p.p.r. while RBs and WRs get less. Full redraft league.

 

The question might come up as to how this could happen. Well, our league doesn't have a veto system at all. It has always been assumed that all teams would try in good faith to compete, and until this trade that has been the case. If this trade doesn't completely destroy our league for future seasons, at the very least we won't have a blind trust mentality going forward.

 

I think Dad pulled off a huge injustice to the rest of the league's hard prep work, and the son very unwisely bailed on good players way too soon for no good reason. Anyway, your thoughts would be appreciated. Am I overreacting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

our league doesn't have a veto system at all.
lol @ your rules then.

 

Am I overreacting?
Yes because thx to your rules no one has no right to "react" at all.

 

On paper I agree the trade is weak but so far in reality it isn't. Smells like collusion to me but again your rules obviously are lame because this is permitted so nobody has a leg to stand on.

 

lol

Edited by BeeR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the words of John Wayne "i won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, I won't be layed a hand on...I don't do these things to other people and I require the same from them."

 

 

You are pretty much screwed for the moment; were I in your shoes I would ask for a league-wide vote with regard to future trades once the season has ended.

 

If such inequities persist after your objections, tell 'em to eff off and find another league. Life is too short to endure irritants such as those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Father and son in my league pulled off two trades this week (neither one is me, it's my BIL and nephew). Combining them together, can ANYBODY justify what the son did here? Dad is 2-0, son is 0-2 in the season so far.

 

Dad gets Tony Romo, Maurice Jones-Drew, Brandon Marshall and (from the first trade) Jason Witten.

Son gets Kyle Orton, Steven Jackson, Darren McFadden and (from the first trade) David Akers.

 

As far as I can tell, the son originated both trades, and dad took advantage. Witten is significant in our scoring system because TEs get 1 p.p.r. while RBs and WRs get less. Full redraft league.

 

The question might come up as to how this could happen. Well, our league doesn't have a veto system at all. It has always been assumed that all teams would try in good faith to compete, and until this trade that has been the case. If this trade doesn't completely destroy our league for future seasons, at the very least we won't have a blind trust mentality going forward.

 

I think Dad pulled off a huge injustice to the rest of the league's hard prep work, and the son very unwisely bailed on good players way too soon for no good reason. Anyway, your thoughts would be appreciated. Am I overreacting?

 

No, you're not overreacting. From what you've written, it seems to be an unfair trade.

 

But on the other hand, who can really determine value or fairness? While I can only speak for myself, I would expect that we've all traded somebody away the day before he got injured and laughed as the guy we received had a monster game, or that we've traded for a player who became far more valuable than anybody - including ourselves - had anticipated. I would assume that most of us - excluding Henry - have made trades which weren't, in hindsight, nearly as brilliant as we had thought at the time. Ultimately, a significant part of this game is good or bad luck. Its only Week 3, and a few weeks from now the kid may look brilliant. You never know.

 

Regardless, at this time, I would bet that most fantasy football players in the dad's position would jump at trades like that, especially if cash is on the line. Rely on another's inexperience to make your team better. Assuming that those players do actually perform as well as you apparently believe they will, the kid will learn some valuable fantasy football lessons: patience with studs; really evaluate trades before making them; don't blindly trust anybody except JUM; even - or especially - your dad; or this game's not for you if you don't want to think things through. I doubt he'd take trades lightly again.

 

The problem is, obviously, the father-son connection. The other members will be more apt to believe that collusion is involved because of the blood. Even if they believe there's no collusion, they won't want the dad using his son's inexperience to cruise himself into the cash at their expense.

 

But in the absence of any evidence of actual collusion, I don't know if you can or even should make a retroactive rule for this season. They were acting according to the rules, or to the absence if any rules. The purpose of a veto rule is to ensure that if things do somehow go too far, that there is a mechanism to at least maintain the status quo. The failure to have some basic rule in place is yours alone, though it is understandable.

 

While I doubt it will destroy your league totally, it could really hurt your league this season. Depends on the amount of money at stake, as that always makes things less forgiving. A similar trade occurred in a long-standing small-dollar league I am in, though there was a bit of evidence of collusion. Again, no rule was in place. About half of the league lost interest for the rest of the season but returned the following year after a rule was in place. Three people who were in from the start dropped out of the league completely. Let's hope yours turns out better. Best of luck with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the trades were soooo unbalanced as to be collusive. I think teams need to be free to make bad trades and the son did just that. If the son initiated the trades, I don't blame the dad for taking them..though if MY son offered me this trade, I'd take pity on him and decline. No doubt that's a bad trade but I'd let it stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me as though Father told Son to sign up, or did so for him, so that Father could use Son's lineup as a place to hold more of Fathers players so that he could trade them in and out as needed depending on the week..

Edited by DCFan17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The son should be ridiculed by the rest of the league. He bailed on top picks too ealry and the other owners should rake him across the message boards as to how stupid he was to make the trade. Then he will be embarrassed that "Daddy" beat him again. I would make it to where he could not live it down. That was a dumb trade by scared owner with no faith in his draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol @ your rules then.

 

Yes because thx to your rules no one has no right to "react" at all.

 

On paper I agree the trade is weak but so far in reality it isn't. Smells like collusion to me but again your rules obviously are lame because this is permitted so nobody has a leg to stand on.

 

lol

 

 

Why people get into leagues without a veto rule is beyond me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why people get into leagues without a veto rule is beyond me.

 

Because some owners will veto trades that benefit a division rival in a tight playoff race?

 

If you're in a casual league with friends/family, make sure the stakes a low and tell your brain that these kinds of shenanegans are to be expected and there is nothing you can do about it. Trying to prove collusion is difficult or impossible. Some people don't do any research or don't care, or as in this case, the son could be under the influence of the dad. Decide if this kind of crap is worth it going forward and if you want to subject yourself to it next year.

 

In a league of knowledgeable, honest people who are playing hard to win, it's fine to leave the veto powers with the commish only, and he should rarely if ever have to use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the father got schooled to me.

 

Romo will be a top 7 stud again eventually. The TDs will come, but that doesn't change the fact that Orton is in a pass-happy offense and his shiny new toy Bay-Bay is almost healthy.

MJD is one bad stat-line against the Eagles away from a 'bust of the year' candidate. DMC looks like he'll get or exceed 25 touches a week. That's not going to change when Bush returns, barring injury ofcourse.

Marshall is nowhere close to where I thought he'd be. Again if he cannot stick it to Cromartie on MNF it's going to be a long season for him as well.

Witten is an overrated name in ppr leagues. He averages 4 TDs a year and gets about 5 red zone targets a year. Big deal.

 

Yes the Dad bought low but he might pay the price. The point is noone can see the future no matter how lopsided it looks. As was pointed out earlier, suck it up for this year, do the best you can with your lineup, then go find a league that you are more comfortable in next year.

 

Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this is a trade that would warrant a veto even if allowed. May not be a balanced trade but as someone in another thread said, if a trade is truely balanced whats the point of making it. A team initiating a trade would obviously want to benefit not break even.

 

The argument for the trade is looking at the players actual performance to date, not their names or speculative production through the rest of the season. In either of my leagues the combined score of the players the dad received is 89.1 to date. However the son received 121.8 in return.

 

How can you prove, or even claim collusion if the team you claim is dumping players received more total points to date then they had to give up to get them? The "dumping team" gained 32.7 points by making the trade. Maybe the son is loaded at WR/TE but weak at RB; Ryan Grant and Mathews maybe? Maybe they don't start a mandatory TE anyway so the son doesn't need a TE that bad. Orton has outscored Romo to date and the Cowboys team is an absolute disaster right now minus Austin. Maybe the son gambles that will continue thru the season, picks up two RBs for one and dumps a WR that hasn't done much yet and a TE he doesn't need.

 

People need to just take a valium on this collusion witch hunt (you'll know it when you see it and you ain't seen nothing yet); especially if you know NOTHING about their teams, league size, starting requirements or scoring. Thank god juries can't rule on a case without any facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious who the son has for his tight end and who was his other kicker. With newbies they tend to look at the kickers points and want them when they are high. We are in a keeper league a new guy took over a team and kept Graham a few years back even with saying to him that it is a mistake to do so. If the son has a TE like Clark, Gates or Davis I could see him doing that. The 3 for 3 in the second trade to a newbie will look good to him because of the points scored versus lack of points scored by who he is trading. I really don't think you have ground for collusion here just inexperience. However father took advantage and I think it will teach son a lesson about trades in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

veto systems are bs and so is veto'ing a trade that doesn't have proof of collusion...

 

everything is pretty much fair game because at the end of the day, it's still your money on the table unless the father is buying two teams so he can trade with himself whenever he wants to...

 

...if that's the case then something needs to be said....especially if there is another trade like this between the two teams...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the second trade is dead even. The first one is fishy for sure, but it's the kind of mistake we've all made as fantasy rookies - is the son new to FF? Does he not catch the nuance of how valuable TE's are compared to kickers? Or does he just have strong depth at TE and a really crappy kicker? I can't imagine in any way possible it's collusion - if so they suck at it because son's team has more explosive potential IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You pay for your team... you draft your team... you own your team. You manage your team. Nobody has any right to tell you how to do it.

 

You, as the commish, don't have any right to "judge" whether a deal is good or not. Are you upset that type of offer didn't come to you? Would you have accepted because it came from a non-family member? In that case it makes it okay? Unless you have evidence of cheating, which you don't, approve the trade and move on.

 

As for Witten/Akers?? Witten already has one concussion this year. Another hit to the head and he'll be gone for an extended period. If the guy is weak at kicker, he just got one of the league's best. The deal is perfectly fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So question then...

 

What is the best case scenario for vetoing friendly/family leagues. One of my leagues ($40) is about half someone's extended family (Brother-in laws, uncles, nephews blah blah) and about half of it is random people from works or whatnot.

 

So what is the best method for dealing in such a league when people are worried about collusion.

 

Currently we have no trading whatsoever. Any suggestions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your concerned about collusion from the beginning, why would you even want to be in the league? Fantasy Football ceases to be fun when you spend your time worrying and looking for other people cheating, as opposed to making your own team better.

 

Somebody said it earlier... you will know collusion when you see it. And give the commish the power to act on it. But if you have to ask yourself, and others, if this is collusion, it's probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was the owner of either team and that trade got vetoed, I would never play in that league again, and very likely would pack it up instantly and stop turning in lineups, etc.

 

As a paid owner, I have the right to determine what is best for my team. Neither the commissioner or leaguemates can make those decisions for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

before any action is taken against either party, your commish must order a DNA test to prove that they are really father and son. Once that is established, then you can go to the next step. :wacko:

 

 

.... seriously, a league without trade protest rules or guidelines is just asking for trouble. It deserves what it gets. Next year the league should grow a set and adopt some rules.

Edited by Dcat
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